In any event, the court rejected Pollock only a few years later, by upholding an estate tax and a gift tax — that is, a tax on net worth. After the 16th Amendment, which declared an income tax constitutional, was ratified in 1913 as a response to Pollock, discussions of the constitutionality of taxes other than the head tax dropped off the Supreme Court docket.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-warren-wealth-tax-20190125-story.html

CLOSE

President Donald Trump renewed his call for a border wall threatened another government shutdown or emergency action if he does not get ‘fair deal.’ (Jan. 25)
AP

President Donald Trump addressed the nation on Friday to announce the end of the government shutdown

In making that announcement, Trump restated several of the reasons he feels the country needs a border wall and improved border security. 

“After 36 days of spirited debate and dialogue, I have seen and heard from enough Democrats and Republicans that they are willing to put partisanship aside,” Trump said during his speech. 

Here is a look at five things Trump said and the context needed to fully understand the issues he brought up. 

Trump suggested federal workers supported the shutdown

Statement: “I want to thank all of the incredible federal workers and their amazing families who have shown such extraordinary devotion in the face of this recent hardship. You are fantastic people. You are incredible patriots. Many of you have suffered far greater than anyone but your families would know or understand. And not only did you not complain but in many cases, you encouraged me to keep going because you care so much about our country and about its border security.” 

Facts: The American Federation of Government Employees sued the Trump administration shortly after the shutdown began. Hundreds of thousands of workers have been furloughed or are on the job without pay during the shutdown.

“Our members put their lives on the line to keep our country safe,” said J. David Cox Sr., the union’s national president. “Requiring them to work without pay is nothing short of inhumane.”

Throughout the entirety of the shutdown, federal employees took to social media to criticize Congress and Trump for the shutdown and ask for an agreement to be reached. 

On Friday, FBI Director Christopher Wray told his agents that the five-week government shutdown has been “mind-boggling” and “unfair”  days after Adm. Karl Schultz, commandant of the Coast Guard, released a video calling the shutdown “unacceptable” for forcing workers to rely on food pantries and donations. 

Trump repeated the idea that walls work 

CLOSE

A video released by Customs and Border Protection shows a group of migrants scaling the border fence near Yuma with the help of smugglers using a ladder.
Border Patrol

Statement: “They do work. No matter where you go, they work. Israel built a wall, 99.9 percent successful. Won’t be any different for us. They keep criminals out. They save good people from attempting a very dangerous journey from other countries, thousands of miles, because they think they have a glimmer of hope of coming through. With a wall, they don’t have that hope. They keep drugs out, and they dramatically increase efficiency by allowing us to patrol far larger areas with far fewer people. It’s just common sense. Walls work.”

Facts: Several instances of migrants going over existing wall structures or under the border came to light during the shutdown that was entirely about building a wall. 

The most recent incident came this week, when a group of mostly Guatemalan asylum seekers breached the U.S.-Mexico border south of Yuma, Ariz., on Monday night, by using a ladder to scale the border fence

Customs and Border Protection on Wednesday released security-camera footage of the incident on Wednesday involving 118 migrants. About 86 percent of them were families traveling together, the agency said.

The video was released about a week after the largest single group of migrant families and minors ever recorded in the Yuma area tunneled underneath a border fence and voluntarily turned themselves into U.S. Border Patrol agents.

A group of 376 migrants, composed almost overwhelmingly of Guatemalan families and children seeking asylum, breached the U.S.-Mexico border just before noon approximately 4½ miles east of the San Luis, Ariz., commercial port of entry.

That large group tunneled under the border a couple weeks before Mexican law enforcement officials released a video showing a newly discovered tunnel that was found along the border in the area of Nogales, Ariz. It was the third tunnel found in the past couple of months.

Trump talked about women being tied up with their mouths taped shut 

Statement: “Human traffickers, the victims are women and children, maybe to a lesser extent, believe it or not, children. Women are tied up, they’re bound, duct tape put around their faces, around their mouths. In many cases they can’t even breathe.” 

Facts: During his speech, Trump delivered a winding tale of women being bound and gagged with duct tape while being ferried across unwalled sections of the border in vehicles. When asked about his story, the Department of Homeland Security declined to provide any examples of that happening, calling into question whether such situations have happened in real life.

There are some elements of truth behind the president’s claim. More than two thirds of all Central American migrants have reported being victims of some kind of violence on their journey, and nearly a third of migrant women have reported being sexually assaulted, according to a survey conducted by Doctors Without Borders. Migrants have also reported being kidnapped along the journey as smugglers demand more money from their families or friends.

Sometimes migrants are smuggled into the country through ports of entry in the back of tractor trailers, but recent cases don’t indicate that any of the migrants were bound and gagged. Instead, the trucks are often lined with sleeping mats, water, and ventilation pipes.

But no evidence exists that duct-tape bound women have been smuggled across the border in vehicles.

Trump suggested that a wall would help control the amount of drugs coming across the border 

Statement: “Vast quantities of lethal drugs, including meth, fentanyl, heroin and cocaine are smuggled across our Southern border and into U.S. schools and communities.”

Facts:  The majority of marijuana caught by U.S. officials along the southwest border is caught between ports of entry. But according to Customs and Border Protection data, the vast majority of hard drugs, such as methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin and fentanyl, which are more potent and deadly, are caught at ports of entry.

Former CBP Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske told USA Today recently that those numbers accurately reflect successful smuggling runs, since cartels have better odds getting through busy ports of entry than the stretches of border in between patrolled by Border Patrol agents.

“It’s very clear that (drugs) come through the ports,” Kerlikowske said.

Trump talked about the ‘health crisis’ on the border 

Statement: “The sheer volume of illegal immigration has overwhelmed federal authorities and stretched our immigration system beyond the breaking point. Nearly 50 migrants a day are being referred for medical assistance. They’re very, very sick, making this a health crisis as well. It’s a very big health crisis. People have no idea how big it is unless you’re there.”

Facts: Since a partial government shutdown began on Dec. 22, agents have spent nearly 19,300 hours in hospital visits, according to Customs and Border Protection.  

Since Dec. 22, Border Patrol has transported 2,224 migrants they’ve apprehended to local hospitals along the U.S.-Mexico border. That’s roughly 5.3 percent of all apprehensions during that time period, according to the agency.

Customs and Border Protection said in its statement that the hospitalizations have strained Border Patrol resources, “severely limiting their ability to process the large group or respond to other border security duties.”

“Thus resulting in increased time in custody, delaying custody transfer coordination, and inhibiting response to other illegal cross-border traffic,” they added.

However, advocacy groups said the increase in hospitalizations has more to do with the mounting pressure on the Border Patrol after the deaths of Guatemalan children at the border last month. 

Following their deaths, U.S. Department of Homeland Security officials mandated secondary medical checks for children in the government’s custody. 

Contributing: Louie Villalobos and Alan Gomez of USA TODAY; Josh Susong, Daniel Gonzalez, Dan Nowicki, Michael Squires, and Dennis Wagner of the Arizona Republic

 

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/25/government-shutdown-2019-what-know-5-claims-president-trump-made/2681049002/

St. Louis — A male St. Louis police officer was charged Friday with involuntary manslaughter in the shooting death of a female officer during what was described as a deadly game with a revolver. Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced the charge against Nathaniel Hendren, 29, in the death of 24-year-old Katlyn Alix, as they allegedly played a game in which a revolver’s cylinder was emptied, one bullet put back and the two colleagues taking turns pointing at each other and pulling the trigger.

Alix was with two male officers at an apartment when she was killed just before 1 a.m. Thursday . A probable cause statement from police, provided by Gardner’s office, offered a chilling account of the dangerous game that led to her death.

This undated photo released by the St. Louis Police Department shows officer Katlyn Alix. 

St. Louis Police Department


The probable cause statement said Alix and Hendren were “playing with firearms” when Hendren produced a revolver.

“The defendant emptied the cylinder of the revolver and then put one cartridge back into the cylinder,” the statement said. He allegedly spun the cylinder, pointed the gun away and pulled the trigger.

The gun did not fire. The statement said Alix took the gun, pointed it at Hendren and pulled the trigger. Again, it didn’t fire.

Hendren “took the gun back and pointed it at the victim (and) pulled the trigger causing the gun to discharge,” the statement said. “The victim was struck in the chest.”

CBS affiliate KMOV-TV reports that authorities say Hendren’s partner told them he told both Alix and Hendren that they shouldn’t play with guns, adding that he “didn’t want to have any part of it.”

He was leaving the room when Hendren shot Alix. Authorities said he walked back into the room and saw she was shot in the chest. 

The male officers drove Alix to a hospital where she died. Hendren also is charged with armed criminal action.

The two men were on-duty at the time of the shooting. Police Chief John Hayden has declined to answer questions about why the officers had gathered at the apartment, which was home to one of the men.

St. Louis police said the charges were the result of a promise Hayden made to Alix’s family to conduct a “thorough and competent investigation.”

Alix, a military veteran who was married, was not working but met the men at the apartment.

Police immediately launched an internal investigation and placed both officers on paid leave. Gardner also began her own investigation on Thursday and enlisted the Missouri State Highway Patrol to conduct it.

Alix went into the police academy in 2016 and had been with the department for two years as a patrol officer in the second district, KMOV reported

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/katlyn-alix-st-louis-officer-shooting-death-officer-nathaniel-hendren-charged-today-2019-01-25/

With airports jammed with angry passengers, Republican senators blaming each other behind closed doors for the government shutdown, and President Trump’s poll numbers tanking, the writing was on the wall. Feeling pressure from his fellow Republicans to reopen the government, Trump announced Friday afternoon that a deal was reached for federal employees to come back to work as negotiations on border security are given a little more time.

A week ago, the White House was firm on its demand: Parts of the government will remain shuttered until Democratic lawmakers write a $5.7 billion check for a border wall. Trump’s capitulation (and make no mistake, it was a capitulation) is a complete reversal of the White House position and a blowout win for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in her first month back on the job.

Trump, however, remained defiant. At the same time he asked lawmakers to work in unison for the benefit of the nation, he threatened to use the nuclear option if Congress can’t come up with a solution. “I have a very powerful alternative, but I did not want to use it at this time,” Trump said in the White House Rose Garden. “Hopefully, it will be unnecessary.”

That “very powerful alternative” Trump is referring to is a declaration of national emergency, a proclamation that would provide him with a way to get his border wall money without having to go through the normal legislative process. Ordinarily, the executive branch is constitutionally barred from spending any taxpayer money on any program unless Congress explicitly authorizes and appropriates the funds. Outside of declaring war or authorizing the use of military force, the ability to appropriate funds, or not, is the legislative branch’s most coveted power.

Lawmakers from both political parties protect the power of the purse with every fiber of their being because it’s one of the few tactics Congress can employ to pressure the president. Trump’s declaring of a national emergency would rip that power away. If lawyers in the executive branch can argue that there is indeed a dire national emergency along the southwestern border with Mexico, billions of dollars in the military construction budget will be made available for the border structure Trump so desperately wants. Trump could task the Army Corps of Engineers to start building right away.

Democrats, who are as strongly opposed to a border wall as Trump is enamored by it, would not be powerless bystanders if the president tried to do an end-run around Congress. They could technically prohibit any money from being used for construction of a border barrier through legislation, although GOP opposition would likely kill it. They could file a lawsuit against Trump, arguing that his emergency declaration is not, in fact, an emergency, but rather an instigation of an artificial crisis in order to justify an unjustifiable project.

A lawsuit would work itself through the court system and wind up in the Supreme Court, where the case could prove to be one of the most important trials of executive power since the fight over military commissions in the George W. Bush era. The border wall could become a proxy war between the executive and legislative branches, a classic battle over constitutional power that the judiciary would have to arbitrate. If Trump loses that fight, the precedent it would set would impact the flexibility of presidents in the future to tap into their emergency powers.

Trump may decide that a national emergency is too big of a step. The House Freedom Caucus, Trump’s most reliable support base on Capitol Hill, has already questioned whether an emergency proclamation is a smart idea. Lawmakers such as Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows are concerned that a declaration now could provide a future Democratic president with the power to do something similar on progressive priorities like climate change. The White House may gamble on another government shutdown, perhaps believing that the public would blame Democrats for being too obstructionist this time around.

Either way, the three-week government reopening shouldn’t be celebrated as a major breakthrough. The end of the longest shutdown in history may turn out to be the intermission to the meatier second act.

Daniel DePetris (@DanDePetris) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. His opinions are his own.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/trumps-border-wall-drama-isnt-over-this-is-just-intermission

Two former associates of Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneHillicon Valley: Senate panel subpoenas Roger Stone associate | Streaming giants hit with privacy complaints in Europe | FTC reportedly discussing record fine for Facebook | PayPal offering cash advances to unpaid federal workers Senate panel subpoenas Roger Stone associate Jerome Corsi Corsi says stepson subpoenaed to testify before grand jury in Mueller investigation MORE indicated Friday that they are willing to testify against him in court.

Jerome Corsi and Randy Credico, who have appeared before the grand jury impaneled by special counsel Robert MuellerRobert Swan MuellerSasse: US should applaud choice of Mueller to lead Russia probe MORE and provided documents contradicting Stone’s congressional testimony, signaled they would serve as witnesses if the case goes to trial.

Stone, a longtime associate of President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarriors visit Obama during trip to DC Kushner’s top secret security clearance was rejected twice: report Senate Democrats reject Trump’s ‘pro-rated’ wall funding pitch MORE who worked briefly on his campaign as an informal adviser, was arrested Friday on one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements and one count of witness tampering. He is accused of making false statements during his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, telling lawmakers he did not discuss his alleged backchannel to WikiLeaks over email or through text messages.

Conservative conspiracy theorist Corsi told The Hill on Friday that it would be “very hard” for him to comment on whether Stone lied during congressional testimony, saying Stone “may have different perceptions.”

But he said that if Stone’s case goes to trial and he were subpoenaed to appear as a witness, he would likely comply with the order.

“I don’t see how I have any choice but to testify, and I would plan to do so,” Corsi said. “And I plan again to tell the truth.”

Larry Klayman, Corsi’s attorney, said Friday that he couldn’t comment as to whether his client would testify.

Stone has denied the charges against him, saying he will plead not guilty during his arraignment next week in Washington, D.C.

Credico, a former New York radio host, declined to comment directly to The Hill, citing the advice of his attorneys.

His lawyer, Martin R. Stoler, said that if Stone goes to trial, Credico would testify if called as a witness.

Stoler also said the indictment backs up Credico’s statements that he was not Stone’s backchannel to WikiLeaks.

“Randy has made a number of public statements in the past, and the indictment has been completely consistent with whatever Randy has said,” Stoler said.

Stone for months has insisted that Credico was his backchannel to WikiLeaks.

Credico, who had been friends with Stone for more than a decade, told The Hill last year that the friendship has ended.

Other testimony and messages provided by both Corsi and Credico to the special counsel’s office indicate Stone sought more information on emails in WikiLeaks’s possession, despite Stone telling congressional investigators that he had not.

Stone’s indictment accuses him of engaging in witness tampering by threatening Credico if he did not make statements that aligned with Stone’s testimony before congressional investigators.

Credico had urged Stone in text messages and emails to amend his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee. Credico was subpoenaed to testify before the committee, but asserted his Fifth Amendment right to not self-incriminate.

In messages exchanged before Credico invoked the Fifth Amendment, Stone called him a “rat” and a “stoolie,” according to court documents.

Stone also said he would “take that dog away from you,” referring to Credico’s dog Bianca, and later wrote, “I am so ready. Let’s get it on. Prepare to die [expletive].”

Stoler told The Hill that his client would not pursue a separate civil case against Stone, citing Friday’s indictment.

Klayman, meanwhile, said Corsi may pursue a lawsuit against Stone and Infowars founder Alex Jones if “they defame us again.”

Stone and Jones went after Corsi in the lead-up to a Washington Post story published this week about payments Corsi received from Infowars, after he stepped down as Washington bureau chief for Infowars.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/427063-former-stone-associates-indicate-willingness-to-testify-against-him

WASHINGTON — A White House official said Friday that the Trump administration is taking steps to ensure back pay is issued as soon as possible to the roughly 800,000 furloughed employees who went without paychecks during the 35-day government shutdown.

President Donald Trump announced Friday that the government would re-open through Feb. 15 while negotiations on border security funding continue.

“Because of the President’s actions, Federal workers will be paid in the coming days,” the White House tweeted. “To the public servants who have worked without pay and been furloughed, we thank you. To Congress, it is time to negotiate and address the humanitarian crisis on our border once and for all.”

Administration officials said payroll can vary by agency and encouraged employees to contact their specific employer for further information.

Congress passed a bill Jan. 16 guaranteeing government employees would receive back pay at “the earliest date possible” once the government reopened, regardless of the next scheduled pay date. However, the bill did not extend the same protections to the millions of government contractors, such as janitors and food service workers, who are often paid very little.

“Get the checks out, now. Federal employees haven’t been paid in more than a month and mortgage and rent are due next week,” said National Treasury Employees Union President Tony Reardon in a statement Friday. “They shouldn’t have to wait a minute longer.”

Although there was widespread relief that the government was temporarily reopening, federal employees were wary that they could find themselves in the same situation in just a few weeks.

Mandy Ranslow, an analyst for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, said she personally feels “cautiously optimistic” about the government reopening and “wouldn’t discount the idea we might [be] in this same situation in three weeks considering there are a lot of rich guys making decisions and they don’t understand why federal employees are suffering.”

Jason Swearingen, a contract worker at NASA, said that by mid-January he had used all of his vacation days to make it through the shutdown.

“I don’t know if I will get my vacation time paid back,” he wrote to NBC News on Twitter. “I’m glad that there’s at least a temporary opening, but I’m annoyed that it’s temporary.”

The Smithsonian museums and the National Zoo also announced Friday that they would re-open next Tuesday.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/government-employees-expected-receive-back-pay-within-days-n963046

<!– –>

As the partial government shutdown hits its 35th day, and hundreds of thousands of people face another missed paycheck, the closure threatens recruitment and retention of top talent in federal departments.

For years, government jobs have earned a reputation as stable. Employees could generally count on few surprises, good benefits and a solid retirement. For many workers, it comes with the reward of feeling like they helped the public.

The record-long government shutdown has damaged that notion. On Friday, about 800,000 federal workers will start to lose their second paychecks since funding for nine departments lapsed on Dec. 22. Some face furloughs, while others have had to toil without pay.

Related: Air traffic controller shortage delays flights at Newark, LaGuardia and Philadelphia

The missed paydays have left thousands of workers scrambling to cover meals and bills, selling personal items or seeking temporary or permanent work outside of their government posts. Some U.S. employees and outside groups advocating for them worry the political fight over President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall will drive talented people away from government service.

“I expect there will be some long-term repercussions of this in terms of really good people deciding this is not the career they signed up for,” one American diplomat posted in Europe who declined to be named said last week about younger people entering the foreign service. The official, who also mentioned Trump’s travel ban as a potential factor in driving young diplomats away, is reporting to work during the shutdown and not getting paid.

The federal government employs about 2 million civilians, according to the Office of Personnel Management. While many conservatives such as Office of Management and Budget Director and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney would like to see cuts, federal employment has stayed steady in recent years. The government does send much of its work to private contractors. (Contractors are in dire straits, too. There are about 10,000 companies that are contracted by government agencies affected by the shutdown, according to The Washington Post.)

Federal funding has lapsed 21 times since 1976, according to the Congressional Research Service. While workers did not face furloughs in all of those cases, they have during recent shutdowns. With the current partial closure entering its record 35th day and leading to at least two missed paychecks, it has become particularly demoralizing for people considering government work.

People entering government jobs often take the posts knowing they could make more money in the private sector. Many — whether in affected areas such as the State Department, Department of Housing and Urban Development or FBI — believe in the mission of their agency.

Having a passion for the work only goes so far when employees get paychecks for $0.

“Very few people in either the public or private sector can probably tolerate that and be in any kind of great shape,” said a representative for the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest government worker union. The AFGE official declined to be named.

Congress has created a great deal of uncertainty for government workers in recent years. Funding lapsed — though only briefly — twice last year. Lawmakers have hopped from one short-term continuing resolution to the next to keep the government running, which also creates uncertainty for workers.

But employees have felt the pain of this shutdown more sharply. For some, it means finding stopgap sources of income when they cannot go to work, such as driving for Uber. For others, it means considering another line of work entirely — and potentially taking their skills away from public service.

One unidentified FBI special agent in the Northeast region said younger bureau employees “have said they will find work elsewhere” if the shutdown is prolonged, according to a statement released by the FBI Agents Association, which advocates for active and retired agents. The official said, “I can’t imagine attracting new qualified applicants” due to the shutdown, and speculated that talented people could seek other work.

Another special agent in the Washington, D.C., region with a computer science degree questioned the notion of working without pay.

“Putting up with lower pay than the private sector only makes sense when you actually get paid,” the unidentified agent said in a statement issued by the FBIAA.

Morale was already taking a hit

The shutdown hit at a time when government worker morale was already suffering. Policies such as the travel ban hampered some officials’ enthusiasm. But the Trump administration has also proposed stark cuts to various departments in its budget proposals.

Employee engagement fell in 2018 in 59.1 percent of federal organizations ranked by the Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for efficient government. Engagement rose in only 39.6 percent of entities listed in its Best Places to Work in Federal Government report, while it stayed the same in 1.3 percent of organizations.

Funding lapses only make matters worse, and could deter qualified people from government posts, according to Max Stier, president and CEO of the Partnership for Public Service.

“There is no other job that you could be required to be in where you have to work with no paycheck,” Stier said. “So it hurts the morale, it hurts the ability to encourage new people to come in.”

Employment with the federal government has offered particular stability to black Americans. The government is broadly considered a less discriminatory employer than many private sector companies — which Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, noted during an NAACP telephone town hall earlier this month.

Black employees made up about 18 percent of executive branch workers in 2017, according to the Office of Personnel Management. During the NAACP event, Fudge said that when Trump suggested on Twitter that most of the people not getting paid are Democrats, he really meant most of those not getting paychecks are black, according to Cleveland.com.

Meanwhile, White House officials have faced backlash for an apparent lack of empathy toward unpaid government workers. In a CNBC interview Thursday, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said he does not “really quite understand” why government workers are going to food banks when they could take out loans.

Democrats, who have highlighted the plight of government employees as polls show most Americans blame Trump for the shutdown, pounced on his comments Thursday. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described the remark as a “let them eat cake” attitude.

Then, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow said that the workers are “volunteering” because “they believe government service is honorable and they believe in President Trump and they’re working as hard as ever.”

The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request to comment on the perceived lack of empathy or the potential for government workers to leave their jobs.

Trump has repeatedly said many federal employees agree with him on border security and believe in his push to build the proposed wall. The AFGE representative estimated that only a “tiny, tiny percentage” of federal employees agree with the president’s tactics.

The White House and Congress have so far failed to break an impasse over Trump’s demand for $5.7 billion to construct the barrier. On Thursday, two bills to reopen the government — one with funds for the wall and another without — failed in the Senate.

A Democratic-backed measure to temporarily fund the government, which the president threatened to veto, earned more votes in the GOP-held Senate than a Trump-backed plan. While neither of the proposals ended the impasse, the votes appeared to kick-start the first serious negotiations in weeks.

Republicans, likewise, have tried to put pressure on Democrats by proposing bills to pay government workers who are not receiving paychecks. Democrats have rejected those proposals, urging the GOP to reopen the government, which would ensure the employees get paychecks. It is unclear how the GOP proposals would ensure people get paid if Congress does not pass appropriations bills.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer talked about a way out of the closure Thursday as senators from both parties called for a short-term plan to fund the government for three weeks. Trump said he would support such a plan, but only if he got a “down payment” on the wall. Pelosi called any funding for the barrier a nonstarter.

It’s not certain how long the shutdown will last, or what level of pain for government workers would force lawmakers to end it. The fact that a political fight, rather than the merits of their work, caused federal employees to go without pay could make them even more disillusioned, the Partnership for Public Service’s Stier said.

“They’re in their jobs because they care about the missions of the organizations they’re working for,” he said. “The worst thing you can do is say, ‘you can’t do what you care about.’ Particularly when it’s saying that you can’t do what you came to work for, not because of your work, but because of some political fight.”

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/25/government-shutdown-worker-missed-paychecks-could-hurt-recruitment.html

However, President Trump says barriers must be included in border security plan; reaction and analysis on ‘The Five.’

Source Article from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alI5h17molU

A 12-year-old in Texas has been charged with capital murder after allegedly breaking into the home of a professional boxer and killing him. The boy could face a maximum of 40 years if convicted, a sentence that juvenile justice advocates are hoping he can avoid.

Boxer John Duane VanMeter, 24, was killed in his home on Wednesday evening, according to Uvalde, Texas, police, who said a woman in the house called 911 to report someone had broken in and shot her boyfriend.

Witnesses told NBC affiliate News 4 San Antonio that a male was seen running from the residence dressed in black, with a black bandana covering part of his face, before he was transported to Jourdanton Juvenile Detention Center.

Police did not identify the suspect. Numerous legal experts told NBC News they believe he is one of the youngest people to be charged with capital murder, the most serious type of felony.

The capital murder charge differs from first-degree murder in that it typically involves a special circumstance, such as a kidnapping, or the murder of a firefighter or police officer who is on duty.

In the Uvalde boy’s case, prosecutors likely considered the robbery component to be the special circumstance, said Mandy Miller, a Houston-area attorney who represents several juveniles who were convicted of capital murder years ago and are trying to get their sentences reduced.

“It’s a common practice for district attorney’s offices to charge as high as they believe they can possibly make it and work their way down,” Miller, who is not involved in the Uvalde case, said. “This case is obviously going to be complicated.”

In states such as Texas that have the death penalty, crimes by adults charged with capital murder are punishable by death. But a Supreme Court case from 2005 banned capital punishment for juveniles in the United States.

Jason Chein, a psychology professor at Temple University who has studied adolescent brain development and decision-making, said that ruling was one of several important acknowledgments from the Supreme Court of the biological differences between juvenile and adult brains.

“Impulse control is something that we see continuing to develop at least into mid- to late adolescence. You’re going to see improvements in impulse control even up to 16 years old. That’s when it starts to level off and look like that of an adult,” he said.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/12-year-old-charged-capital-murder-spotlights-justice-system-ill-n962886

Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar is facing a social media backlash after accusing President Trump of backing a “coup” in the socialist-led country of Venezuela even though Nicolas Maduro’s government is considered largely illegitimate by much of the international community.

“A US backed coup in Venezuela is not a solution to the dire issues they face,” Omar tweeted. “Trump’s efforts to install a far right opposition will only incite violence and further destabilize the region. We Must support Mexico, Uruguay, & the Vatican’s efforts to facilitate a peaceful dialogue.”

The U.S. and other nations on Wednesday took the step of recognizing Juan Guaido, the opposition head of the National Assembly, as the interim president of Venezuela. Maduro was elected last year in a vote widely seen as fraudulent.

MADURO SEVERING VENEZUELAN RELATIONS WITH US

Omar’s response provoked a fierce backlash on social media.

Omar was at the center of another Twitter controversy earlier this week when she made unsubstantiated accusations against the Covington Catholic students who had the viral confrontation with Native American elder Nathan Phillips.

She also was criticized for claiming that Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., was “compromised” and that Israel has “hypnotized” the world.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep-ilhan-omar-faces-backlash-after-claiming-trump-is-backing-coup-in-venezuela

[President Trump’s emergency powers, explained.]

The cease-fire could pave the way for Mr. Trump to deliver his State of the Union address to Congress after all, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi quickly clarified that it would not be held next Tuesday as originally scheduled. She had rescinded her invitation earlier this week to come to the House chamber until the government was reopened, and on Friday, the speaker said she would work with Mr. Trump to find a new date.

“The State of the Union is not planned now,” Ms. Pelosi said. “When government is open we will discuss a mutually agreeable date.”

As he announced the move, Mr. Trump paid tribute to the federal workers who have endured five weeks without pay, expressing sympathy for them in a way he had not until now. “You are fantastic people,” he said. “You are incredible patriots. Many of you have suffered far greater than anyone that your families would know or understand.”

He promised to ensure that workers will be compensated for the paychecks they have missed since the shutdown began in late December. “I will make sure that all employees receive their back pay very quickly or as soon as possible,” he said. “It will happen fast.”

The surprise announcement was a remarkable surrender for a president who made the wall his nonnegotiable condition for reopening the government. Mr. Trump relented as the effects of the shutdown rippled across the Northeast, with effects far beyond paychecks, such as air traffic slowing Friday because of a shortage of air traffic controllers, who called in sick. The F.B.I. director said he was as angry as he had ever been over his agents not being paid, and workers at the Internal Revenue Service called in sick.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/us/politics/trump-shutdown-deal.html

The hearing for Roger Stone just wrapped up.

This was an identity hearing to confirm he is Roger Stone before he is released by US marshals on $250,000 signature bond. That means he doesn’t have to put any money on the bond so long as he continues to appear before the court when required.

When asked by the judge to turn in his passport, Stone said, “I do not have a valid passport, it is expired.” 

Stone has to submit to substance abuse testing as part of what was agreed to in pre-trial. And he will be allowed to go to any medical visits with the doctor he is currently seeing.

When the judge read the bond instructions he said, “I understand your honor.”

When asked if he wanted to waive removal he said, “yes your honor.”

Stone was shackled around his waist and ankles. 

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/roger-stone-mueller-indictment/index.html

President Trump’s strategy of forcing a government shutdown to get funding for a border wall took another blow on Thursday when a Democratic bill to reopen the government received more votes in the Republican-controlled Senate than his own compromise bill that included wall funding.

There is, right now, more evidence that Trump’s support is fracturing than there is of disunion among Democrats, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is showing no signs of retreat. The chances of Trump getting his border wall dwindle by the day.

Watching how poorly Trump has played his hand on the border wall, dating back to the start of his presidency, when his party controlled both branches of Congress and he was coming off an election win, really highlights a missing ingredient that has severely imperiled Trump’s agenda. It comes down to personnel. Trump’s administration has included people who want to fight for his agenda who have little or no experience getting things accomplished in government. It also has people who have experience with government, but have no loyalty to his agenda. It has very few people who have both attributes. And many who have neither.

This is among the most common complaint I’ve heard from people who are sympathetic to Trump, but frustrated on progress on a number of issues, whether on immigration, healthcare, or foreign policy. Just look at Pelosi and how she’s wielded her power in the border wall fight. Even on something ultimately unimportant like the State of the Union. She knew she had the power to block a joint session of Congress and thus prevent him from giving a high-profile speech in the House chamber, she asserted that power, held firm, and Trump backed down. It just reinforced a feeling that Democrats know to use power when they have it to fight for their agenda, but Republicans never do. Trump was supposed to change things, but he has not been able to, because he’s lacked the right people.

Advisers such as Stephen Miller or, formerly, Steve Bannon, by and large, support the Trump agenda. But neither of them had the skill set to either build consensus on Capitol Hill, or wield power in a way that can muscle policies through Congress. Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and ex-chief of staff John Kelly came to their jobs with reputations for competence, but clearly were not fully on board with Trumpism and spent much of their time trying to contain him.

You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist about the “deep state” to recognize that many career employees of government agencies hate Trump and want to thwart his agenda. Even many appointees have approached their job as if their purpose is to manage him rather than to go to war for his policies — a sentiment infamously demonstrated by the anonymous New York Times op-ed.

There are other figures we’ve seen who were kind of the worst of both worlds. Reince Priebus had been an effective RNC chairman, but he was not the right fit to be chief of staff — nor did he really share Trump’s vision for the country. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson may have been an impressive CEO, but was completely out of his depth in Foggy Bottom, and fought to undermine Trump’s foreign policy, particularly on Iran.

Trump’s greatest successes have come in areas in which there were people working together who a) shared his goals and b) knew how to make them happen. A perfect example is judicial nominees, in which former White House Counsel Don McGahn consulted with outside groups such as the Federalist Society, who were eager to help Trump fulfill his promise of appointing conservative judges. The Trump team coordinated things closely with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who understood what it would take to get a lot of them confirmed.

There have also been successes in some areas of regulatory policy.

But Trump is seriously lacking people who are true believers in his cause who know enough about how to get things done in Washington. The reality is Republicans had the power in 2017 to build a wall if there was somebody knowledgeable about both immigration policy and legislative tactics to enable Trump to harness that power. This was always going to be a major challenge running as an outsider, against the party’s establishment, with plenty of seasoned hands in the party refusing to join the administration.

So he finds himself in the current situation — a protracted shutdown in which he lacks leverage. On the one side, people who want him to cave in and offer more fig leafs to Democrats, and on the other, people who are eager to see him carry on the fight with no strategy to win. This is the story of much of Trump’s presidency.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/shutdown-fight-highlights-missing-ingredient-that-has-impeded-trumps-agenda

President Trump’s decision Thursday morning to surrender to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s demand that he wait until after the government shutdown is resolved to deliver his State of the Union speech in the House chamber is going to make it a lot less likely that Pelosi, D-Calif., gives in on the funding for a border wall.

Sure, in the larger scheme of things, this childish skirmish doesn’t matter much. No lives are going to be affected by whether the date of a speech is on Jan. 29 on some other time. But in an ongoing negotiation with no real movement, any standoff is going to become a proxy battle.

In this case, Pelosi’s petulant action of rescinding her invitation to the State of the Union was an effort to flex her muscles. Trump responded, first, by canceling a congressional delegation’s overseas trip and then sending a letter on Wednesday signaling he was going to show up anyway, widely seen as an attempt to force her hand. But Pelosi didn’t flinch — she has the power to block a resolution calling a joint session of Congress and was willing to use it. Instead of trying to call her bluff by showing up, and forcing her to shut off the lights on him, or delivering the speech an an alternate venue, he instead announced he was completely capitulating.

As Mark Levin noted, Pelosi is now going to see this as weakness. Trump lashed out, he tut-tutted, but ultimately he gave Pelosi exactly what she wanted without getting anything in return.

At this point, there’s very little reason to believe that Pelosi will give in. Her party is unified behind her, Trump is the one who’s getting more blame for the shutdown, and her base would flip out if she agreed to fund the border wall. Now, on top of this, she has even more reason to believe that he’ll eventually cave.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/trumps-surrender-on-the-state-of-the-union-makes-it-even-less-likely-pelosi-will-give-in-on-border-wall

Three senior Trump campaign officials have told Mr. Mueller’s team that Mr. Stone created the impression that he was a conduit for inside information from WikiLeaks, according to people familiar with their witness interviews. One of them told investigators that Mr. Stone not only seemed to predict WikiLeaks’ actions, but also that he took credit afterward for the timing of its disclosures that damaged Hillary Clinton’s candidacy.

In social media posts and numerous interviews before the 2016 election, Mr. Stone indicated that he had advance knowledge that a trove of information damaging to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign might be about to spill into public view, and even suggested that he had personally spoken to the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.

Mr. Stone has changed his story in the months since, saying that he was not actually speaking to Mr. Assange and that he had no direct knowledge that Russians were responsible for the Democratic hacking. Still, it was revealed last year that, in the weeks before the election, Mr. Stone was messaging on Twitter with Guccifer 2.0, a pseudonym used by one or more operatives in the Russian intelligence scheme to steal the emails and funnel them to WikiLeaks.

Mr. Stone himself has said publicly that he was prepared for the possibility that he could be indicted, but he has long maintained that he is innocent and has often echoed Mr. Trump’s claims that Mr. Mueller’s investigation is a politically motivated witch hunt.

“This was supposed to be about Russian collusion, and it appears to be an effort to silence or punish the president’s supporters and his advocates,” he said last May on “Meet the Press.”

“It is not inconceivable now that Mr. Mueller and his team may seek to conjure up some extraneous crime pertaining to my business, or maybe not even pertaining to the 2016 election,” he said.

The tumultuous relationship between Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump goes back decades, with Mr. Stone acting as an informal adviser to Mr. Trump as he considered running for president several times. When Mr. Trump formally announced during the spring of 2015 that he was running for president, Mr. Stone was one of the first members of the team, but within months, he had a public dispute with Mr. Trump and left the campaign.

The two men have remained close, though, speaking often by telephone.

Mr. Stone revels in his public persona as a bête noire of American politics, and has taken credit for helping unearth scandals about Democratic politicians. In 2008, he played a role in revealing an affair between a prostitute and Eliot Spitzer, who was then the governor of New York. Mr. Spitzer immediately resigned from office.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/us/politics/roger-stone-indicted-mueller-investigation.html

Each day that President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarriors visit Obama during trip to DC Kushner’s top secret security clearance was rejected twice: report Senate Democrats reject Trump’s ‘pro-rated’ wall funding pitch MORE keeps the federal government closed over funding for an unpopular border wall further transforms the perception of Republicans among the general public from favoring growth to unfavoring immigration. This gambit puts Republicans in jeopardy of losing control of the Senate next year. His stance on the border wall is the latest divisive action that has split the coalition that delivered Republicans the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2016. His immigration agenda has included separating families at the border, promising to end birthright citizenship, supporting fringe legislation to cut legal immigration levels in half, calling up the military to respond to a few thousand asylum seekers, and launching an administrative attack on immigration applications.

His decision to make the midterm elections a referendum on immigration repelled independents, suburbanites, and women. It created a blue wave that cost the party dozens of seats and the House majority. Doubling down on this message risks the Republicans losing the Senate next. Nearly 60 percent of Americans oppose a border wall. By a margin of two to one, they oppose both the tactics of shutting down the government and declaring a national emergency to force border wall funding. By a margin of three to one, Americans support immigration. No wonder the approval rating of Trump has fallen since the beginning of the shutdown.

After the midterm elections, Trump pointed to Senate Republican gains to claim victory. While the party did expand its Senate majority to 53 seats, closer inspection indicates a net gain of just two seats was not impressive. Democrats faced the most handicapped election map in at least a generation, defending 26 Senate seats, including 10 in states that Trump won in 2016, compared to nine Senate seats for Republicans. The Republican Senate victory in Florida was won by a mere 10,000 votes.

In 2020, Republicans face a much more difficult election map, defending 22 Senate seats compared to just 12 Senate seats held by Democrats. In order to take control, Democrats must win four or five Senate races in the following states that are likely to be the most competitive. In Arizona, Democrats won the seat of retiring Republican Senator Jeff FlakeJeffrey (Jeff) Lane FlakeWhite House immigration agenda hurts Senate Republicans in 2020 Schumer recruiting top-notch candidate for McCain Senate seat The Hill’s Morning Report — Trump eyes wall money options as shutdown hits 21 days MORE in 2018. They will look to do the same in 2020, likely against the same opponent, in the old seat that was held by the late Republican Senator John McCainJohn Sidney McCainWhite House immigration agenda hurts Senate Republicans in 2020 Kamala Harris faces Democrats’ Rocky Mountain divide Momentum for earmarks grows with Dem majority MORE.

In Colorado, Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonFBI lawyer’s unusual interventions in Trump probe raise questions White House immigration agenda hurts Senate Republicans in 2020 The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Senate holding dueling funding votes | Trump to delay State of the Union | Cohen subpoenaed by Senate Intel MORE won by five points in 2016, and voters elected a progressive Democratic governor in 2018. Democrats have Republican Senator Cory GardnerCory Scott GardnerOn The Money: Shutdown Day 34 | Senate rejects two measures to end shutdown | Trump says he will take wall ‘down payment’ | Pelosi rejects Trump proposal | GOP senators blast Pence on strategy | Ross sparks controversy with comments on furloughed workers GOP senators read Pence riot act before shutdown votes Six GOP senators vote to end shutdown without wall funding MORE as their main target there in 2020. In Iowa, Trump won by nine points in 2016, and Democrats flipped two Republican House seats in this swing state in 2018. The only remaining Republican in the four member Iowa House delegation is Representative Steve KingSteven (Steve) Arnold KingWhite House immigration agenda hurts Senate Republicans in 2020 Majority of voters see Trump’s border proposal as ‘good faith’ start to negotiations GOP rep in op-ed: ‘Some people affiliated with our party have made racist comments’ MORE, who has poisoned the Republican brand by defending white nationalism. This deals a blow to the reelection chances of Republican Senator Joni ErnstJoni Kay ErnstWhite House immigration agenda hurts Senate Republicans in 2020 Ernst opens up about past assaults Trump tells GOP senators he’s sticking to Syria and Afghanistan pullout  MORE.

In Maine, Clinton won by three points in 2016, and Democrats took back the governorship in 2018. Although Republican Senator Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsOn The Money: Shutdown Day 34 | Senate rejects two measures to end shutdown | Trump says he will take wall ‘down payment’ | Pelosi rejects Trump proposal | GOP senators blast Pence on strategy | Ross sparks controversy with comments on furloughed workers GOP senators read Pence riot act before shutdown votes Six GOP senators vote to end shutdown without wall funding MORE is popular in the state, she faces a tough reelection campaign as the last New England Republican in Congress and is a top target of Democrats. In North Carolina, Trump won by four points in 2016. The state has a history of tight revolving door Senate races. With gains in 2018, Democrats may be able to flip this seat held by incumbent Republican Senator Thom TillisThomas (Thom) Roland TillisWhite House immigration agenda hurts Senate Republicans in 2020 Graham angers Dems by digging into Clinton, Obama controversies Centrist efforts to convince Trump to end shutdown falter MORE.

Republicans have an advantage of three Senate seats, but Democrats must win more seats to take control since Republicans will likely win back the Alabama Senate seat held by Democrat Doug Jones. If Democrats win four of these seats and the vice presidency, or win five of these seats and lose the vice presidency, then they will gain control the Senate in 2020.

Given that Democrats are increasingly flirting with socialist policies, the possibility of such an outcome should keep conservatives up at night. To have the best chance of maintaining and increasing their presence in Congress, Republicans must stand up to Trump and present a message that resonates with the growing voter populations in the Phoenix, Denver, Des Moines, Portland, and Raleigh metro areas. That means ignoring the divisive immigration siren song in favor of a positive growth platform.

Jordan Bruneau is a policy analyst at the Becoming American Initiative.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/426804-white-house-immigration-agenda-hurts-senate-republicans-in-2020

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has rejected Nicolas Maduro’s demand that he withdraw U.S. diplomats by Saturday afternoon. I suspect he’s done so in order to encourage a systemic breach between Maduro and the Venezuelan military that keeps him in power.

Pompeo knows that the Venezuelan military’s support for Maduro is not, ultimately, ideological in nature. Rather, it reflects Maduro’s mass-bribery of the military’s top ranks — the abundant patronage he is providing. The military’s general officer ranks have become very wealthy as a result of this corruption.

Yet, even if they are immoral, they are not irrational. Maduro might rant about “extreme imperialist insolence” as he demands the U.S. withdraw its diplomats, but the military is the only means by which he can effect that withdrawal.

Any military attack on the U.S. embassy would invite a violent exchange with the embassy’s Marine security garrison. It would also become a standing invitation for the Marine FAST team, which is likely being moved proximate to Venezuela even as we speak. Even if the Venezuelan generals could win a short-term struggle for control of the embassy compound, any loss of American life would not only be matched by significant Venezuelan military casualties (the embassy’s terrain is well-suited to a defensive action), but it would also become a legitimate casus belli. An attack on the U.S. would hasten the demise of the officers involved or lead to their future lifetime spent in a U.S. federal penitentiary.

While Pompeo is certainly playing a high-risk game here, it would be unfair to suggest he’s using U.S. diplomats as simple pawns of brinkmanship. After all, President Trump on Wednesday officially recognized Venezuelan National Assembly chief, Juan Guaido, as his nation’s interim president. Guaido has requested that the U.S. retain its diplomatic presence against Maduro’s wishes. To now evacuate U.S. diplomats would degrade U.S. foreign policy credibility and moral leadership — concerns, we should note, that Trump’s critics have often suggested he ignores.

We must also note that all of this takes place against the backdrop of the massive street mobilization against Maduro. Pompeo knows that with the generals watching the reverberations against Maduro’s rule, they have added reason to question their continued support for Maduro. The tide, likely measured by U.S. intelligence assessments as well as the street momentum, seems to be shifting.

There are risks here. Maduro retains nominal control over the Venezuelan armed forces, and he has a penchant for unpredictable action. The president might also rely on his “colectivos” — armed ideological supporters — to conduct any action against the U.S.

Still, I doubt it. Even Maduro can’t be so stupid as to use force against the United States. It would invite the end of his regime. It’s also crucial to note here that the U.S. is giving Maduro an easy way out — an offer of safe passage to a wealthy retirement — if he steps down now. In that offer and the corollary escalation of U.S. pressure, it is clear the Trump administration senses the moment has come to bring matters to a head.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/mike-pompeo-is-keeping-us-diplomats-in-venezuela-to-break-nicolas-maduros-military-alliance

WASHINGTON (AP) — The counter-puncher caved.

President Donald Trump’s decision to postpone his State of the Union address under pressure from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi surprised allies, contradicted top aides who had been working on an alternative speech plan and left all of Washington trying to determine whether it signaled new willingness by Trump to make a deal to reopen the government.

“Well, it’s really her choice,” Trump said Thursday, acknowledging Pelosi had the upper hand when it came to scheduling the traditional presidential address to Congress. The speaker had made clear Trump could not deliver his speech from the House unless he waited until the government reopens.

So Trump, who is typically loath to show any sign of weakness, made a highly uncharacteristic about-face and one that highlighted the importance the president attaches to the type of symbolism and pageantry associated with a speech from the rostrum of the House.

The president concluded that there was no viable alternative that could match the gravitas of the traditional State of the Union address, in which all three branches of government come together under one roof, drawing the president’s largest television audience of the year. An alternative speech or rally also would have been a hard sell for television networks, which took heat earlier this month for airing the president’s prime-time Oval Office address in which he largely rehashed his case for a southern border wall.

“I would have done it in a different location but I think that would be very disrespectful to the State of the Union,” Trump said Thursday. “I could have gone to a big auditorium and gotten 25,000 people in one day and you’ve been there many times. But I think that would be very disrespectful to the State of the Union.”

Trump went so far as to praise Pelosi’s move as “actually reasonable” — although he had blasted her position just a day earlier.

The reversal surprised those who have known Trump for years.

Throughout his presidency, Trump has reveled in his take-no-prisoners negotiating style — from talking tough against North Korea to slapping tariffs on allies. And he has dug in his heels time and time again, refusing to admit errors and insisting that he won’t accept a budget deal that doesn’t include money for his promised border wall.

“Nobody’s ever seen him make such a concession in public,” said former campaign aide Sam Nunberg. “The only thing I can think of is that he wasn’t going to like the optics of not giving it in the House chamber.”

As late as Wednesday afternoon, officials had been busy discussing contingency locations, including a rally-style event, an Oval Office address, a speech in the Senate chamber and even a visit to a border state.

“We always like to have a plan B,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders had said Wednesday.

But White House officials were caught off guard when Pelosi announced that she would block Trump from speaking until the shutdown ended. Indeed, at least some seemed unaware of rules specifying that both the House and Senate must pass a concurrent resolution formally inviting the president to address a joint session.

Late Wednesday, Trump announced by tweet that he would postpone the speech “because there is no venue that can compete with the history, tradition and importance of the House Chamber.”

“It is a stage that no modern president wants to vacate,” said Donald Ritchie, a former Senate historian. “I can understand why the president decided he’ll wait for the chamber to reopen so he can go in there.”

On the Trump-friendly show “Fox and Friends,” co-anchor Brian Kilmeade applauded the move.

“I really respect the president’s decision to keep some type of tradition and semblance of order. So I think it’s a great move to do it and it hopefully puts more pressure on all sides to get something done,” Kilmeade said.

The decision came hours before the Senate voted on — and failed to pass — dueling bills to end the shutdown. And it raised questions about what comes next in Trump’s evolving strategy on the budget fight. On Friday, hundreds of thousands of federal workers will miss another paycheck, and polls have shown a majority of voters blame the president for the mess.

Some worried the spat would further sour relations between Trump and Pelosi, who haven’t spoken in weeks. But former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, an informal adviser to the president, argued it could be a positive step.

“I assume that it is an effort on his part to signal that he’s willing to be reasonable and find a way to get along. And now we’ll see whether Pelosi will come back and be reasonable as well,” said Gingrich. “By his conceding to her, I think he sets the stage now for her” to do the same.

If that’s the case, it would be a notable new approach for the president, said Trump biographer Michael D’Antonio. He said that, in Trump’s life before politics, he never retreated, choosing instead to deflect, blame others, or simply declare himself a success even when he wasn’t, insisting, for instance, that “The Apprentice” show was a hit even when it was lagging in the ratings and framing his bankruptcies as smart legal maneuvers.

“The president’s decision to delay the State of the Union speech is an unprecedented moment of realism in the life of a man who has always promoted himself as a fantasy figure who always wins at everything,” said D’Antonio, the author of “The Truth About Trump.”

“For him to buckle in the face of a challenge from an opponent, and a woman no less, is truly a historic event.”

___

Associated Press writers David Bauder and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/01/24/trump-makes-rare-cave-on-state-of-the-union-speech/

President Trump’s strategy of forcing a government shutdown to get funding for a border wall took another blow on Thursday when a Democratic bill to reopen the government received more votes in the Republican-controlled Senate than his own compromise bill that included wall funding.

There is, right now, more evidence that Trump’s support is fracturing than there is of disunion among Democrats, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is showing no signs of retreat. The chances of Trump getting his border wall dwindle by the day.

Watching how poorly Trump has played his hand on the border wall, dating back to the start of his presidency, when his party controlled both branches of Congress and he was coming off an election win, really highlights a missing ingredient that has severely imperiled Trump’s agenda. It comes down to personnel. Trump’s administration has included people who want to fight for his agenda who have little or no experience getting things accomplished in government. It also has people who have experience with government, but have no loyalty to his agenda. It has very few people who have both attributes. And many who have neither.

This is among the most common complaint I’ve heard from people who are sympathetic to Trump, but frustrated on progress on a number of issues, whether on immigration, healthcare, or foreign policy. Just look at Pelosi and how she’s wielded her power in the border wall fight. Even on something ultimately unimportant like the State of the Union. She knew she had the power to block a joint session of Congress and thus prevent him from giving a high-profile speech in the House chamber, she asserted that power, held firm, and Trump backed down. It just reinforced a feeling that Democrats know to use power when they have it to fight for their agenda, but Republicans never do. Trump was supposed to change things, but he has not been able to, because he’s lacked the right people.

Advisers such as Stephen Miller or, formerly, Steve Bannon, by and large, support the Trump agenda. But neither of them had the skill set to either build consensus on Capitol Hill, or wield power in a way that can muscle policies through Congress. Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and ex-chief of staff John Kelly came to their jobs with reputations for competence, but clearly were not fully on board with Trumpism and spent much of their time trying to contain him.

You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist about the “deep state” to recognize that many career employees of government agencies hate Trump and want to thwart his agenda. Even many appointees have approached their job as if their purpose is to manage him rather than to go to war for his policies — a sentiment infamously demonstrated by the anonymous New York Times op-ed.

There are other figures we’ve seen who were kind of the worst of both worlds. Reince Priebus had been an effective RNC chairman, but he was not the right fit to be chief of staff — nor did he really share Trump’s vision for the country. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson may have been an impressive CEO, but was completely out of his depth in Foggy Bottom, and fought to undermine Trump’s foreign policy, particularly on Iran.

Trump’s greatest successes have come in areas in which there were people working together who a) shared his goals and b) knew how to make them happen. A perfect example is judicial nominees, in which former White House Counsel Don McGahn consulted with outside groups such as the Federalist Society, who were eager to help Trump fulfill his promise of appointing conservative judges. The Trump team coordinated things closely with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who understood what it would take to get a lot of them confirmed.

There have also been successes in some areas of regulatory policy.

But Trump is seriously lacking people who are true believers in his cause who know enough about how to get things done in Washington. The reality is Republicans had the power in 2017 to build a wall if there was somebody knowledgeable about both immigration policy and legislative tactics to enable Trump to harness that power. This was always going to be a major challenge running as an outsider, against the party’s establishment, with plenty of seasoned hands in the party refusing to join the administration.

So he finds himself in the current situation — a protracted shutdown in which he lacks leverage. On the one side, people who want him to cave in and offer more fig leafs to Democrats, and on the other, people who are eager to see him carry on the fight with no strategy to win. This is the story of much of Trump’s presidency.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/shutdown-fight-highlights-missing-ingredient-that-has-impeded-trumps-agenda

We’ve detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you’re not a robot.

Source Article from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-25/u-s-sails-navy-vessels-through-taiwan-strait-challenging-china

President Trump’s strategy of forcing a government shutdown to get funding for a border wall took another blow on Thursday when a Democratic bill to reopen the government received more votes in the Republican-controlled Senate than his own compromise bill that included wall funding.

There is, right now, more evidence that Trump’s support is fracturing than there is of disunion among Democrats, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is showing no signs of retreat. The chances of Trump getting his border wall dwindle by the day.

Watching how poorly Trump has played his hand on the border wall, dating back to the start of his presidency, when his party controlled both branches of Congress and he was coming off an election win, really highlights a missing ingredient that has severely imperiled Trump’s agenda. It comes down to personnel. Trump’s administration has included people who want to fight for his agenda who have little or no experience getting things accomplished in government. It also has people who have experience with government, but have no loyalty to his agenda. It has very few people who have both attributes. And many who have neither.

This is among the most common complaint I’ve heard from people who are sympathetic to Trump, but frustrated on progress on a number of issues, whether on immigration, healthcare, or foreign policy. Just look at Pelosi and how she’s wielded her power in the border wall fight. Even on something ultimately unimportant like the State of the Union. She knew she had the power to block a joint session of Congress and thus prevent him from giving a high-profile speech in the House chamber, she asserted that power, held firm, and Trump backed down. It just reinforced a feeling that Democrats know to use power when they have it to fight for their agenda, but Republicans never do. Trump was supposed to change things, but he has not been able to, because he’s lacked the right people.

Advisers such as Stephen Miller or, formerly, Steve Bannon, by and large, support the Trump agenda. But neither of them had the skill set to either build consensus on Capitol Hill, or wield power in a way that can muscle policies through Congress. Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and ex-chief of staff John Kelly came to their jobs with reputations for competence, but clearly were not fully on board with Trumpism and spent much of their time trying to contain him.

You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist about the “deep state” to recognize that many career employees of government agencies hate Trump and want to thwart his agenda. Even many appointees have approached their job as if their purpose is to manage him rather than to go to war for his policies — a sentiment infamously demonstrated by the anonymous New York Times op-ed.

There are other figures we’ve seen who were kind of the worst of both worlds. Reince Priebus had been an effective RNC chairman, but he was not the right fit to be chief of staff — nor did he really share Trump’s vision for the country. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson may have been an impressive CEO, but was completely out of his depth in Foggy Bottom, and fought to undermine Trump’s foreign policy, particularly on Iran.

Trump’s greatest successes have come in areas in which there were people working together who a) shared his goals and b) knew how to make them happen. A perfect example is judicial nominees, in which former White House Counsel Don McGahn consulted with outside groups such as the Federalist Society, who were eager to help Trump fulfill his promise of appointing conservative judges. The Trump team coordinated things closely with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who understood what it would take to get a lot of them confirmed.

There have also been successes in some areas of regulatory policy.

But Trump is seriously lacking people who are true believers in his cause who know enough about how to get things done in Washington. The reality is Republicans had the power in 2017 to build a wall if there was somebody knowledgeable about both immigration policy and legislative tactics to enable Trump to harness that power. This was always going to be a major challenge running as an outsider, against the party’s establishment, with plenty of seasoned hands in the party refusing to join the administration.

So he finds himself in the current situation — a protracted shutdown in which he lacks leverage. On the one side, people who want him to cave in and offer more fig leafs to Democrats, and on the other, people who are eager to see him carry on the fight with no strategy to win. This is the story of much of Trump’s presidency.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/shutdown-fight-highlights-missing-ingredient-that-has-impeded-trumps-agenda