Monday, July 20, 2015
Our hostages in Iran are more important than President Obama's feelings
The gist of President Obama’s press conference on
Wednesday was that he’s proud of his Iran agreement. And he may well be
right that it's a good deal. Not being a nuclear physicist, I don't have
any frame of reference to judge whether it blocks Iran's path to the
bomb. And, frankly, neither does the chorus of those with knee-jerk
reactions. Personally, I look forward to hearing from experts and hope
there can be a substantive, mature discussion in the Congress.
Preventing a nuclear-armed Iran is essential, and I applaud the president’s efforts to pursue that goal diplomatically rather than militarily. He's right that it’s naive to think Iran was poised to capitulate completely, and he's right that solving every issue in one agreement is not feasible. And while the president even resorted to posing questions to himself that he thought reporters should have, he wasn't likely to address Amir Hekmati or the other three Americans held hostage or missing in Iran.
So Major Garrett had to. He pointed out one of those “concerns with regard to Iran”: that the Islamic Republic has unlawfully taken three Americans hostage (with one more missing and thought to be held by persons unknown at the behest of the regime in Tehran), and that Iran has used them as bargaining chips in an attempt to exact concessions.
Garrett asked the president why he was "content" to leave the issue of the hostages outstanding. I might have worded the questions slightly differently, but that doesn't mean Major was wrong to ask his question his way.
But I can tell you that the president hasn’t met with all their families, in fact, I’ve begged him on TV to meet with the family of former Marine Amir Hekmati or at least say his name out loud.
I’ve grown close to the family over the past several months, and I’ve asked the President to visit them before Amir’s father, Ali Hekmati, dies of cancer, so that he can hear personally how much his son’s service means to his commander in chief.
I understand that the president is busy even on a good day and that scheduling a presidential visit is challenging. But it's been nearly four years. That said, I do commend Vice President Biden for meeting with Amir’s sister and her husband at length recently.
What’s a bigger deal to me than a visit, a bigger deal than the fact that the hostages weren't released immediately as a result of this deal (which I think was an unreasonable expectation), is that the president didn’t even mention the four Americans until Garrett brought them up. Granted, he’s stated his commitment to their freedom in the past, but I’ve yet to hear a plan from his administration for securing their release.
“One thing at a time,” you could argue. And that’s fair. It’s difficult and delicate work to win the release of any prisoner unjustly imprisoned abroad, especially in a rogue nation like Iran.
I know this because I’ve been working for the past 8 months advocating for Amir’s release. I’ve been on the ground with his family, most recently in Vienna, the site of the nuclear negotiations, to help them make sure Amir’s case loomed large over the discussions.
I constantly assure the family that it takes time, but we’ll get him home. I tell them the story of Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi, a former Marine with PTSD, who was unjustly imprisoned in Mexico. It took months to secure his release, but now he’s home.
When I tell Amir’s family this, they nod and they smile, but I can see in their eyes that they’re working hard not to lose hope. That’s the hardest part: keeping hope alive as the good news turns to bad, as reporters take up the cause one day and drop it the next, as the months roll into years.
This family needs more than handshakes and the occasional sound bite. It needs commitment and work and vision and a plan.
Major Garrett's job is to ask the president tough questions. President Obama, like him or not, is a brilliant, Harvard-trained attorney and a talented rhetorician when he chooses to be. I think those who rushed to outrage over the form of Major's question ended up accomplishing nothing other than patronizing the president.
You can’t solve all the world’s problems in a day, and preventing nuclear war is the highest priority. But if you ask me, these prisoners are a pretty damn high priority too. Every day they languish in prison as bargaining chips for whatever concession Iran might need next, our reputation grows weaker.
And they grow weaker. Amir has lost 30 pounds and developed a lung disease due to the squalid conditions in which he’s being held. He served his country honorably, and now he’s sitting in a damp cell while President Obama yells at Major Garrett just for mentioning him.
Just answer the question, Mr. President.
Ultimately, history may judge Major's question as a watershed moment in this crisis. At a bare minimum, anyone connected to the Internet in this country now knows there are four Americans being held hostage in Iran. The media should debate the way Major asked the question – that's healthy – but shame on those outlets who debated the words Major used without also telling those four Americans' stories.
Montel Williams is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy who served 22 years in the Marine Corps and the Navy. He went on to host the emmy award winning Montel Williams Show for 17 seasons and is now a noted activist on veterans issues. Williams is heavily involved in the campaign to free former Marine Amir Hekmati, currently held hostage in Iran nearly 4 years and asks all to use hashtag #freeamirnow on social media and go to giveforward.com/freeamir to help the Hekmati family. Follow him on Twitter@montel_williams and on facebook at Facebook.com/montelwilliamsfan.
Preventing a nuclear-armed Iran is essential, and I applaud the president’s efforts to pursue that goal diplomatically rather than militarily. He's right that it’s naive to think Iran was poised to capitulate completely, and he's right that solving every issue in one agreement is not feasible. And while the president even resorted to posing questions to himself that he thought reporters should have, he wasn't likely to address Amir Hekmati or the other three Americans held hostage or missing in Iran.
So Major Garrett had to. He pointed out one of those “concerns with regard to Iran”: that the Islamic Republic has unlawfully taken three Americans hostage (with one more missing and thought to be held by persons unknown at the behest of the regime in Tehran), and that Iran has used them as bargaining chips in an attempt to exact concessions.
Garrett asked the president why he was "content" to leave the issue of the hostages outstanding. I might have worded the questions slightly differently, but that doesn't mean Major was wrong to ask his question his way.
Amir has lost 30 pounds and developed a lung disease due to the squalid conditions in which he’s being held. He served his country honorably, and now he’s sitting in a damp cell while President Obama yells at Major Garrett just for mentioning him.Obama countered by saying that he is concerned about the hostages and that he’s met their families. And he scolded Garrett: “I gotta give you credit, Major, for how you craft those questions. The notion that I’m content as I celebrate with American citizens languishing in Iranian jails. Major, that’s nonsense and you should know better.”
But I can tell you that the president hasn’t met with all their families, in fact, I’ve begged him on TV to meet with the family of former Marine Amir Hekmati or at least say his name out loud.
I’ve grown close to the family over the past several months, and I’ve asked the President to visit them before Amir’s father, Ali Hekmati, dies of cancer, so that he can hear personally how much his son’s service means to his commander in chief.
I understand that the president is busy even on a good day and that scheduling a presidential visit is challenging. But it's been nearly four years. That said, I do commend Vice President Biden for meeting with Amir’s sister and her husband at length recently.
What’s a bigger deal to me than a visit, a bigger deal than the fact that the hostages weren't released immediately as a result of this deal (which I think was an unreasonable expectation), is that the president didn’t even mention the four Americans until Garrett brought them up. Granted, he’s stated his commitment to their freedom in the past, but I’ve yet to hear a plan from his administration for securing their release.
“One thing at a time,” you could argue. And that’s fair. It’s difficult and delicate work to win the release of any prisoner unjustly imprisoned abroad, especially in a rogue nation like Iran.
I know this because I’ve been working for the past 8 months advocating for Amir’s release. I’ve been on the ground with his family, most recently in Vienna, the site of the nuclear negotiations, to help them make sure Amir’s case loomed large over the discussions.
I constantly assure the family that it takes time, but we’ll get him home. I tell them the story of Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi, a former Marine with PTSD, who was unjustly imprisoned in Mexico. It took months to secure his release, but now he’s home.
When I tell Amir’s family this, they nod and they smile, but I can see in their eyes that they’re working hard not to lose hope. That’s the hardest part: keeping hope alive as the good news turns to bad, as reporters take up the cause one day and drop it the next, as the months roll into years.
This family needs more than handshakes and the occasional sound bite. It needs commitment and work and vision and a plan.
Major Garrett's job is to ask the president tough questions. President Obama, like him or not, is a brilliant, Harvard-trained attorney and a talented rhetorician when he chooses to be. I think those who rushed to outrage over the form of Major's question ended up accomplishing nothing other than patronizing the president.
You can’t solve all the world’s problems in a day, and preventing nuclear war is the highest priority. But if you ask me, these prisoners are a pretty damn high priority too. Every day they languish in prison as bargaining chips for whatever concession Iran might need next, our reputation grows weaker.
And they grow weaker. Amir has lost 30 pounds and developed a lung disease due to the squalid conditions in which he’s being held. He served his country honorably, and now he’s sitting in a damp cell while President Obama yells at Major Garrett just for mentioning him.
Just answer the question, Mr. President.
Ultimately, history may judge Major's question as a watershed moment in this crisis. At a bare minimum, anyone connected to the Internet in this country now knows there are four Americans being held hostage in Iran. The media should debate the way Major asked the question – that's healthy – but shame on those outlets who debated the words Major used without also telling those four Americans' stories.
Montel Williams is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy who served 22 years in the Marine Corps and the Navy. He went on to host the emmy award winning Montel Williams Show for 17 seasons and is now a noted activist on veterans issues. Williams is heavily involved in the campaign to free former Marine Amir Hekmati, currently held hostage in Iran nearly 4 years and asks all to use hashtag #freeamirnow on social media and go to giveforward.com/freeamir to help the Hekmati family. Follow him on Twitter@montel_williams and on facebook at Facebook.com/montelwilliamsfan.
Pentagon chief Carter not offering new arms deal to Israel
WASHINGTON – In the face of Israeli outrage over the Iran nuclear accord, the Pentagon is moving quickly to reinforce arguably the strongest part of the U.S.-Israeli relationship: military cooperation.
But officials say Washington has no plans to offer new weaponry as compensation for the Iran deal.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter left for Tel Aviv on Sunday to push ahead with talks on ways the U.S. can further improve Israel's security -- not just with Iranian threats in mind, but an array of other challenges, including cyberdefense and maritime security.
Israel also has expressed concern that U.S. sales of advanced weaponry to Gulf Arab states has the potential of offsetting, to some degree, Israel's qualitative military edge.
Aides said in advance of the trip that although Carter strongly supports the Iran deal, he had no intention of trying to reverse Israeli opposition to it. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has denounced the deal as a mistake of historic proportion.
Carter is scheduled to meet with Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, as well as with Israeli generals, and visit troops in northern Israel. He plans to stop in Jordan and Saudi Arabia, U.S. allies whose leaders also are worried about implications of the nuclear deal.
On the day the Iran accord was announced, Carter issued a statement saying the U.S. is "prepared and postured" to help Israel improve its security, although he offered no specifics. He added that the U.S. would "use the military option if necessary" to protect its allies, to "check Iranian malign influence" and to ensure freedom of navigation in the Gulf.
The U.S.-Israel defense relationship has deepened in recent years, even as tensions between the two over how to contain Iran's nuclear program has grown.
The U.S. has invested hundreds of millions in an Israeli air defense system known as Iron Dome, designed to shoot down short-range rockets, mortars and artillery shells fired into northern Israel from southern Lebanon and into Israel's south from the Gaza Strip. The U.S. has worked with Israel on anti-missile systems and a wide range of other defenses. Two years ago the Pentagon committed to providing advanced radars for Israel's fleet of fighter jets and KC-135 refueling aircraft, and making Israel the first country to buy the V-22 Osprey hybrid airplane-helicopter.
Just two months ago Washington announced a $1.9 billion arms sale to Israel for a range of missiles and bombs, including bunker busters that can penetrate reinforced defenses to reach underground targets. Not included is the Pentagon's biggest bunker buster bomb.
"There is no real compensation for Israel."Israeli officials insist they are not prepared to discuss American "compensation" for the Iran deal, saying that would imply acceptance of the accord. Israel believes there are loopholes in the deal that will pave the way for Iran to eventually emerge as a nuclear power.
- Israeli Cabinet Minister Yuval Steinitz
Cabinet Minister Yuval Steinitz, Netanyahu's point man on the nuclear issue, told reporters "there is no real compensation for Israel" if Iran develops the capacity to make nuclear weapons. While he said that Israel will discuss "almost everything" with the U.S., he said Israel's focus right now is voicing its opposition to the deal.
The two countries have been holding talks on renewing a 10-year defense pact set to expire in 2018. Under the current deal, Israel receives about $3 billion in military aid from the U.S. each year. That number is likely to increase when the deal is renewed, and possibly before then.
Obama has indicated he is open to new ways of improving Israeli security, but he has played down the idea that ending economic penalties on Iran will drastically alter the balance of power in the region.
"Do we think that with the sanctions coming down, that Iran will have some additional resources for its military and for some of the activities in the region that are a threat to us and a threat to our allies? I think that is a likelihood," Obama told a White House news conference on Wednesday. "Do I think it's a game-changer for them? No."
Some private analysts also suggest the concern about Iranian ascendancy may be exaggerated.
"Naturally, with the lifting of sanctions there's going to be concern by Israel and Saudi Arabia that Iran will become `normalized' in the region. However, I think Iran is still going to face a certain amount of isolation," Dalia Dassa Kaye, director of the RAND Center for Middle East Public Policy, wrote in an analysis.
Obama's principal military adviser, Gen. Martin Dempsey, met with Netanyahu and Israeli military officials just last month. The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman told reporters with him in Israel that once an Iran nuclear deal was struck, Israeli and U.S. officials needed to "quickly and comprehensively" discuss the way ahead.
"It will be incumbent on both of us to make sure that we provide the kind of reassurances that the state of Israel has always counted on us to provide. But we are going to have to do the same thing with the Gulf allies," Dempsey said, alluding to deep concerns in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states that removing sanctions on Iran would make it a greater regional danger.
Dempsey said he understands why Israelis believe a nuclear deal will give Iran room to accelerate its funding of surrogate Shiite groups like Hezbollah.
"I share their concern," Dempsey said.
Trump won't apologize to McCain, suggests backlash led by trailing GOP rivals
Donald Trump on Sunday declined to apologize for his comments about war veteran and Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain, suggesting the backlash is being fueled by fellow Republican presidential candidates trailing him in the polls.
“Republican candidates, some of whom are registering one percent and zero, they're very upset that I'm leading the polls by actually a nice margin,” Trump, a self-funded, billionaire real estate mogul, told ABC’s “This Week.” “They started attacking me.”
On Saturday, Trump acknowledge that McCain, a former Navy fighter pilot who spent five-and-a-half years as a prisoner during the Vietnam War, was indeed a war hero but only “because he was captured.”
“I like people who weren’t captured,” he also said.
The feud between Trump and McCain appeared to have started during a recent event in Phoenix, Ariz., that swelled to 1,500 people, many apparently energized by Trump suggesting that he would, if elected, build a wall along the southern U.S. border and that some Mexicans coming into the country are rapists and drug dealers.
McCain, whom Trump financially backed in his failed 2008 presidential bid, called the attendees “crazies,” which upset Trump, who called for an apology.
Most of the 14 other GOP candidates have condemned Trump’s remarks about McCain, including Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry who are calling for Trump to quit the race.
“This is not just an insult to John McCain, who clearly is a war hero and a great man,” Rubio said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “But it's an insult to all POWs, to all men and women who have served us in uniform, who have been captured in battle. … It's ridiculous. And I do think it is a disqualifier as commander in chief.”
Within hours of Trump’s “war hero” comments, Perry called for him to drop out, and he repeated his position Sunday.
“I really don't understand his strategy here of taking on a bullet that went through John McCain and a hit a lot of us that wore the uniform of this country,” Perry said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “And I still stand by my statement. Until Mr. Trump apologizes directly to John McCain and to the veterans of this country, I don't think he has the character or the temperament to hold the highest position in this country.”
McCain has yet to respond.
“I'm certainly not pulling out,” Trump told ABC. “I'm leading and I'm leading in many states. … And I will win the Hispanic vote.”
Trump also said he received a standing ovation after the event Saturday in Ames, Iowa, at which he made the comments and that “nobody was offended.”
“This whole thing was brought up by a lot of the people that are competing against me currently that aren't even registering in the polls,” he said.
Trump also repeated earlier criticism about McCain failing to use his elected position of power to improve the trouble Department of Veterans Affairs so that veterans could get better health care without the exceedingly long waits.
“It's a scandal. And John McCain has done nothing,” he said, before waving off criticism from veterans’ groups, saying, “Maybe they don't speak to the same vets that I speak to.”
Obama looks to ban Social Security recipients from owning guns
The Obama administration wants to keep people collecting Social Security benefits from owning guns if it is determined they are unable to manage their own affairs, the Los Angeles Times reported.
The push, which could potentially affect millions whose monthly disability payments are handled by others, is intended to bring the Social Security Administration in line with laws that prevent gun sales to felons, drug addicts, immigrants in the United States illegally, and others, according to the paper.
The language of federal gun laws restricts ownership to people who are unable to manage their own affairs due to "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease” – which could potentially affect a large group within Social Security, the LA Times reported.
If Social Security, which has never taken part in the background check system, uses the same standard as the Department of Veterans Affairs – which is the idea floated – then millions of beneficiaries could be affected, with about 4.2 million adults receiving monthly benefits that are managed by “representative payees.”
The latest move is part of the efforts by President Obama to strengthen gun control following the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in 2012.
Critics are blasting the plan, saying that expanding the list of people who cannot own guns based on financial competence is wrongheaded.
The ban, they argue, would keep guns out of the hands of some dangerous people, but would also include people who simply have a bad memory or have a hard time balancing a checkbook.
The background check for gun ownership started in 1993 by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, named after White House Press Secretary James Brady, who was partially paralyzed after being shot in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.
Gun stores are required to run the names of potential buyers through a computerized system before every sale.
Sunday, July 19, 2015
Trump attacks McCain's record as war hero, draws rebuke from GOP presidential field
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s criticism Saturday of fellow party member and Arizona Sen. John McCain for being “captured” during the Vietnam War brought sharp rebuke from others in the GOP field.
“He was a war hero because he was captured,” Trump said at the Family Leadership Summit, in Ames, Iowa. “I like people who weren’t captured.”
Most of the 14 other GOP candidates, including some at the summit, immediately criticized Trump’s remarks.
Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry tweeted that McCain “is an American hero” and that all U.S. prisoners of war “deserve our nation's highest debt of gratitude” and that Trump’s comments are “disgraceful.”
He also called on Trump to apologize and said the comments make him “unfit” to become commander in chief and that he should quit the race.
Trump made his remarks after the conference moderator, Republican pollster Frank Luntz, described McCain as "a war hero" and Trump was pressed on his recent description of McCain as "a dummy."
McCain spent more than five years as a prisoner of war after his plane was shot down during combat in Vietnam.
McCain and Trump have been feuding for days. The discord apparently follows a recent joint event in Phoenix, Ariz., that swelled to 1,500 people when Trump decided to attend and talk about illegal immigration.
McCain referred to the attendees as “crazies.”
Trump when announcing his candidacy said some Mexicans who cross the border illegally come with problems and that some are “rapists.”
He said McCain calling the attendees at the Arizona event crazies was “disrespectful.”
“These were not crazies," Trump said. “These were great American citizens.”
Trump earlier complained about having financially backed McCain’s failed 2008 presidential bid and said that McCain graduated last in his class at the U.S. Naval Academy.
More recently, he has accused McCain of failing veterans by not improving the trouble Department of Veterans Affairs, the agency that provides their health care.
Trump said in a series of tweets after the event: “I will make this right for our great Vets!” and “John McCain has failed miserably to fix the situation and to make it possible for veterans to successfully manage their lives.”
Among the other 2016 GOP presidential candidates to respond was Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.
“John McCain is an American hero,” he said on Twitter. “I have nothing but respect for his service to our country.”
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a GOP candidate who has been at or near the top of most polls since the start of the election cycle, said on Twitter: “Enough with the slanderous attacks. @SenJohnMcCain and all our veterans -- particularly POWs have earned our respect and admiration.”
Candidate and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said on Twitter: “Senator John McCain is an American hero. Period. Stop.”
As US energy output surges, Republicans lead effort to lift decades-old oil export ban
Congressional Republicans are leading a bipartisan effort to lift a decades-old ban on oil exports, arguing the recent surge in domestic-energy production and other factors have pushed the embargo past its prime.
To be sure, the United States has recently emerged as the world’s largest energy producer -- largely the result of the relatively new method of extracting natural gas and hard-to-get oil known as “fracking.”
Supporters of the plan, including many in the oil and gas industry, essentially argue that lifting the ban would help the U.S. economy. They say it is now slowing future energy production and exploration and that U.S. companies could profit from getting an abundance of domestic energy products on world markets.
“I’m optimistic about our efforts,” North Dakota GOP Rep. Kevin Cramer told FoxNews.com on Wednesday. “We have bipartisan support and a broad understanding of the issue among members.”
Cramer largely attributes the support from rank-and-file members and top GOP leadership alike to three separate bills circulating in three different House committees -- Agriculture, Foreign Affairs and Energy and Commerce.
He touts the legislation as a potential boon for the U.S. economy. And he prefers a measured approach to passage, amid urgent calls to immediately repeal the ban in the wake of the Iran nuclear pact, fearing that strategy will become a political football like the Keystone XL Pipeline, not the “jobs creator” he wants it to be.
Cramer and other supporters also argue that lifting the ban would result in cheaper electricity, which would spark growth in U.S. manufacturing and other sectors of the economy, beyond the oil and gas industry.
In addition, they argue, the so-called “light sweet” or “sweet” oil derived from fracking and the companion horizontal-drilling process cannot be readily processed by U.S. refineries but is exceptionally valuable overseas.
“It’s a premium product,” said Cramer, who is co-sponsoring bills by Texas Republican Reps. Joe Barton and Mike McCaul that combined have at least 10 Democratic co-sponsors.
However, calls to lift the ban, the result of the 1970’s energy crisis, have also brought out critics. And they have resulted in conflicting reports about the potential impact of adding billions of barrels of U.S. crude oil to world markets -- from oil prices plummeting around the globe to gas prices increasing at pumps across the county.
“Pro-ban supports would like to make it cut and dry, but it’s a very complicated issue,” Jay Hauck, executive director of the CRUDE coalition, said Friday. “It’s an onion, and you have to peel away the layers.”
The group, whose full name is Consumers and Refiners United for Domestic Energy, represents U.S. energy companies and advocates for keeping crude in the country.
Hauck argues the U.S. is indeed now the world’s biggest energy producer but has yet to achieve total energy independence, which means exporting would result in billions of barrels more annually from foreign countries, posing a greater national security risk.
One of the biggest critics of lifting the ban is Navy Cmdr. Kirk Lippold, who was in charge of the USS Cole in 2000 when terrorists attached and detonated a bomb on the destroyer at a Yemen port, killing 17 American sailors.
Lippold testified at a recent House hearing on the issue that the biggest benefactor of U.S. exports would be rival China.
In the Senate, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican and chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, is helping lead efforts to lift the ban.
She was among those sending early-warning signals about the Iran nuclear deal allowing the oil rich country to put 1 million barrels daily on the world market.
“We are letting Iran export its oil to markets that we prevent our own companies from accessing,” Murkowski said in late June. “Any deal that lifts sanctions on Iranian oil will disadvantage American companies unless we lift the antiquated ban on our own oil exports."
And Murkowski’s committee held a hearing June 9 on a bill that she and Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota Democrat, have co-sponsored on lifting the ban.
However, a top Senate staff told FoxNews.com after the Iran deal was struck Tuesday that Murkowski has no intentions of holding up a major foreign policy vote or international trade legislation over lifting the ban, likely references to the Trans-Pacific Partnership pact being debated in Congress and the upcoming votes on the Iran nuclear deal.
(The staffer made the comments after a House effort to insert ban-lifting language into the trade pact went nowhere.)
Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said this spring that he doesn’t think “an overly compelling argument has been made” to lift the ban while the U.S. continues to import 7 million barrels of crude oil daily.
However, the issue is being handled by the Commerce Department, not the Energy Department. And Moniz made clear he was not making a statement “in support of or against the idea of exports.”
Both agencies decline Friday to comment.
Hauck said the companies that his group represents are not "absolutely, under-no-circumstances opposed" to lifting the ban and would consider such a change when the U.S. becomes free from foreign oil dependency.
Cramer says the House bills, including the third from Texas GOP Rep. Mike Conaway, could be combined or become an amendment to a large bill.
And he sees possibility in the fact that the White House has never threatened to veto such legislation.
“I’m the optimist,” he said.
Family of Chattanooga gunman says their son suffered from depression
The family of the man who authorities say killed four Marines and a sailor in Chattanooga said
in a statement that their son suffered from depression and was not the same person they knew.
"There are no words to describe our shock, horror, and grief," said the statement, provided Saturday to the Associated Press by a lawyer representing the family of Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez. "The person who committed this horrible crime was not the son we knew and loved. For many years, our son suffered from depression. It grieves us beyond belief to know that his pain found its expression in this heinous act of violence."
"We understand there are many legitimate questions that need to be answered," the statement said. "Having said this, now is the time to reflect on the victims and their families, and we feel it would be inappropriate to say anything more other than that we are truly sorry for their loss."
The family also said they are cooperating with the investigation.
Some Muslims now fear the Chattanooga community’s perception of them had changed after the shooting rampage Thursday.
Mohsin Ali, a member of the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga, said he hopes the local community doesn’t dissolve into turmoil the others have in the region over building mosques and other matters. Peaceful coexistence has largely prevailed in the city that has pride itself on strong ties between people of different faiths.
"We, our kids, feel 100 percent American and Chattanoogan," said the Pakistani-born Ali, who is a child psychiatrist. "Now they are wondering if that is how people still look at them."
Serving a warrant on the Abdulazeez home Thursday, agents led two women wearing Islamic head coverings away in handcuffs. However, FBI agent Jason Pack said Saturday that no arrests have been made in the case.
Authorities are looking into the shooting as a terrorism investigation and whether Abdulazeez was inspired or directed by a terrorist organization. They still don’t know what motivated the shooting.
The president of the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga said Abdulazeez's father told him he felt blindsided and did not see any recent changes in his son.
"He told me that he had never seen it coming, and did not see any signs from his son that he would be that way and do something like that," Bassam Issa said.
Ali said immigrants owe a debt of gratitude to America and the armed forces to protect it, because they often know firsthand what it means to live in countries without personal freedoms or the rule of law. Near the end of Friday night’s service, at Ali’s urging, dozens of Muslims received a standing ovation as they stood in support of their city and in allegiance to their nation.
It was a remarkable show of togetherness in a region where relations have sometimes been tense since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Still, the events of the last few days have left some on edge, particularly the young. The end of Ramadan is usually a time for celebration, but events at the Islamic Center were canceled after the shootings. A sign on the door Friday encouraged visitors to go to the memorial service instead.
Khadija Aslam, 15, didn't wear her head covering in the car while riding to prayer services after the shootings for fear of attracting attention, and 15-year-old Zoha Ahmad said her family is worried about the possibility of vandalism at their home.
"A lot of people know we live there and that we're Muslims," she said.
Ali said he plans to offer group counseling for concerned members of the Islamic community at his home, and that might help ease concerns. But, he isn't sure.
"We'll see," said Ali.
Justice Roberts' ObamaCare ruling could be boon for congressional Republicans
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts
But secretly, many Republicans in Congress are thanking Roberts from saving conservatives from themselves. And if they aren’t sending him balloons and flowers now, they may do so by the end of the year.
The King v. Burwell health care case centered on a four-word phrase: “established by the state.”
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) granted states the opportunity to set up local exchanges to process health care plans. But residents of states that didn’t establish exchanges could receive subsidies to use the federal system instead.
Thus, there was no exchange “established by the state” in those venues. So the question the high court examined was whether it was fair for residents of non-exchange states to score tax credits when the rest of the population was ineligible.
In its decision, the Supreme Court held that Congress “meant for those provisions to apply in every State as well.”
But what would have happened had the high court ruled it was unconstitutional to award people subsidies from non-exchange states?
“Chaos,” muttered one senior congressional Republican aide. “Any solution to the problem is going to have the right howling.”
Why? Because a vote to fix the problem would constitute a vote tacitly endorsing ObamaCare.
The Republican Party has engineered close to 60 congressional votes to repeal the law. Nobody knows the precise number because everyone has actually lost count.
Republicans in both bodies of Congress expressed optimism at constructing a health care fix that would pass. But they knew this could absolutely ignite the embers of the conservative base if they did anything short of scrapping the entire law.
Republicans feared a decision finding the credits unconstitutional would kick 7 million people off the subsidies and strip them of health coverage.
The GOP worried that the public might then turn on Republicans for stoking an effort that cost those people coverage -- even if some are skeptical about the law.
GOP sources said they feared President Obama would have trotted across the country with a simple, one-page fix to the law to include those people. But there was consternation as to whether the Republican-led Congress could approve a “patch” piece of legislation, even though GOP leaders promised to advance a plan.
“We want to give people a bridge from ObamaCare,” House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan said during an appearance on Fox News Channel before the decision.
But Ryan was circumspect when pressed on the same program about the minutiae of a GOP plan.
“We want to see what the (court’s) ruling is specifically so we can customize our response to the actual ruling,” he said. “That plan will involve making sure people have assistance as we transition to give people freedom from ObamaCare.”
Prior to the high court decision, Ryan spoke privately with members about giving block grant money to states to give them the ability to set up their own system to protect Americans for two years until a possible Republican Congress and Republican president could set up an ACA alternative. Most Republicans liked what they heard.
Ryan summoned Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell (the “Burwell” in King v. Burwell) before the Ways and Means Committee in mid-June. The Wisconsin Republican blasted Burwell after the session.
“They (members of the administration) still refuse to entertain the notion that their health care law may be struck down by the Supreme Court. And they refuse to acknowledge they are even thinking about a backup plan. And that's unfortunate,” Ryan said.
A reporter followed up, asking Ryan about crafting his substitute.
“We are putting the final touches on it. Dotting the I's. Crossing the T's,” he replied.
Ryan may not have been willing to cough up the GOP legislative construct to the press corps then. But at the hearing, he insisted that Burwell publicly reveal what the administration would do if the court struck down the subsidies.
“Is the president going to be willing and flexible to work with Congress to fix this mess and negotiate with Congress?” Ryan asked Burwell.
“To solve that problem, the critical decisions are going to sit with the Congress,” Burwell told the chairman.
Ryan later predicted that if the Supreme Court tossed the subsidies, Obama could “put concrete around his ankles and say, ‘It's my law or nothing.’ ”
Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, also tried to pry loose some answers from Burwell.
“Will the president sign legislation other than merely extending the subsidies to federal exchanges?” he queried.
“I think it's very hard for me to answer a question about hypothetical legislation,” responded Burwell.
Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, upbraided Ryan for “never coming up with a single, comprehensive alternative after all of these years.”
He also decried Republicans as “armchair critics” of the ACA.
Many Republicans privately acknowledge that the Supreme Court ruling helped them sidestep an immense fight over health care -- the trickiest parts including the navigation of fissures inside their own party.
But the fight isn’t over.
There’s an important congressional vocabulary term everyone will start to hear a lot about over the next few weeks. It’s called reconciliation -- a very special type of reconciliation, something known on Capitol Hill as “budget reconciliation.”
The congressional budget process is an exclusive bit of parliamentary infrastructure, separate from most other legislation.
Housed inside the annual budget machinery is “reconciliation.”
Reconciliation can be used to sync up spending, revenue and adjust the debt ceiling. Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution dictates that bills with revenue implications must start in the House. So the reconciliation vehicle originates in the lower chamber. But the real impact of reconciliation lies in the Senate.
The Senate’s fundamental glory is an unlimited amendment process and unlimited debate. That’s what gives rise to filibuster. But the budget process limits debate, curbs most amendments and requires but a simple majority to adopt legislative items. Thus, there is no way to filibuster something tucked into a budget reconciliation package.
Republicans now hold 54 seats in the Senate. Under conventional rules, Democrats could filibuster health care legislation. Vanquishing a filibuster would require a coalition of 60 Republicans and Democrats. Republicans know this. But since Obama signed the ACA into law in 2010, Republicans never controlled the Senate until this year.
Republicans would struggle to even put a health care bill on the floor right now. Sixty votes are necessary to hurdle the first filibuster blocking the measure from coming to the floor. Another round of 60 is required to shut off all debate and finish a bill. But that’s not the case with reconciliation.
There’s a lot of chatter now of putting a repeal of the ACA in a reconciliation measure later this year on the floors of the House and then the Senate. And Democrats can’t do anything about it.
Moving a health care bill through the House is simpler than in the Senate. But reconciliation grants the Senate the possibility to approve a repeal bill. That’s happened in the House umpteen times since 2011. But never in the Senate.
Undoubtedly, Obama would veto such a bill. But that’s what Republicans want. A dare. They want to deposit a full repeal bill on the president’s desk and dare him to veto it. And if he doesn’t, what have Republicans accomplished?
A lot.
To wit:
Congressional Republicans will have bypassed a catastrophic meltdown in the nation’s health care system because of the Supreme Court ruling in King v. Burwell. Mayhem may have descended on the Capitol had the High Court ruled that the subsidies were unconstitutional.
Republicans will have forced the president to veto a repeal of ObamaCare. But since they know they don’t have the votes to override the veto (a two-thirds vote in both bodies of Congress), Republicans haven’t necessarily had to produce an alternative health care bill. Such legislation remains a unicorn. And even if it does exist, this is a fractious issue in the Republican Party.
Republicans will have made Democrats from swing districts and states who face challenging re-elections to either vote to override the veto or side with the president.
Message masters at the National Republican Congressional Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee will be more than happy to record those roll call tallies. The NRCC and NRSC will then integrate those votes into campaign ads against those lawmakers next year.
In short, some Republicans may seethe publicly at Chief Justice John Roberts now. But they could be sending him balloons and flowers later.
And here’s the Supreme Court address if they need it: 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543.
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Most new California licenses go to drivers in country illegally
More than half of all new California driver’s licenses this year have gone to people who are in the country illegally, the state said Friday
The California Department of Motor Vehicles reported it has issued roughly 397,000 licenses to people who live in the country illegally. A total of 759,000 licenses have been issued in the first six months of the year. The DMV only issued 435,000 licenses in the first six months of 2014.
The new law initially generated huge interest causing long lines at motor vehicle offices in January and February. The DMV expects to see about one million more applicants over the next three years who are covered under new law.
"We hope that all of those people will be able to pass the testing and have the necessary documents to obtain" a license, said DMV spokeswoman Jessica Gonzalez.
Supporters of the law say giving licenses to people regardless of their immigration status makes the road safer for everyone. New drivers say having a license means they can travel more freely for work or pleasure.
"It's great that people are taking advantage of this new law," said Jackelin Aguilar, community organizer for Placer People of Faith Together, an Auburn, California-based group that supports the new licenses.
"It's definitely a step forward for the families, and having identification is huge," Aguilar said.
Opponents say people who get into the country illegally shouldn’t be rewarded.
Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, which advocates for legal and limited immigration, criticized California for making life easier for people in the country illegally, at the expense of citizens and legal residents.
"There are now 400,000 more signals to people all over the world that working illegally in California is encouraged by the government itself," he said.
About 687,000 people have applied for the licenses issued to illegal immigrants. Applicants must pass driving tests and show proof of residency and identity.
The new license is marked differently than those issued to other drivers in the state and is not considered a valid form of federal identification, for example, to board an airplane.
More than 1.1 million people who qualify for the new licenses took the written driver's test between Jan. 2 and June 30, and 436,000 have also taken a behind-the-wheel driving test.
San Francisco deputies’ union takes on sheriff over immigration stance
Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the complaint links Kathryn Steinle's murder to a March memo that prohibited deputies from giving information about prisoners to immigration agents. The grievance, according to the newspaper, said the policy "recklessly compromises the safety of sworn personnel, citizens, and those who merely come to visit the San Francisco area."
Steinle's killing, allegedly by illegal immigrant Francisco Sanchez, has prompted a round of finger-pointing in San Francisco, a so-called sanctuary city. Sanchez, who had a lengthy felony record and already had been deported five times, was turned over to San Francisco by the feds in March on an old, outstanding warrant -- but the sheriff's office freed him the next month. Federal immigration officials say they asked to be notified prior to his release, but they were not.
Mirkarimi, in defending the decision, has suggested he was following a 2013 city policy, which only allows certain violent offenders to be held for deportation.
But San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee and others have said Mirkarimi's department still could have contacted immigration officials.
"Do we need to educate somebody on how to pick up the phone?" Lee said, according to the Chronicle.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement said in a statement earlier this month: "We're not asking local law enforcement to do our job ... all we're asking is that they notify us when a serious foreign national criminal offender is being released to the street so we can arrange to take custody."
Iran's supreme leader says nuke deal won't change policy on US
Senators upset UN will act on Iran nuke deal.
Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Saturday that a historic nuclear deal reached with world powers earlier this week won’t have any effect on Iran’s policy toward the U.S.
Khamenei said in a televised speech that U.S. policy in the Middle East runs counter to Tehran’s strategy and that Iran will continue to support its allies in the Middle East including the Lebanese, Hezbollah, Palestinian resistance groups and the Syrian government.
"Our policy towards the arrogant U.S. government won't change at all," he said. He was addressing a large crowd in Tehran, broadcast live on state TV, to mark the end of the Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan.
Iran calls its Lebanese ally Hezbollah a "resistance movement" while the U.S. describes it a terrorist group. And Iran continues to call for the destruction of Israel; Khamenei in his Saturday speech described Israel as a "terrorist, baby-killer government."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has strongly opposed the deal, saying it will enable Iran to emerge from crippling economic sanctions while doing nothing to moderate Iran's aggressive behavior around the Middle East.
"U.S. policies in the region are 180 degrees in contrast to Iran's policies," Khamenei said. "Whether this text (nuclear deal) is approved or disapproved, we won't give up supporting our friends in the region. The oppressed Palestinian nation, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, the honest mujahedeen of resistance in Lebanon and Palestine will enjoy our constant support."
Iran’s direct talks with Washington was only limited to the nuclear issue and that there can’t be any dialogue or deal with the U.S. over any other issues, he said. However, Khamenei has said in the past that he door to other issues could open should the U.S. carry out its obligations under the deal in good faith.
Khamenei’s comments are the most detailed since a deal was agreed upon earlier this week. His remarks are widely held because in most of Iran’s matters, he has the final say and could still back outy of the agreement. The deal between Iran and six world powers curbs Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the removal of sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy.
The hard-line stance on future negotiations with the U.S. quenches the idea Iran’s Foreign Minister brought up about cooperation between both parties on fighting the Islamic State.
Javid Zarif said in an Eid message Friday that he hopes the nuclear deal could bring about a better relationship abroad. President Hassan Rouhani has preached a foreign policy of engagement based on mutual respect since his election in 2013, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Even with a deal reached, the U.S. and Iran still have obstacles to clear before anything official comes about.
Iran’s parliament and the Supreme National Security Council must sign off on the deal, while Khamenei still has to agree to the deal.
Congress has 60 days to weigh-in on the deal. President Barack Obama could veto a disapproving resolution should Congress disapprove of it.
Tennessee gunman first radicalized, now idolized by Internet jihadists
It's a sad day when people try to turn mad dogs like this guy into a hero.
Dozens of Twitter accounts spewing jihadist bile have placed Mohammad Abdulazeez’s bearded face as their main images, and tweets believed to have been sent out by Islamic State radicals and sympathizers have proclaimed him a martyr. And according to one top federal official, the posthumous praise for the sick slaughter comes over the very forum that may have turned the suburban-bred college graduate into a killer.
“The threat is real, and it comes from the Internet,” said Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Texas. “This is a new generation of terrorist. This is not Bin Laden in caves with couriers anymore. This is what the new threat of terrorism looks like.”
“The threat is real, and it comes from the Internet.”While the FBI is investigating the Chattanooga shooting as a terrorist act, the agency has not yet declared it one. But McCaul said Abdulazeez appears to have been motivated by ISIS to first open fire at a military recruiting center in a Chattanooga strip mall and then at a nearby military training center, where four Marines were killed.
- Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Texas
“My judgment and experience is that this was an ISIS inspired attack. And it has been opened as a terrorism investigation by the FBI, which is a very significant event in this case,” McCaul said.
After the attack, Twitter accounts linked to terrorist groups exploded with praise for Abdulazeez. One twitter user with hashtags #IslamicState and #ChattanoogaShooting pledged “The War Has Just Begun. More to come fellas,” another taunts “We are in your homeland, payback time?” and a third attempts to justify the murders of the Marines by proclaiming they “participated in slaughtering Muslim babies.” Other twitter posts with hashtags “Chattanooga”, “ISIS,” and “Islamic State” vow “O American dogs, you will see wonders. Soon” and another mocks in broken English “Taste the blood of Americans …. Are very good.”
Related Image
Expand / Contract
Terrorists around the world have honored Abdulazeez on their Twitter accounts. (Screengrab)
The bigger concern, Mauro said, is not only that there may be a “copycat” attempt, but also that the successful attack may lead to even more people being radicalized.
“ISIS feels their success is Allah’s endorsement,” Mauro said. “The success of ISIS attracts more people.”
Twitter is just one of several media outlets where terrorists and their sympathizers congregate to share their latest horrific acts and propaganda. But stopping the use of the web to celebrate and inspire terror is a daunting task, experts said.
Related Image
Expand / Contract
This
April 2015 booking photo released by the Hamilton County Sheriffs
Office shows a man identified as Mohammad Youssduf Adbulazeer after
being detained for a driving offense. A U.S. official speaking on
condition of anonymity identified the gunman in shootings at two
Chattanooga military facilities as Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, who
shares the same age and address as the man in the photo. (Hamilton
County Sheriffs Office via AP) (The Associated Press)
Terror groups like Islamic State have become so organized, they have their own media production houses, Khan said. In addition to filming, editing and posting videos of prisoner and traitor executions, they also film outreach and recruitment efforts and speeches by their leaders that glorify their acts.
While spokespeople for U.S. media outlets and others in the UK claim they cannot rid their sites of terrorist related materials in a timely manner because they are so bombarded with content from around the world, the U.S. based software company GIPEC has developed tools its founder said can assist in combating the global threat of on-line terrorism recruitment and the jihadist messaging.
The software, which its developer said also can be used to track piracy, counterfeiting and pornography, said there is no excuse for software companies not to remove terrorist-related content immediately.
“Terrorist organizations are spending time and money and using American social media platforms to recruit and incite sympathizers and ‘lone wolves’ here in the United States and around the world,” said a GIPEC analyst. “The social media companies have a moral responsibility to make their platforms safe from these horrific and directional posts that call for terrorist behavior that we have been witnessing over the past months.”
Friday, July 17, 2015
Huffington Post (Glorified Blog) won't cover Trump as politics, Donald fires back at 'blog'
Your a Blog!
The website announced its editorial decision earlier in the day, with a blaring homepage headline that read: "YOU'RE FIRED! From Our Political Reporting."
HuffPost editors said in a brief coverage note that Trump's candidacy would not be part of their politics coverage going forward, and, "Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section."
They explained: "Our reason is simple: Trump's campaign is a sideshow. We won't take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you'll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette."
Trump's campaign hit back in a written statement, touting his poll numbers and mocking the HuffPost website.
"If you read previously written Tweets, Mr. Trump has never been a fan of Arianna Huffington or the money-losing Huffington Post," the campaign said. "The only clown show in this scenario is the Huffington Post pretending to be a legitimate news source. Mr. Trump is not focused on being covered by a glorified blog."
The site's provocative editorial call quickly came under fire from both sides of the political spectrum, not just the Trump campaign.
Rich Noyes, research director at the conservative Media Research Center, said the decision on a candidate's legitimacy should be up to voters, not the media.
"It seems high and mighty of the Huffington Post to decide who is and who isn't a real candidate when Donald Trump is leading in the Republican polls right now," Noyes said. "They wouldn't have taken kindly if the rest of the media had treated Arianna Huffington's run for governor of California as a sideshow. I would say it's up to the voters to decide who is a real candidate and who is not."
From the left, Mother Jones' David Corn also took issue with HuffPost, for different reasons.
Trump has given the Republican Party a collective migraine the past couple weeks over his comments on Mexican illegal immigrants. And Corn wrote that "to exile Trump to the realm of the Kardashians is to let the Republican party off the hook too easily."
Corn said while Trump has turned the primary "into a stretch Hummer-sized clown car," The Huffington Post is "wrong." Trump is a "political phenomenon" whose rise says a lot about Republican voters, he said.
Like him or not, Trump is a registered candidate. He recently filed a campaign finance report with the Federal Election Commission, like all the other candidates. And the latest Fox News poll shows him atop the GOP primary field, though his lead is within the margin of error.
To be sure, Trump is part-reality TV showman, part-businessman, and now part-politician. But he's hardly the first entertainer to enter politics, following in the footsteps of comedian and now-Democratic Minnesota Sen. Al Franken; movie star and ex-California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger; and actor-turned-President Ronald Reagan.
The Poynter Institute's James Warren pointed to those examples in challenging the website's decision.
"You might think Trump is a buffoon. But he may have, for the moment at least, touched some nerve of dissatisfaction, perhaps partial explanation of his decent showing in some early Republican polls. Something of the sort happened long ago with some guys who were actually professional actors and were similarly disparaged," he wrote. "They, too, could have been journalistically segregated long ago as not meeting some arbitrary test of seriousness and legitimacy. You do remember Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger, don't you?"
The difference with Trump may be that he didn't polish his persona before entering the race. His complaint that Mexico is sending "rapists" and other criminals to America has outraged Latino groups, and led to rebukes from fellow candidates on both sides of the aisle. He has since sparred over Twitter with several of them.
But the Republican Party has not made any move to exclude him. The most that has happened was Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus reportedly urged Trump in a phone call to tone it down, though The Donald disputes the claim.
While The Huffington Post is getting much attention for its decision, not all conservatives are outraged.
Michael Reagan, son of the late president, told FoxNews.com, "You can't really disagree with The Huffington Post -- he is entertaining."
"He has sucked all the air out of the room and if the other Republicans don't want him to win, they ought to figure out how to put the air back into the room," he said.
David Avella, chairman of the Republican recruiting arm GOPAC, said The Huffington Post, as a private company, does have the right to provide coverage as it deems fit.
"If Donald Trump doesn't like how he is being covered by the Huffington Post, then he could buy it," he said. "There are plenty of media outlets that will cover him in their political sections. In fact, in the last two weeks media coverage has not been a problem for Donald Trump."
'He was our hero': 4 Marines killed in Tennessee terror attack ID'd
One was a 19-year-old from Georgia, who served as a lance corporal artillery cannoneer. Another was a 40-year-old from Massachusetts, who survived two tours in Iraq and earned a Purple Heart.
A day after a gunman opened fire on military personnel in Chattanooga, Tenn. -- killing four Marines -- profiles of the men who served their country only to die on its soil began to emerge.
Gunnery Sgt. Thomas Sullivan, from Springfield, Mass. and a Marine since 1997, was one of those killed Thursday by Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez, 24, a Kuwaiti-born Chattanooga resident who opened fire on two military facilities in Chattanooga before being shot dead by police near the scene.
The three other Marines killed were identified Friday as Lance Cpl. Skip "Squire" Wells, of Marietta, Ga., Sgt. Carson Holmquist, of Grantsburg Wisc., and Staff Sgt. David Wyatt, of Chattanooga.
Sullivan served in India Battery, 3rd Battalion, 12th Marines and fought in the 2005 Battle of Abu Ghraib, where he earned a Combat Action medal and Purple Heart.
The Facebook page of a Springfield bar and restaurant owned by one of Sullivan's two siblings posted a message paying tribute to Sullivan.
Related Image
Expand / Contract
US
Marine Lance Cpl. Skip Wells, in his military portrait, and with his
mother, Cathy Wells, in a photo taken last week at Disney World, where
Skip was honored as a service member of the day. (Courtesy: Cathy Wells)
Sullivan's friend, Josh Parnell, of Chicago, told Oak Lawn Patch, "There's no Marine you would want that was better in combat than him."
On Friday, friends posted tributes to Holmquist on his Facebook page, which was plastered with photos of the American flag.
"You will be missed bud," wrote one friend.
Just last week, Wells and his mother traveled to Disney World where he was honored as a service member of the day. Cathy Wells told Fox News her son died for the love of his country.
Abdulazeez attacked a military recruitment center in Chattanooga, spraying the strip mall facility with gunfire from his silver Mustang before driving, with police in pursuit, to a Naval training facility seven miles away, where he killed the unarmed Marines.
Three other people — a Navy sailor, a Marine Corps recruiter and a police officer — were wounded in Thursday's attack. Sources told Fox News early Friday that the sailor, who is in serious condition, underwent surgery and made it through the night much to the relief of doctors. The police officer was shot in the ankle. The recruiter was wounded in the leg and has been released from the hospital.
The remains of the Marines are en route to Dover, Delaware, a Marine Corps spokesman said Friday afternoon.
Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker ordered U.S. and Massachusetts flags to be flown at half-staff at all state buildings and military installations across the state in honor of Sullivan and the other victims of the attack.
Chattanooga shooting proves it's time to arm our Armed Forces
It turns out that at least one of the two military facilities attacked in Chattanooga, Tennessee -- was a gun-free zone.
If you looked closely crime scene photographs - you can see the sign -- plastered on the front of a bullet- riddled window.
Click here to follow Todd on Facebook for conservative conversation.
Four Marines were slaughtered -- a fifth wounded -- along with a Chattanooga police officer.
Authorities say the gunman, identified as 24-year-old Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, was killed in a shoot-out.
Abdulazeez is reportedly a Kuwaiti-native who attended high school in the Chattanooga area. The Times Free-Press posted his graduation photo – that included the phrase; “My name causes national security alerts. What does yours do?”
The FBI says it’s too soon to speculate on the suspect’s motive – but I think we’ve all got a pretty clear understanding of what went down.
As many as 50 shots were fired -- and all the survivors could do was barricade themselves inside.
The brave men and women who staff these military recruiting stations are sitting ducks. Soft targets - is the terminology they use.
The same thing happened at the Fort Hood massacre.
In response to the shooting Homeland Security ordered enhanced security measures at federal buildings. Since they can’t carry weapons what are they going to do? How are they going to defend themselves against the next Muhammad Abdulazeez -- lock the doors, pull the shades?
It's time to arm the Armed Forces. Now, I’m sure the experts will say there’s some sort of logical reason why military personnel should not have access to firearms – but I’m not convinced. Brave Marines gunned down in a Southern city -- and that is something we cannot abide. Our elected leaders must give them at least a fighting chance.
It makes absolutely no sense that Marines and Airmen and Sailors and Soldiers who defend our nation are unable to defend themselves – on American soil.
Doctor says George HW Bush's recovery from neck injury could take 3-4 months
PORTLAND, Maine – The fractured neck bone suffered by former President George H.W. Bush when he fell at his summer home will be allowed to heal on its own, a recovery that could take three to four months, officials said.
Bush, at 91 the oldest living former president, did not suffer any neurological impairment when he took a spill at his home in Kennebunkport on Wednesday. He remained hospitalized in fair condition on Thursday.
Bush spokesman Jim McGrath said the 41st president never lost consciousness and was being fitted with a brace to immobilize his neck. He fractured his C2 vertebra, the second one below the skull, but it didn't impinge on his spine and didn't lead to any neurological deficits, McGrath said.
Bush is being treated at Maine Medical Center, the state's largest medical facility, where a children's hospital is named for his wife. His family declined to say how he fell.
Dr. William D'Angelo, a neurosurgeon who is treating Bush, said the former president was lucky the fracture wasn't more serious.
"He's in great spirits," D'Angelo said outside the hospital. "He's with family. As his wife said, it takes a lot more than this to knock his spirits down. He was shot down over the Pacific in World War II. She said this is a small bump in the road."
A hospital spokesman said it was premature to speculate about when Bush will be released, but McGrath suggested it won't be a lengthy stay.
D'Angelo said the injury is common among seniors who fall and can be painful. He said a patient in his 90s would generally take three or four months to heal.
"It's a significant injury, but right now the president is in excellent shape, and we anticipate he'll make a full recovery," the doctor said.
He said Bush was "doing great" and "he's up and talking and out of bed."
A White House spokesman said President Barack Obama called Bush on Thursday morning to wish him a speedy recovery.
Bush, who has a form of Parkinson's disease and uses a motorized scooter or a wheelchair for mobility, has suffered other recent health setbacks. He was hospitalized in Houston in December for about a week for shortness of breath. He spent Christmas 2012 in intensive care at the same Houston hospital for a bronchitis-related cough and other issues.
The Republican served two terms as Ronald Reagan's vice president before being elected president in 1988. He served one term, highlighted by the success of the 1991 Gulf War in Kuwait, and then lost to Democrat Bill Clinton amid voters' concerns about the economy.
Bush was a naval aviator in World War II, and his torpedo plane was shot down over the Pacific. He also served as ambassador to the United Nations, envoy to China and CIA director.
He is the father of Republican former President George W. Bush. Another Bush son, Republican former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, is running for president in 2016.
During the winter, Bush and his wife, Barbara Bush, live in Houston.
Clinton's campaign claims to be small donor driven; facts show otherwise
Sneaky Looking?
Podesta also declared the campaign to be under “a ferocious onslaught of dark money” from Republicans, but that Hillary is funded by grassroots Americans who’ve “chipped in $1, $5, or $10.” An examination of the facts shows something different.
The email, under the subject line: “A ferocious onslaught of dark money,” says, “Republicans are out-raising us 4 to 1. If we win the Democratic nomination for president and this pace keeps up, we are in for a ferocious onslaught of dark money, regardless of who the nominee is on the other side.” But what does that “4 to 1” margin mean?
The Clinton campaign took in $46.7 million in its first quarter of existence, no small sum. Even NBC News called it a “Huge Fundraising Haul.” The next highest total for a campaign was another Democrat, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders raised $15 million. Senator Marco Rubio came in third with $12 million. So where does the “4 to 1” come from? Turns out it’s creative math.
The Clinton campaign combined the totals each of the current top-tier Republican campaign raised, $53 million, with the money raised by Super PACs associated with them, $203 million, for a total of $256 million for the GOP. Clinton’s Super PACs raised $24.3 million. If you add that to her total, as she does with the GOP, her total is $71 million. That’s roughly 3 to 1, not 4 to 1, but it’s still a false number.
The Clinton camp combines all the money raised by GOP candidates, but ignores the money raised by Sanders.
If you add in the money Sanders raised, the Democrats’ total increases to $86 million, closer to 2.5 to one. But Clinton’s team created a false equivalence – one against all. Clinton’s campaign, by itself, has raised more than the top 4 GOP candidates combined – $46 million to $43 million.
The Clinton email also attempts to give the impression of a grassroots movement. It reads, in part:
We’re running a different kind of race. More than 250,000 people have chipped in $1, $5, or $10 because they care enough about this election to have a financial stake in it.The wording is a deliberate attempt to mislead the reader into thinking the Clinton campaign is funded by small dollar donors, average Americans simply “chipping in” what they can. But again, math tells a different story.
If each of Clinton’s 250,000 donors “chipped in” all the low dollar amounts listed in the email — $1, $5, $10, for a total of $16 each — that would total $4 million. That leaves $42 million unaccounted for.
The Washington Post reports only 17 percent of Clinton’s haul, or $7 million, came from donations of $200 or less, which leaves $39 million from high dollar donors. Not exactly the grassroots “different kind of campaign” Podesta is telling supporters.
Add further fudging to the numbers, the New York Post reported the Clinton campaign made concerted effort to attract $1 donations from as many people as possible to dilute the high dollar donor numbers.
Chattanooga gunman reportedly blogged about Islam, showed increased signs of devotion
The man authorities say killed four U.S. Marines when he attacked two military sites in Chattanooga, Tenn. was a practicing Muslim who reportedly showed signs of becoming increasingly devout in recent weeks.
Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez, 24, was shot and killed by police after he allegedly attacked the Marines at the Navy Operational Support Center and Marine Corps Reserve Center at around 11 a.m. Thursday. Before attacking the military center, police say Abdulazeez sprayed an Armed Forces recruiting center seven miles away with bullets, leaving a police officer with a non-life threatening ankle wound.
“While it would be premature to speculate on the motives of the shooter at this time, we will conduct a thorough investigation of this tragedy and provide updates as they are available," an FBI official told Fox News, hours after the deadly attack. A law enforcement source told Fox News that Abdulazeez was not on the FBI’s radar prior to the shooting.
The Daily Beast reported that Abdulazeez kept a blog that contained just two posts, both published on Monday and both concerning Islam. The first refers to a hypothetical test, designed to, as the writer puts it, "separate the inhabitants of Paradise from the inhabitants of Hellfire."
In the the second post Abdulazeez says his fellow Muslims have a "certain understanding of Islam and keep a tunnel vision of what we think Islam is."
"We ask Allah ... to give us a complete understanding of the message of Islam, and the strength the [sic]live by this knowledge, and to know what role we need to play to establish Islam in the world," he writes. The posts do not make any specific reference to current world events, such as the civil war in Syria or U.S.-led airstrikes against the Islamic State terror group (ISIS).
The New York Times reported that recent family photographs posted on Facebook showed Abdulazeez with a newly grown beard. Dr. Azhar Sheikh, a founding member of the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga, told the paper that Abdulazeez had also begun attending Friday prayers regularly over the past two to three months. Sheikh said the suspect's family had attended services in Abdulazeez's younger days, but he had stopped doing so, and Sheikh assumed that he had moved away.
According to the Times, Abdulazeez was born in Kuwait to a family of Jordanians. A federal official told the paper that Abdulazeez had become a naturalized American citizen, though it is not clear when. Abdulazeez grew up in a middle-class suburban subdivision just across the Tennessee River from Chattanooga itself. The Chattanooga Times Free Press, citing county property records, reported that Youssuf Abdulazeez, the family patriarch, had owned the house his son grew up in since 2001. It was not clear whether the family had lived elsewhere in the U.S. before arriving in Chattanooga.
Neighbor Dean McDaniel described Abdulazeez and his sisters to the Times as being polite and well-behaved. He said the girls and their mother wore head scarves in public, while Abdulazeez dressed in jeans, T-shirts and shorts. He added that Youssuf Abdulazeez and his wife spoke in a foreign accent, but their children did not.
Mohammed Abdulazeez graduated from the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in 2012 with a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and was a student intern a few years ago at the Tennessee Valley Authority, the federally owned utility that operates power plants and dams across the South.
Hussnain Javid, a 21-year-old senior at the university, said he and Abdulazeez graduated from Chattanooga's Red Bank High School several years apart. Javid said Abdulazeez was on the high school's wrestling team and was a popular student. He added Abdulazeez was "very outgoing" and that he was well known.
Javid said he occasionally saw Abdulazeez at the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga, but the last time was roughly a year ago.
During his school years, Abdulazeez's faith was most noticeable during his athletic exploits. Ryan Smith, a high school wrestling teammate of Abdulazeez, told the Times Free Press that Abdulazeez would sometimes get in trouble with coaches for fasting during the season, putting him at risk of running afoul of the sport's weight requirements.
Scott Schrader, one of the owners of a Chattanooga gym who trained Abdulazeez in mixed martial arts, told the paper that the then-teenager would stop training every day at 6 p.m. to pray.
"He was honestly one of the funniest guys I'd ever met," said Smith. "I never saw a violent bone in his body, outside of the sport he was doing."
Little is known about what Abdulazeez did after he graduated from college. Smith said he recently saw his former classmate working at cell phone kiosks at two local malls. On April 20 of this year, Abdulazeez was arrested and accused of driving under the influence after failing a sobriety test. Court records showed that he was released on $2,000 bond. Until Thursday, it was his only recorded run-in with the law.
Sheikh told the New York Times that the Chattanooga Islamic Society had canceled its planned Friday celebration of Eid al-Fitr, which marks the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
"We have canceled out of respect and remembrance for our fallen Marines," he said.
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...