Al Franken Cartoons

Senate unanimously calls on Trump administration to take action against threats to Jewish centers

The U.S. Senate on Tuesday called on the Trump administration to take a more aggressive approach to counter the growing number of anonymous bomb threats against Jewish organizations across the country.
All 100 senators said in a letter addressed to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, FBI Director James Comey and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly that the incidents are becoming more frequent and failure to take swift action places innocent people at risk.
“We write to underscore the need for swift action with regard to the deeply troubling series of anonymous bomb threats made against Jewish Community Centers (JCCs), Jewish day schools, synagogues and other buildings affiliated with Jewish organizations or institutions across the country,” the senators wrote.
The letter came as the Anti-Defamation League and several Jewish community centers across the U.S. received a new round of bomb threats, adding to the scores that have been plagued with since January.
Federal authorities have been investigating more than 120 threats against Jewish organizations in three dozen states since Jan. 9 as well as a wave of vandalism at Jewish cemeteries. Over the course of Monday evening and Tuesday, there were eight emailed or phoned-in bomb threats in six states plus Ontario, the JCC Association of North America said.
Bomb threats were made to Jewish centers in upstate New York, Wisconsin, Oregon, a synagogue in Rhode Island and a school in Illinois. The Anti-Defamation League received threats to its offices in New York, Atlanta, Boston and Washington D.C., as well as other offices in Florida and Maryland.
On Friday, Missouri resident Juan Thompson was arrested on a cyberstalking charge and accused of making at least eight of the threats nationwide, including one to the ADL. Authorities said Thompson was trying to harass and frame his ex-girlfriend by pinning the threats on her.

HHS Secretary Price: GOP ObamaCare replacement bill 'a work in progress'

Secretary Tom Price: Health bill is a work in progress

Health and Human Services secretary Tom Price told Fox News' "Hannity" Tuesday night that House Republicans' bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare was the first step of a three-part process to implement the long-promised GOP tonic for the Affordable Care Act's ills.
"This is a work in progress and continues to be so," Price told host Sean Hannity in an exclusive interview. "Let me make clear to people that this single bill is not the entire plan."
Price claimed that passage of the bill introduced Monday would be followed by doing away with ObamaCare's rules and regulations "if they hurt patients." A second bill would introduce key reforms pledged by President Trump during his campaign, such as the ability to purchase insurance across state lines and the expansion of health savings accounts (HSAs).
Hours earlier, lawmakers from the right wing of the Republican Party slammed the bill as "ObamaCare by a different form" and vowed to revive a 2015 repeal bill that already passed Congress under former President Barack Obama.
“There’s no reason we should put anything less on President Trump’s desk than we put on President Obama’s,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said.
Price attempted to throw cold water on the so-called "clean repeal" notion, telling Hannity that it was "not a viable proposal."
"The president has said ‘Repeal and replace – we’re going to do them concurrently and move forward’," he said, "and that’s why it’s important for people to recognize the three different phases."
Republican congressional leaders have joined with the Trump administration to defend the plan on the table as a positive starting point.
"We're going to do something that's great and I'm proud to support the replacement plan released by the House of Representatives," Trump declared at the White House as he met with the House GOP vote-counting team Tuesday. "We're going to take action. There's going to be no slowing down. There's going to be no waiting and no more excuses by anybody."
At the White House meeting Tuesday, Trump made clear to House Republicans that he would be personally engaging with individual members who oppose the bill as leadership tries to round up votes, according to a lawmaker present who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private gathering.
Not long after, Trump appeared to be making good on his promise, tweeting at Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has criticized the bill.
The president plans to reconvene the group next week and will meet with conservative leaders to discuss the issue Wednesday.
Meanwhile, Vice President Mike Pence told GOP lawmakers at the Capitol this was their chance to scuttle Obama's law, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell forecast congressional passage by early April.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., at a late-afternoon press conference, said the package “keeps our promise” to replace ObamaCare. He predicted the legislation, by the end of the process, would attract a majority in the House.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer also stressed that the bill would go through “regular order,” allowing lawmakers to make amendments.
“We’re not jamming this down anybody’s throat,” he said, during a press briefing where he stacked copies of the original law and Republicans’ proposal side-by-side to demonstrate how much smaller – and presumably simpler – the GOP plan is.
But major obstacles loom, as one conservative group after another released statements torching the plan. The Club for Growth, Heritage Action for America, Americans for Prosperity and Tea Party Patriots variously derided the new bill as Obamacare Lite, Obamacare 2.0 and even RyanCare.
Notes of caution also came from GOP governors, with Ohio Gov. John Kasich arguing that phasing out expanded Medicaid coverage without a viable alternative is "counterproductive" and Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner saying he was "very concerned" that people will be "left in the lurch" under the House GOP plan.
Republicans’ new legislation would repeal a range of the original ObamaCare taxes and subsidies, while preserving certain patient protections. But conservatives pushed back on various aspects of the plan, including a new system of tax credits that would replace the existing subsidies; a short-term continuation of the Medicaid expansion; and a new surcharge insurance companies would be allowed to impose for coverage that lapses.
Tuesday night, Price tried to answer criticism from conservatives who claimed that the proposed tax credit system amounted to an unaffordable new entitlement.
"If you get your coverage through your employer, which is about 175 million people in this country, you get a tax benefit because that’s paid with pre-tax dollars," Price said. "The individuals that are out there in the individual small group market, they don’t have any tax benefit. We’re trying to equalize the tax treatment of health coverage for folks."

Conservatives also have questions about what the plan will do for health care costs.
Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina said Tuesday the fiscal impact of the replacement plan will scored in the coming days, but “there is only one score that the American people will pay attention to – whether it really does lower the cost of their health care.”
Jordan said their plan differs from the new proposal in that it does not keep the Medicaid expansion and does not keep some of the original law’s tax increases.
Paul argued only a full repeal will garner the unified support of Republicans.
“Opposition to ObamaCare helped the GOP win the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016,” Paul said.

Sen. Kaine's son arrested at Trump rally in Minnesota

The son of Hillary Clinton's former running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine, was one of six arrested Saturday protesting a rally in support of President Trump at the Minnesota State Capitol.
Linwood Michael Kaine, 24, and four others were arrested on suspicion of second-degree riot at the “March 4 Trump” rally in St. Paul. Another person was cited for disorderly conduct, the Duluth News Tribune reported.
Kaine, who lives in Minneapolis, was released from the Ramsey County Jail Tuesday pending a further investigation, authorities said. No charges were filed against him or the four others. The city attorney is reviewing the incident.
Kaine was involved in a skirmish between Trump supporters and counter-protesters, St. Paul police spokesman Steve Linders said.
Linders said Kaine was seen with four people who lit fireworks in the capitol and fled. Police were investigating whether Kaine lit a firework, the newspaper reported.
Linders said Kaine and the group were arrested a block from the capitol. He said police tracked Kaine and the group down and arresting officers had to use “some force” to take him into custody.
No one from Sen. Kaine’s office contacted the department, he added.
Sen. Kaine, from St. Paul, released a statement to the Pioneer Press Tuesday night.
"We love that our three children have their own views and concerns about current political issues," he said. "They fully understand the responsibility to express those concerns peacefully."

Franken says he thinks Sessions committed perjury

Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., on Tuesday called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to clarify an answer he gave during his confirmation hearing in January about possible meetings with Russians.
"It’s hard to come to any other conclusion that he just perjured himself,” Franken told CNN, recalling the hearing. “He answered a question that he asked himself, which is, 'Did I meet with any Russians?' And he answered it falsely. He said no, I hadn’t.”
Sessions maintains that his answer to a question from Franken was correct.
Franken had asked Sessions in January what he would do if he learned of evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign had been in touch with the Russian government in the course of the campaign.
TRUMP REPORTEDLY UNHAPPY ABOUT SESSIONS' RECUSAL FROM RUSSIA INVESTIGATIONS
Sessions responded that he himself had not had "communications with the Russians." Sessions said Monday that he answered the question the way he did because Franken had raised allegations of continuing communication between Trump associates and intermediaries for the Russian government.
"I did not mention communications I had had with the Russian ambassador over the years because the question did not ask about them," Sessions wrote.
Sessions clarified his confirmation hearing testimony to acknowledge having spoken twice last year with the Russian ambassador, but he said he stood by his earlier remarks as an honest and correct answer to a question.
The filing amends testimony Sessions gave under oath in January when he said he did not have communication with Russians. Sessions reversed course last week and acknowledged that he actually had spoken with the ambassador once at the Republican National Convention last July and again at a meeting in his Senate office in September in the presence of his Senate staff.
Sessions committed last week to amending his earlier testimony as he agreed to recuse himself from any investigations involving the Trump campaign and Russian interference in the presidential election.
"I do not recall any discussions with the Russian ambassador, or any other representative of the Russian government, regarding the political campaign on these occasions or any other occasion," Sessions wrote in a three-page filing with the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Kim Jong Un Cartoons

House Republicans release long-awaited ObamaCare replacement bill

The politics of the ObamaCare overhaul

House Republicans on Monday evening released the text of their long-awaited ObamaCare replacement bill, proposing to eliminate the various taxes and penalties tied to the original legislation while still preserving certain patient protections.  
Aiming to deliver on their signature campaign promise after several election cycles trying to reclaim control of Washington, majority Republicans unveiled what they call the American Health Care Act. The sweeping legislation would repeal ObamaCare’s taxes along with the so-called individual and employer mandates – which imposed fines for not buying and offering insurance, respectively.
It also would repeal the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies, replacing them with tax credits for consumers.
CLICK TO READ THE TEXT OF THE OBAMACARE REPLACEMENT BILL.
The bill would continue Obama's expansion of Medicaid to additional low-earning Americans until 2020. After that, states adding Medicaid recipients would no longer receive the additional federal funds the statute has provided.

More significantly, Republicans would overhaul the federal-state Medicaid program, changing its open-ended federal financing to a limit based on enrollment and costs in each state.
“We begin by repealing the awful taxes, the mandate penalties and the subsidies in ObamaCare,” House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, R-Texas, told Fox News’ “Special Report with Bret Baier” in an exclusive interview.
Asked about some conservatives’ concerns that GOP leaders are merely pushing ‘ObamaCare Lite,’ Brady countered, “It is ObamaCare gone.”
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., told Fox News they also “are not pulling the rug out from under people.” Rather, he said Republicans want to restore power to the states and control costs in Medicaid and elsewhere.
“It’ll amount to the biggest entitlement reform, probably in at least the last 20 years,” he said.
The release of the bill touches off what is likely to be a contentious debate, not just with Democrats but within the Republican Party.
The White House signaled its approval of the plan, with spokesman Sean Spicer saying, "Today marks an important step toward restoring healthcare choices and affordability back to the American people."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the bill "hands billionaires a massive new tax break while shifting huge costs and burdens onto working families across America."
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the proposal "would cut and cap Medicaid, defund Planned Parenthood, and force Americans, particularly older Americans, to pay more out of pocket for their medical care all so insurance companies can pad their bottom line."
The first test for GOP leaders, who have been under heavy pressure ever since President Trump took office to release a bill, will be whether the text satisfies the influential conservative wing  – which has the numbers to torpedo the legislation. But it is a balancing act, as moderate Republican lawmakers, as well as governors of both parties, also have warned against going too far in rolling back consumer protections and benefits.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said the bill would "drive down costs, encourage competition, and give every American access to quality, affordable health insurance." He added, "This unified Republican government will deliver relief and peace of mind to the millions of Americans suffering under Obamacare."
However, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the bill "looks like ObamaCare Lite to me ... It's going to have to be better."
Rank-and-file Republicans were watching to see if the legislation brings down the cost of healthcare.
"If it doesn't, we haven't changed anything," one House Republican told Fox News.
While subsidies would be repealed in the new bill, they would be replaced by monthly tax credits. The credits, worth between $2,000 and $14,000 a year, could be used by low-and-middle-income families who don’t get work- or government-sponsored insurance to buy state-certified plans.
The credits would be based on age and family size, unlike the income-based version under ObamaCare. Conservatives have objected that that feature creates a new entitlement program the government cannot afford.
"I can’t believe many conservative groups are going to like this," one GOP lawmaker told Fox.
Republicans said they'd not yet received official cost estimates on the overall bill from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. That office's projections on the bill's price tag and the number of people the measure would cover could be key in winning over recalcitrant Republicans, or making them even harder to win over.
It's unclear how many people might lose coverage under the new plan.
The legislation, meanwhile, would preserve protections for those with pre-existing conditions by prohibiting insurers from denying coverage or charging them more. It also would continue to allow young adults to stay on their parents’ plans up to age 26.
Further, the plan would call for a “transition” away from the current Medicaid expansion, which was used under the original law to cover millions more people. Republicans also say they’d give states $100 billion to design their own programs, while upping the amount of money families can contribute to so-called Health Savings Accounts.
A series of tax increases on higher-earning people, the insurance industry and others used to finance the Obama overhaul's coverage expansion would be repealed as of 2018.

In a last-minute change to satisfy conservative lawmakers, business and unions, Republicans dropped a plan pushed by Ryan to impose a first-ever tax on the most generous employer-provided health plans.
Fox News is told the plan is to go to both the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees on Wednesday for "mark-up" sessions where they will craft a final version of the bill. The legislation would tentatively go before the House Budget Committee next week.
The hope is that the bill would hit the House floor the week after that -- and the Senate before the Easter recess.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, wouldn't rule out changes in the measure by his chamber, where significant numbers of moderate Republicans have expressed concerns that the measure could leave too many voters without coverage.

"The House has the right to come up with what it wants to and present it to the Senate by passing it. And we have a right to look it over and see if we like it or don't," Hatch told reporters.

Underscoring those worries, four GOP senators released a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., shortly before the bill was unveiled.

They complained that an earlier, similar draft of the measure "does not provide stability and certainty for individuals and families in Medicaid expansion programs or the necessary flexibility for states." Signing the letter were Sens. Rob Portman of Ohio, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Cory Gardner of Colorado and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

GOP lawmakers get behind Trump immigration order reboot amid new legal threats

Republican lawmakers largely endorsed President Trump’s revised immigration executive order on Monday and suggested it addressed concerns they had about the original measure, even as a coalition of Democratic attorneys general and civil rights groups prepared for a new round of legal action.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, who had voiced reservations about the original travel ban rollout, said the new version advances “our shared goal” of protecting the United States.
Another Republican critical of the original version, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, said he believes the revised order will “pass legal muster.”
“I congratulate the administration for modifying the original order to ensure that it is prospective in application, protective of those with valid visas and legal status, and exempts Iraqis, as five thousand Americans are currently fighting alongside them against ISIL,” Graham said in a statement.
Trump’s revised executive order, signed Monday, suspends the refugee program and entry to the U.S. for travelers from six mostly Muslim countries, curtailing what was a broadly worded directive in a bid to withstand court scrutiny.
As before, the order will suspend refugee entries for 120 days. But it no longer will suspend Syrian refugee admissions indefinitely.
The new order also will ban travelers from six countries who did not obtain a visa before Jan. 27 from entering the United States for 90 days. The directive no longer includes Iraq, as the original order did, but covers travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Iraq, a key U.S. ally in the fight against terror group ISIS, was removed from the travel ban list after Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said he spoke with the Iraqi government about its vetting process and felt that the screening system was thorough enough to stand on its own.
As Republican lawmakers threw their political weight behind the revised version, Democratic officials in Washington, Virginia and Massachusetts said they were considering their next legal steps.
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who took the Trump administration to court over the constitutionality of the original order, said Monday he still has legal concerns about the updated language.
At a news conference, he said he and his office will review the policy and will decide on a course of action later this week.
“I do not take lightly suing the president of the United States,” he said.
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said she’s also considering legal options in response to the reworked travel ban. Healy called the newest language misguided and said it is “a clear attempt to resurrect a discredited order and fulfill a discriminatory and unconstitutional campaign promise.”
Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, who also led a legal challenge to Trump’s first ban, said the new directive still “sends a horrible message to the world.”
"Our goal has always been to protect the commonwealth of Virginia and our residents who were harmed by President Trump's ill-conceived, poorly-implemented, and un-American ban, particularly green card holders and those at our businesses and colleges with valid work and student visas,” he said. “It is significant that after we won the nation's first preliminary injunction against the ban, President Trump has now revoked his original order and apparently exempted all those persons from his revised order."
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel calling the revision a betrayal of the country’s core values.
“The legal grounds of the first travel ban were questionable at best, and today’s iteration is nothing more than a wolf in sheep’s clothing – different packaging intended to achieve the same result,” Emanuel said in a statement, adding that the order would “slam the door” on refugees fleeing war-torn countries.
Unlike the first rocky rollout of the executive order, Trump privately signed the new directive while Tillerson, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly formally unveiled it. The Trump-free event was in contrast to the first version of the order that the president signed in a high-profile ceremony at the Pentagon’s Hall of Heroes.
Tillerson defended the new order on Monday, saying Trump is using “his rightful authority” to keep people safe with the new directive.
“This order is part of our ongoing efforts to eliminate vulnerabilities that radical Islamic terrorists can and will exploit,” he added.
Kelly said the new executive order “will make America more secure.”
“Unvetted travel isn’t a privilege especially when national security is at stake,” he said.
Among other things, the revised order also makes clear that green card holders are not affected.
“If you have travel documents, if you actually have a visa, if you are a legal permanent resident, you are not covered under this particular executive action,” White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway told Fox News on Monday. “I think people will see six or seven major points about this executive order that do clarify who is covered.”
The Trump administration also plans to cap the number of refugees it accepts to 50,000 a year – down sharply from the 110,000 accepted by the Obama administration.
According to the new executive order, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security will have 20 days to perform a “global, country-by-country review of the identity and security information that each country provides to the U.S. government to support U.S. visa and other immigration benefit determinations.”
Countries will then have 50 days to comply with requests to update or improve the “quality” of the information they provide to U.S. officials.
For countries that don’t comply, the State Department, DHS and intelligence agencies can make additional recommendations on what, if any, restrictions should be imposed.
The new order also details categories of people eligible to enter the United States for business or medical travel purposes.
Almost immediately, there was pushback from Democratic lawmakers and human rights groups.
“A watered down ban is still a ban,” Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said. “Despite the administration’s changes, this dangerous executive order makes us less safe, not more, it is mean-spirited, and un-American. It must be repealed.”
Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, agreed.
“President Trump has recommitted himself to religious discrimination, and he can expect continued disapproval from both the courts and the people,” he said in a statement.
More than two dozen lawsuits were filed in response to the original travel ban. The suit filed in Washington state succeeded in having the order suspended by arguing that it violated constitutional protections against religious discrimination.
The White House was criticized the first time around for its rocky rollout of the travel ban. Trump has expressed frustration both in person and on social media over the stalled ban, at times targeting the courts and federal judges who he claimed put the country at risk by holding up the order.
Last week, Trump told reporters at the White House that “the new order is going to be very much tailored to what I consider to be a very bad decision.”
Despite widespread belief the first order was done in haste, Trump and other White House officials have repeatedly called it a success.