The central theme of the U.S. case against Huawei is the company’s alleged links with the Chinese state. These links include national security and intelligence collection, subsidies and soft loans, access to closed state procurements and the strong support of the state in promoting exports and defending the company’s market position.
The Shenzhen telecoms giant thoroughly denies any and all such links, painting itself as fully independent of the Chinese state. But with every twist and turn in the company’s battle with Washington, the Chinese state is right there by its side.
Now, a story in the Sunday Telegraph is just the latest to pose serious questions. The newspaper reports that China has been “rigging” 5G equipment testing to discredit Huawei’s rivals, including Nokia and Ericsson. According to government and industry sources, “Beijing is feeding secret details of security vulnerabilities” to the testers to tip the balance in Huawei’s favor. The testing encompasses “hacking techniques used to check for weak spots… vulnerabilities discovered by China’s secret state hackers have been passed to the 5G testers to ensure Nokia and Ericsson’s equipment is found to be insecure.”
Huawei’s security issues have always been separated into two very different areas. First, standard software and hardware vulnerabilities stemming from poor development and testing. This is the crux of a scathing British intelligence report earlier this year that seriously criticized the quality of the technology, and it is the area where Huawei has committed to a multi-billion-dollar investment program to make improvements. It is also the area where the company’s rivals will have similar issues and concerns. The second area is the shadowy world of national espionage, where Huawei stands accused of either current or potential future collaboration with China’s defense and spy agencies. This is where the so-called smoking gun that has not been publicly produced as yet comes in.
The 5G testing is due to complete this month and China’s hope is that it can be used to inform European assessments of Huawei’s suitability for 5G deployments. Ahead of the recent U.S. blacklisting of Huawei and its affiliates, it had seemed that key European markets, led by Germany, had secured a pass from Washington, where a rigorous testing regime was seen as good enough, with the U.S. publicly stating that they expected Huawei to fail such a test. The accusations of cheating would seem to be an alternative way around the problem – if Huawei is only as bad as everyone else, the argument would run, why single them out.
Huawei is a very cost-effective option for telecoms execs worldwide, essentially their products give more for less. The accusation here, of course, being that this is enabled by Chinese state subsidies. But more for less is still more for less. Huawei has also invested so heavily in R&D in recent years, that there is genuine market-leading innovation at stake. If the Chinese equipment is to be removed from networks it will lead to billions in cost and months, maybe even years in delays. It will also make negotiating terms more difficult with rivals by making the landscape much less competitive.
Beijing started a more public fight back last week, threatening to target foreign firms that adhere to the U.S. blacklist and withdraw support from Huawei, denying them access to China’s vast market and industrial base. First came a proposal for enhanced cybersecurity regulation, and this was quickly followed by a blatant entity list. The common theme was that foreign entities that cut ties or disadvantaged Chinese firms for “non-technical” reasons, read politics and sanctions, would fall foul of the new rules.
It has been clear for many months, and more so after U.S. sanctions saw Google, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Intel, ARM and others pull future support for Huawei, that only action by Beijing, dove-tailing into a trade agreement compromise, can prevent Huawei from tipping into a major downward spiral.
U.S. President Donald Trump visits Britain in the coming days and will reportedly threaten to curb intelligence-sharing with its closest ally unless Huawei is cut from the country’s 5G plans, both at the core and the edge. This would cause chaos for the country’s networks which are just now in launch mode. It is expected that a series of “emergency” discussions between U.S. and U.K. intelligence officials will take place in the coming days to understand how to move forwards practically.
Fox News Flash top headlines for June 1 are here. Check out what’s clicking on Foxnews.com
Virginia Beach Police are turning their focus to the weapons cache and job history of the man whose Friday shooting spree at a municipal complex killed 12 people and injured several more.
The gunman, ID’d as DeWayne Craddock, was employed as an engineer with the city’s public utilities department for 15 years. Police killed Craddock after exchanging gunfire at the scene, but Virginia Beach Police Chief James Cervera has withheld identifying a potential motive.
In a news conference on Saturday afternoon, Cervera said that contrary to media reports, Craddock was not fired from his city post.
As for weaponry, two .45-caliber pistols were said to have been used by the shooter, and two other guns were recovered at the shooter’s home, the chief said. At least three of the weapons were purchased legally, though the history of the fourth was not immediately known. The two weapons used at the municipal center were purchased in 2016 and 2018 by the shooter, officials said.
Cervera said a more specific timeline of the deadly ramage would be released sometime on Sunday.
As more details about the shooter were emerging on Saturday, many in this stunned community continued to keep a focus on the victims, most of whom were municipal employees. Several vigils have been scheduled for the victims of the massacre, which has been dubbed the deadliest mass shooting in the United States this year.
Frank Janes is comforted by his wife, Cathie Janes, during the prayer vigil at Strawbridge Marketplace in response to a shooting at a municipal building in Virginia Beach, Va., Saturday, June 1, 2019. A longtime city employee opened fire at the building Friday before police shot and killed him, authorities said. (Daniel Sangjib Min/Richmond Times-Dispatch via AP)
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam attended a prayer vigil on Saturday morning at the Regal Cinemas in Strawbridge Marketplace. The solemn event was organized by Lifehouse Church.
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, center, attends a vigil in response to a shooting at a municipal building in Virginia Beach, Va., Saturday morning. A longtime city employee opened fire at the building Friday, with lethal consequences, before police shot and killed him, authorities said. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
President Trump ordered that flags be lowered to half-staff on Saturday, and he tweeted his condolences and support for “that great community” of Virginia Beach.
SAN FRANCISCO – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s speech to the California Democratic Party State Convention Saturday drew loud cries of “impeach” from attendees as Pelosi mentioned special counsel Robert Mueller’s report and ticked through evidence in the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election that suggested President Donald Trump obstructed justice
Pelosi previously resisted calls to begin impeachment proceedings against the president even as the chorus of Democrats calling for impeachment grows.
Her appearance before the California delegates — a decidedly left-leaning crowd — ramped up the pressure, with delegates beginning to shout “impeach” as she brought up the various congressional investigations into the White House and the Trump Organization.
Two California lawmakers — House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Financial Services Chair Maxine Waters — were scheduled to address the convention Saturday evening.
A woman holds up signs as US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi takes the stage during the 2019 California Democratic Party State Convention at Moscone Center in San Francisco on June 1, 2019.Josh Edelson / AFP – Getty Images
When Pelosi made reference to Mueller, who spoke publicly for the first time in two years on Wednesday in addressing the results if his investigation, calls for impeachment grew louder, at one point almost drowning her out. The San Francisco-based representative stopped and said, “As I told you, this is like coming home for me.”
Pelosi said House Democrats would continue to investigate and hold Trump and his administration accountable.
Beth Fouhy is the senior politics editor for NBC News and MSNBC, based in New York.
The family behind Purdue Pharma, the makers of OxyContin, has closed down all new funding of nonprofits while it deals with myriad lawsuits related to its role in the opioid…
Is the 2020 hopeful’s plan to close the gender pay gap a good strategy? Independent Women’ Forum senior policy analyst Patrice Onwuka and youth political strategist Malia Fisher debate.
Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’ star appears to be dimming as other Democrats rise past her while she struggles to gain a footing among likely voters.
The junior U.S. senator from California was one of the first Democrats to launch a White House bid, raising at the time an astonishing $1.5 million in just 24 hours while attracting tens of thousands of supposed supporters to a rally in Oakland.
The 54-year-old former state attorney general and San Francisco district attorney — who succeeded Democrat Barbara Boxer in the Senate in 2017 — was viewed as a frontrunner in the 2020 race thanks to her progressive bona fides and effective opposition to President Trump since moving to Washington. Meanwhile, her stint as a DA, while criticized by progressives, was seen as a way to appeal to more moderate voters.
But four months into her campaign, Harris is returning to Los Angeles for the annual state Democratic Party convention no longer as a frontrunner.
Political experts told the Los Angeles Times that part of the reason why Harris’ campaign has stalled is that she has failed to make a succinct case for her candidacy, beyond her background as a prosecutor and virulent opposition to the Trump administration.
“You don’t get elected because you’re a list of qualities,” Gil Duran, a former Harris adviser, told the newspaper. “What’s the big idea she’s carrying? That’s what she’s trying to figure out. She’s having trouble figuring out what she represents.”
“You don’t get elected because you’re a list of qualities. What’s the big idea she’s carrying? That’s what she’s trying to figure out. She’s having trouble figuring out what she represents.”
— Gil Duran, former Harris adviser
Latest polls were particularly troubling to Harris, with former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont fighting for the title of party frontrunner.
Both Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Pete Buttigieg — the mayor of South Bend, Ind., who’s surging despite being virtually unknown just a few months ago — are polling better than Harris.
In fact, according to the Morning Consult poll tracker, Harris’ support peaked just weeks after her announcement, with 14 percent of Democratic voters throwing their support behind her in a Feb. 3 poll. Since then, her support has halved to 7 percent.
But more evidently, the momentum behind her campaign has evaporated while other candidates have solidified their support and may be poised to expand further nationally.
Yet supporters of Harris suggest that her campaign is in the exact right spot at this time — still able to compete and fundraise without the burden of being a frontrunner.
“I don’t think anyone ever thought she would get in the race and blow away the field and be a frontrunner from January 2019 through Election Day,” Brian Brokaw, who managed Harris’ runs for state attorney general, told the Times.
“She needs to stay in the upper tier, which I think she is. Stay in striking position and you outlast everybody.”
Harris recently made a number of comments about policies that are supposed to solidify her progressive stances, including fining corporations that don’t take steps toward closing the gender pay gap.
The senator’s plan, touted by the Harris campaign as “first-of-its-kind” and “historic,” if passed into law, would mandate that large corporations obtain “equal pay certification” from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Companies failing to land a certification would face fines – for every 1 percent wage gap, they would be fined 1 percent of their profits.
In a separate proposal, Harris also said that she will use executive orders to mandate background checks on the private transfers of guns, revoke the licenses of gun makers and dealers whose guns are used in crimes, and ban the importation of many semi-automatic guns.
BEIJING (Reuters) – China will investigate whether FedEx Corp damaged the legal rights and interests of its clients, the official Xinhua news agency said on Saturday, after Chinese telecoms giant Huawei said parcels intended for it were diverted.
Amid rising tensions between China and the United States, the Chinese commerce ministry said on Friday it would draft a list of “unreliable” foreign firms and individuals that harm the interests of Chinese companies. It gave no names.
Washington last month put Huawei on a blacklist that effectively blocks U.S. firms from doing business with the Shenzhen-based company.
Huawei, the world’s largest telecoms equipment maker, told Reuters on Friday it was reviewing its relationship with FedEx, which it alleged had diverted two parcels destined for Huawei addresses in Asia to the United States and had attempted to reroute two others.
FedEx said the packages were “misrouted in error.”
Xinhua, without elaborating, said FedEx recently did not deliver to the right addressees and addresses in China.
FedEx said in a statement it values its relationships with customers in China, and that it would “fully cooperate with any regulatory investigation into how we serve our customers.”
On Tuesday, FedEx China apologized on its Chinese social media account for the “mishandling” of Huawei packages and confirmed there was no “external pressure” to divert packages.
The U.S. government says Huawei is a potential espionage threat because of its close ties with the Chinese government.
Huawei has repeatedly denied it is controlled by the Chinese government, military or intelligence services.
The issue has become a flashpoint in the escalating trade war between the world’s two biggest economies.
Last month, Washington slapped additional tariffs of up to 25% on $200 billion of Chinese goods, accusing Beijing of reneging on its previous promises to make structural changes to its economic practices.
That prompted Beijing to hit back with additional levies on the majority of U.S. imports on a $60 billion target list.
The Chinese tariffs took effect on Saturday.
Reporting by Ryan Woo and Pei Li, Editing by William Maclean and Paul Simao
As states across the US pass laws restricting access to abortion, Illinois passed legislation declaring a pregnant person has a “fundamental right” to terminate their pregnancy and stating that a “fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent rights.”
The new legislation, passed Friday, repeals a 1975 state law that required spousal consent, waiting periods, placed restrictions on abortion facilities, and outlined procedures for pursuing criminal charges abortion providers. The bill also rolls back some state restrictions on late-term abortions by repealing Illinois’ Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, the Chicago Tribune reported. Many provisions in the two newly negated laws had not been enforced due to court injunctions, according to the paper.
“We’re not going back,” said Sen. Melinda Bush, who sponsored the bill in the Illinois Senate, as she argued for the bill. “We’re not going back to coat hangers, we’re not going back to dying. We’re not going back. And I am proud to say Illinois is a beacon for women’s rights, for human rights.”
Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker said he would sign the bill, called the Reproductive Health Act; it passed the Illinois House of Representatives early last week and Friday night the Senate voted 34-20 to approve it.
Illinois lawmakers pointed to the possibility of a conservative Supreme Court majority overturning Roe v. Wade as a reason for choosing to shore up abortion rights on a state level now.
Cassidy told her colleagues that a medically-necessary abortion in her first pregnancy saved her life and allowed her to go on to become a mother to her three sons. She also criticized Illinois’ neighboring states that have recently passed restrictive abortion laws.
“To our neighbors in Illinois who hear the news around the country and worry that this war on women is coming to Illinois, I say, not on my watch,” Cassidy said. “To the people in Missouri and Alabama and Georgia and Kentucky and Mississippi and Ohio, I say, not on my watch.”
New, restrictive abortion laws are cropping up across the country
The move to expand abortion rights in Illinois comes as states including Alabama, Georgia, Ohio, Missouri, Indiana, Kentucky, and Mississippi have all passed laws restricting access to abortion. Lawmakers in some of those states have said they championed the restrictive laws in hopes of triggering court challenges that will force the US Supreme Court to revisit its Roe v. Wade decision, which guarantees a Constitutional right to abortion. These lawmakers believe the court’s new conservative majority will overturn Roe.
In May, Alabama passed the “Human Life Protection Act,” which criminalizes all abortion. Doctors who perform abortions under the ban could be sentenced to up to 99 years in prison unless the pregnant person faces serious health complications that places their life at risk. The law makes no exceptions for cases in which a pregnant person seeks an abortion after rape or incest.
Alabama now has the nation’s strictest abortion law, but other states have also severely narrowed abortion access through the passage of so-called “heartbeat bills” that ban abortions after doctors are able to detect a fetal heartbeat. Heartbeats can sometimes be detected as early as six weeks into a pregnancy — before many know they are pregnant.
Ohio passed its heartbeat abortion ban in April and was quickly followed by Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Heartbeat bills in some states — like in North Dakota, Arkansas, Iowa, Kentucky, and Mississippi — have been blocked by courts. Ohio’s ban is currently facing a legal challenge. Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union are among the parties suing to prevent the heartbeat laws from going into effect.
“This is an extremely dangerous time for women’s health all around the country,” Leana Wen, president of the Action Fund, told the Washington Post.
Anti-abortion activists hope to overturn Roe v. Wade, but last week, the Supreme Court signaled it is not quite ready to address the landmark ruling. In its decision regarding an abortion law passed by Illinois’ neighbor, Indiana, justices struck down one provision while affirming another part of the law, largely avoiding the question of whether abortion should be legal.
In a case involving an Indiana abortion law, the justices gave a kind of compromise ruling, according to the Washington Post. They allowed one portion of the law, which requires that fetal remains be buried or cremated, to stand. But they declined to take up another portion of the law, which bans abortions based on the fetus’s sex, race, or diagnosis of a disability. As a result, a lower court’s decision to strike that portion of the law will stand, and the ban will not go into effect.
The decision was hotly anticipated because if the Court had decided to hear the case, it could have been an opportunity for the justices to revisit Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that established Americans’ right to an abortion. Abortion opponents around the country are eager to see the Court overturn the decision, but previous moves have suggested that the justices aren’t ready to weigh in yet. Tuesday’s decision was more of the same.
But in a concurring statement, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Court would need to make a decision soon on laws like Indiana’s. His words were a reminder that while a Supreme Court battle over abortion isn’t happening today, it might not be far in the future.
The laws are also having the effect of limiting access to abortion. In Missouri, which passed a law banning abortion after eight weeks with no exceptions for rape or incest last week, there is only one abortion provider left. And that provider — a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis — was almost forced to close after state lawmakers refused to renew its license, citing its “deficient practices.” The state said that if all of its physicians submitted to interviews, it might be able to keep its license; however, doctors refused to comply for fear the interviews could lead to criminal prosecutions, North reported.
A judge’s temporary restraining order issued Friday will keep the clinic open — for now. The next hearing in the case comes on June 4; should Planned Parenthood lose its case, the people of Missouri will have to travel to another state, like Illinois, for abortion care.
Other states besides Illinois are working to protect access to abortion rights. Some 13 states including New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Nevada, have proposed bills to include a right to abortion in their Constitutions. While many of those efforts are still in their early stages, Vermont passed a bill to include the protection in its Constitution last week.
A city worker opened fire “indiscriminately” at the Municipal Center in Virginia Beach Friday afternoon, killing at least 12 people before he was shot dead by police in a “long gun battle,” police said.
Eleven of the victims died on the scene and one succumbed to their injuries on the way to the hospital, Virginia Beach Police Chief James Cervera said during a press conference Friday night.
An additional four victims were in surgery at local hospitals for their injuries and “others may have self-transported,” Cervera said.
Two law enforcement sources confirmed to ABC News that DeWayne Craddock, 40, is the alleged suspect in the shooting.
Craddock was recently terminated from his position as a city employee, according to two law enforcement sources.
Three of the injured patients were at Sentara Virginia Beach General Hospital, with two in critical condition and one in fair condition. Another patient was at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital in critical condition, according to Dale Gauding, senior communications adviser for brand engagement at Sentara Healthcare
One of the injured victims is a Virginia Beach police officer who was saved by his bulletproof vest, Cervera said.
The suspect, who had access to the Municipal Center as a public utilities employee, walked into the building at around 4 p.m. and began to “indiscriminately fire upon all the victims,” Cervera said. There were victims on all three floors of the building, and one outside, who Cervera said was shot before the suspect entered the building.
The suspect had two firearms — a long gun and a handgun — law enforcement sources told ABC News.
Four officers responded to the shooting and engaged in a “long gun battle” with the suspect, eventually shooting him, Cervera said, noting that the officers likely “stopped the suspect from committing more carnage.”
Responding officers also secured as many victims as they could, Cervera said.
A .45-caliber handgun was found with multiple empty magazines following shootout, Cervera said.
“We just heard that there was an active shooter and we just barricaded ourselves in offices to make sure that we were all safe and I called 911 just to get them to come there as fast as possible,” said Megan Banton, a Public Works employee who was on the second floor of the building. “My boss was like, ‘This is not a drill. Get down, call 911.'”
Officials are in the process of identifying the victims, Cervara said, adding that their names would be released once all of their family members were notified.
“This is the most the most devastating day in the history of Virginia Beach,” said Virginia Beach Mayor Bobby Dyer.
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam described the shooting as “unspeakable, senseless violence.”
“My deepest condolences and prayers go to the families of those who left home this morning and will not return tonight, as well as those who have been injured in this tragedy,” Northam said.
Authorities are asking people to avoid the Municipal Center area. The scene is now secure but it is still active, Cervera said.
The FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and Virginia State Police are assisting in the investigation.
Cervera described the shooting as a “devastating incident” that “will change a lot of lives.”
“I just don’t know why anyone would do something like that,” Banton said. “I don’t know what would possess someone to come in and start shooting at people.”
ABC News’ Alexander Mallin contributed to this report.
A city worker opened fire “indiscriminately” at the Municipal Center in Virginia Beach Friday afternoon, killing at least 12 people before he was shot dead by police in a “long gun battle,” police said.
Eleven of the victims died on the scene and one succumbed to their injuries on the way to the hospital, Virginia Beach Police Chief James Cervera said during a press conference Friday night.
An additional four victims were in surgery at local hospitals for their injuries and “others may have self-transported,” Cervera said.
Two law enforcement sources confirmed to ABC News that DeWayne Craddock, 40, is the alleged suspect in the shooting.
Craddock was recently terminated from his position as a city employee, according to two law enforcement sources.
Three of the injured patients were at Sentara Virginia Beach General Hospital, with two in critical condition and one in fair condition. Another patient was at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital in critical condition, according to Dale Gauding, senior communications adviser for brand engagement at Sentara Healthcare
One of the injured victims is a Virginia Beach police officer who was saved by his bulletproof vest, Cervera said.
The suspect, who had access to the Municipal Center as a public utilities employee, walked into the building at around 4 p.m. and began to “indiscriminately fire upon all the victims,” Cervera said. There were victims on all three floors of the building, and one outside, who Cervera said was shot before the suspect entered the building.
The suspect had two firearms — a long gun and a handgun — law enforcement sources told ABC News.
Four officers responded to the shooting and engaged in a “long gun battle” with the suspect, eventually shooting him, Cervera said, noting that the officers likely “stopped the suspect from committing more carnage.”
Responding officers also secured as many victims as they could, Cervera said.
A .45-caliber handgun was found with multiple empty magazines following shootout, Cervera said.
“We just heard that there was an active shooter and we just barricaded ourselves in offices to make sure that we were all safe and I called 911 just to get them to come there as fast as possible,” said Megan Banton, a Public Works employee who was on the second floor of the building. “My boss was like, ‘This is not a drill. Get down, call 911.'”
Officials are in the process of identifying the victims, Cervara said, adding that their names would be released once all of their family members were notified.
“This is the most the most devastating day in the history of Virginia Beach,” said Virginia Beach Mayor Bobby Dyer.
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam described the shooting as “unspeakable, senseless violence.”
“My deepest condolences and prayers go to the families of those who left home this morning and will not return tonight, as well as those who have been injured in this tragedy,” Northam said.
Authorities are asking people to avoid the Municipal Center area. The scene is now secure but it is still active, Cervera said.
The FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and Virginia State Police are assisting in the investigation.
Cervera described the shooting as a “devastating incident” that “will change a lot of lives.”
“I just don’t know why anyone would do something like that,” Banton said. “I don’t know what would possess someone to come in and start shooting at people.”
ABC News’ Alexander Mallin contributed to this report.
Beijing to investigate FedEx for ‘damaging rights of Chinese…
According to Xinhua, FedEx failed to deliver express packages to designated addresses in China, “seriously damaging the lawful rights and interests of its clients and…
SAN FRANCISCO – California is no longer a political afterthought.
The solidly blue state hasn’t voted for a Republican president in a general election since George H.W. Bush won here more than 30 years ago. And for the past several election cycles, the nominating contests in The Golden State have been dull races.
With state Democrats deciding to move up their primary from early June to March 3 – the “Super Tuesday” Election Day when voters in 12 other states and Democrats living abroad also cast their ballots – California is enjoying its moment as an electoral belle of the ball.
“By moving to March, we’ve made California not just more relevant but extremely relevant,” California’s secretary of state Alex Padilla told USA TODAY as the California Democratic Party Convention kicked off Friday. “That’s translated into candidates not just coming here to raise money. They are actually coming to talk to California voters.”
Indeed, more than half of the nearly two dozen 2020 Democratic presidential contenders have descended on California this weekend to court liberal activists and party establishment at the convention and other forums being sponsored by left-leaning groups and unions.
That flood of attention by White House hopefuls is good news for California Democrats, who in recent election cycles watched Democratic presidential candidates swoop into the state for big-dollar fundraisers in Silicon Valley and Hollywood while putting minimum effort into voter outreach.
But California’s new standing could shake up how campaigns strategize where they spend their time and dollars, according to political analysts. For the first time, Californians and voters in Texas, the nation’s second most populous state, will hold their primaries on the same day.
“California moving to the front of the pack rather than where it used to be will have a big effect on how candidates campaign,” said James Demers, a Democratic strategist in New Hampshire. “You have to compete first in the early states, but you also have to have this time around some significant resources in California and in Texas. You can’t set up shop in a place like that coming out of New Hampshire and Iowa. You now have to have a campaign in place very early.”
California Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks said California’s move means candidates can survive getting through the first four races without necessarily notching a victory. Wicks was a key adviser to President Barack Obama’s two White House runs and is now advising Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat.
“I think you still have to do well in the first four, but I don’t think it’s going to be disqualifying if you don’t win,” Wicks said.
With mail-in voting provisions, California voters can begin casting their ballots on Feb. 3, the same day as Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses. Sixty-five percent of Californians cast early ballots in the 2018 midterms.
Why the early states matter
The earliest voting states, particularly Iowa and New Hampshire, have served as equalizers in the past. Shoe-leather politics and relatively inexpensive television and radio advertising made them territory where an underdog candidate could stand on nearly even ground with deep-pocketed rivals.
But voters in some more populous states have long complained about Iowa and New Hampshire’s elevated status, noting the states are hardly reflective of the nation’s diversity. The states’ populations have been historically less ethnically diverse, have lower unemployment, and have more married-couple households than the rest of the country.
Similar arguments could be made that California is further to the left of the rest of the country on immigration, climate, and cultural issues.
But some voters pushed back against the notion, suggesting that the state is in fact a leader.
“The rest of the country really looks to California for what a progressive state can be,” said Maricela Gutierrez, director of a San Jose agency that works with immigrants, following a forum in Pasadena where four Democratic candidates outlined their ambitions for immigration reform.
Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Iowa, said California’s move could create a dynamic where earlier voting states Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina will “tee up the nomination” and give California – which sent 475 delegates to the Democratic National Convention in 2016 – a chance “to hit it out of the park.”
“What states have done for years in an attempt to mitigate the impact of the caucuses is to move their primaries forward,” Goldford said. “The irony of that is it doesn’t mitigate the impact of the caucuses, it amplifies the caucuses. When states follow really quickly on Iowa, what it does is shield ‘winners’ … from in-depth and extensive examination and it hurts losers because they have less time to recover from a poor showing.”
Dan Schnur, who served as communications director for former California Gov. Pete Wilson and John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign, said he doubts that California will prove to become a hot race. The state with nearly 40 million residents and three of the nation’s biggest media markets will make it prohibitively expensive for all but a few candidates.
And the state is also not a winner-take-all primary, meaning that delegates are apportioned based on the percentage of the vote they received.
“This move did not make California a 900-pound gorilla in the nominating process,” Schnur said.
Candidates make their pitches
This weekend’s cattle call is centered around the state convention, where 3,400 state delegates will elect the state party’s next leader. Former chairman Eric Bauman resigned in November, weeks after facing allegations he drank on the job and sexually harassed and abused staff. The state party is facing three lawsuits connected to Bauman’s alleged conduct.
But the controversy has been overshadowed by the wall of candidates trying to woo Californians.
Fourteen candidates are scheduled to address the convention Saturday and Sunday, an opportunity to make their case about why they are the best candidate to beat President Trump while touting a progressive streak to delegates from a state that prides itself as the nation’s most liberal state.
Four candidates, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Kamala Harris, former Housing and Urban Development Director Julian Castro and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, stopped in Pasadena Friday to layout their vision to immigrations activists.
Harris was the featured guest at a Planned Parenthood event Friday night. She also flexed home state muscle on the eve of the convention, announcing that she’s sealed the endorsement of 33 Democratic members of the state assembly, including Speaker Anthony Rendon.
Six candidates – Sen. Cory Booker, South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, Harris and Sanders – are scheduled to make five-minute pitches to Service Employees International Union at a breakfast meeting Saturday about how they’d advocate for working people.
Eight candidates – Booker, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar, O’Rourke, Sanders, Warren and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand – have been invited to address the liberal group MoveOn’s forum Saturday afternoon
Sanders, who announced on Friday eight campaign hires who will be the nucleus of his California operation, is scheduled to hold a rally Saturday night in San Jose. Buttigieg plans to head to Fresno Monday to stump and take part in an MSNBC hosted town hall.
Meanwhile, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper plans to attend church on Sunday in Oakland at a predominantly African-American church before ending his California visit.
Padilla, California’ secretary of state, said there are signs that the move to push ahead the state primary is generating excitement among California. More than 20 million people in the state are now registered to vote, with the vast majority Democrats or not party affiliated, he said.
“We are seeing a new energy,” Padilla said.
More than 6,500 people crowded a patchy soccer field on the campus of Laney College on Friday night to see Warren speak at what had originally been billed as a town hall.
The crowd, some who came with elaborate picnics and bottles of chardonnay, was so unexpectedly big that Warren nixed the question-and-answer format. Instead she gave a stemwinder of a speech in which she slammed the influence of corporations in Washington, slammed Trump’s proposed border wall as hateful, and pitched her plan to pay for free college tuition, universal child care and other programs through a new tax on mega-millionaires.
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Rep. Eric Swalwell, Hickenlooper and former Rep. John Delaney, all polling in the bottom half of Democratic hopefuls, also will address the convention this weekend.
Where’s Biden?
Notably absent is former Vice President Joe Biden, who early polls show is in the lead nationally and in California.
But even Biden, who is in Columbus, Ohio, Saturday, delivering a speech to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, has thrown early attention to California.
Jamal Brown, a national press secretary for Biden, said senior campaign aides were dispatched to the California convention to discuss the former vice president’s bid with delegates and other participants.
“In the coming weeks, Vice President Biden is looking forward to returning to California to meet with voters, learn firsthand about their concerns, and ultimately, compete strongly in the state,” Brown said.
Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker, the acting California Democratic Party chairwoman, said that Biden called her Wednesday to express his regrets for not making the convention.
She said that she told Biden that she hoped to “see him in November” when the state party is scheduled to hold a candidates forum.
“He said, ‘Oh no, we’ll see you a lot before November,’ ” she said.
Contributing: Chris Woodyard in Pasadena, California.
Beijing to investigate FedEx for ‘damaging rights of Chinese…
According to Xinhua, FedEx failed to deliver express packages to designated addresses in China, “seriously damaging the lawful rights and interests of its clients and…
SAN FRANCISCO – California is no longer a political afterthought.
The solidly blue state hasn’t voted for a Republican president in a general election since George H.W. Bush won here more than 30 years ago. And for the past several election cycles, the nominating contests in The Golden State have been dull races.
With state Democrats deciding to move up their primary from early June to March 3 – the “Super Tuesday” Election Day when voters in 12 other states and Democrats living abroad also cast their ballots – California is enjoying its moment as an electoral belle of the ball.
“By moving to March, we’ve made California not just more relevant but extremely relevant,” California’s secretary of state Alex Padilla told USA TODAY as the California Democratic Party Convention kicked off Friday. “That’s translated into candidates not just coming here to raise money. They are actually coming to talk to California voters.”
Indeed, more than half of the nearly two dozen 2020 Democratic presidential contenders have descended on California this weekend to court liberal activists and party establishment at the convention and other forums being sponsored by left-leaning groups and unions.
That flood of attention by White House hopefuls is good news for California Democrats, who in recent election cycles watched Democratic presidential candidates swoop into the state for big-dollar fundraisers in Silicon Valley and Hollywood while putting minimum effort into voter outreach.
But California’s new standing could shake up how campaigns strategize where they spend their time and dollars, according to political analysts. For the first time, Californians and voters in Texas, the nation’s second most populous state, will hold their primaries on the same day.
“California moving to the front of the pack rather than where it used to be will have a big effect on how candidates campaign,” said James Demers, a Democratic strategist in New Hampshire. “You have to compete first in the early states, but you also have to have this time around some significant resources in California and in Texas. You can’t set up shop in a place like that coming out of New Hampshire and Iowa. You now have to have a campaign in place very early.”
California Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks said California’s move means candidates can survive getting through the first four races without necessarily notching a victory. Wicks was a key adviser to President Barack Obama’s two White House runs and is now advising Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat.
“I think you still have to do well in the first four, but I don’t think it’s going to be disqualifying if you don’t win,” Wicks said.
With mail-in voting provisions, California voters can begin casting their ballots on Feb. 3, the same day as Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses. Sixty-five percent of Californians cast early ballots in the 2018 midterms.
Why the early states matter
The earliest voting states, particularly Iowa and New Hampshire, have served as equalizers in the past. Shoe-leather politics and relatively inexpensive television and radio advertising made them territory where an underdog candidate could stand on nearly even ground with deep-pocketed rivals.
But voters in some more populous states have long complained about Iowa and New Hampshire’s elevated status, noting the states are hardly reflective of the nation’s diversity. The states’ populations have been historically less ethnically diverse, have lower unemployment, and have more married-couple households than the rest of the country.
Similar arguments could be made that California is further to the left of the rest of the country on immigration, climate, and cultural issues.
But some voters pushed back against the notion, suggesting that the state is in fact a leader.
“The rest of the country really looks to California for what a progressive state can be,” said Maricela Gutierrez, director of a San Jose agency that works with immigrants, following a forum in Pasadena where four Democratic candidates outlined their ambitions for immigration reform.
Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Iowa, said California’s move could create a dynamic where earlier voting states Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina will “tee up the nomination” and give California – which sent 475 delegates to the Democratic National Convention in 2016 – a chance “to hit it out of the park.”
“What states have done for years in an attempt to mitigate the impact of the caucuses is to move their primaries forward,” Goldford said. “The irony of that is it doesn’t mitigate the impact of the caucuses, it amplifies the caucuses. When states follow really quickly on Iowa, what it does is shield ‘winners’ … from in-depth and extensive examination and it hurts losers because they have less time to recover from a poor showing.”
Dan Schnur, who served as communications director for former California Gov. Pete Wilson and John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign, said he doubts that California will prove to become a hot race. The state with nearly 40 million residents and three of the nation’s biggest media markets will make it prohibitively expensive for all but a few candidates.
And the state is also not a winner-take-all primary, meaning that delegates are apportioned based on the percentage of the vote they received.
“This move did not make California a 900-pound gorilla in the nominating process,” Schnur said.
Candidates make their pitches
This weekend’s cattle call is centered around the state convention, where 3,400 state delegates will elect the state party’s next leader. Former chairman Eric Bauman resigned in November, weeks after facing allegations he drank on the job and sexually harassed and abused staff. The state party is facing three lawsuits connected to Bauman’s alleged conduct.
But the controversy has been overshadowed by the wall of candidates trying to woo Californians.
Fourteen candidates are scheduled to address the convention Saturday and Sunday, an opportunity to make their case about why they are the best candidate to beat President Trump while touting a progressive streak to delegates from a state that prides itself as the nation’s most liberal state.
Four candidates, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Kamala Harris, former Housing and Urban Development Director Julian Castro and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, stopped in Pasadena Friday to layout their vision to immigrations activists.
Harris was the featured guest at a Planned Parenthood event Friday night. She also flexed home state muscle on the eve of the convention, announcing that she’s sealed the endorsement of 33 Democratic members of the state assembly, including Speaker Anthony Rendon.
Six candidates – Sen. Cory Booker, South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, Harris and Sanders – are scheduled to make five-minute pitches to Service Employees International Union at a breakfast meeting Saturday about how they’d advocate for working people.
Eight candidates – Booker, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar, O’Rourke, Sanders, Warren and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand – have been invited to address the liberal group MoveOn’s forum Saturday afternoon
Sanders, who announced on Friday eight campaign hires who will be the nucleus of his California operation, is scheduled to hold a rally Saturday night in San Jose. Buttigieg plans to head to Fresno Monday to stump and take part in an MSNBC hosted town hall.
Meanwhile, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper plans to attend church on Sunday in Oakland at a predominantly African-American church before ending his California visit.
Padilla, California’ secretary of state, said there are signs that the move to push ahead the state primary is generating excitement among California. More than 20 million people in the state are now registered to vote, with the vast majority Democrats or not party affiliated, he said.
“We are seeing a new energy,” Padilla said.
More than 6,500 people crowded a patchy soccer field on the campus of Laney College on Friday night to see Warren speak at what had originally been billed as a town hall.
The crowd, some who came with elaborate picnics and bottles of chardonnay, was so unexpectedly big that Warren nixed the question-and-answer format. Instead she gave a stemwinder of a speech in which she slammed the influence of corporations in Washington, slammed Trump’s proposed border wall as hateful, and pitched her plan to pay for free college tuition, universal child care and other programs through a new tax on mega-millionaires.
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Rep. Eric Swalwell, Hickenlooper and former Rep. John Delaney, all polling in the bottom half of Democratic hopefuls, also will address the convention this weekend.
Where’s Biden?
Notably absent is former Vice President Joe Biden, who early polls show is in the lead nationally and in California.
But even Biden, who is in Columbus, Ohio, Saturday, delivering a speech to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, has thrown early attention to California.
Jamal Brown, a national press secretary for Biden, said senior campaign aides were dispatched to the California convention to discuss the former vice president’s bid with delegates and other participants.
“In the coming weeks, Vice President Biden is looking forward to returning to California to meet with voters, learn firsthand about their concerns, and ultimately, compete strongly in the state,” Brown said.
Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker, the acting California Democratic Party chairwoman, said that Biden called her Wednesday to express his regrets for not making the convention.
She said that she told Biden that she hoped to “see him in November” when the state party is scheduled to hold a candidates forum.
“He said, ‘Oh no, we’ll see you a lot before November,’ ” she said.
Contributing: Chris Woodyard in Pasadena, California.
Shanahan went after China while not mentioning the country by name during a speech at a major security summit in Singapore, blasting efforts to militarize man-made outposts in the region and accusing Beijing of destabilizing the area, The Associated Press reported.
“Perhaps the greatest long-term threat to the vital interests of states across this region comes from actors who seek to undermine, rather than uphold, the rules-based international order,” the Defense chief said, according to Reuters.
“If the trends in these behaviors continue, artificial features in the global commons could become tollbooths, sovereignty could become the purview of the powerful,” he continued.
Later, in response to a question, Shanahan stated, “We’re not going to ignore Chinese behavior, and I think in the past people have kind of tiptoed around that.”
The acting Pentagon chief’s remarks came as the Defense Department on Saturday released its first Indo-Pacific strategy report emphasizing “a free and open Indo-Pacific.”
The report calls for a region where “all nations, large and small, are secure in their sovereignty and able to pursue economic growth consistent with accepted international rules, norms, and principles of fair competition.”
“In particular, the People’s Republic of China, under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, seeks to reorder the region to its advantage by leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce other nations,” Shanahan stated in the report.
The document states that the U.S., meanwhile, “supports choices that promote long-term peace and prosperity for all in the Indo-Pacific.”
“We will not accept policies or actions that threaten or undermine the rules-based international order – an order that benefits all nations. We are committed to defending and enhancing these shared values,” the report adds.
Shanahan’s speech Saturday marked his first major international address since taking over as acting Pentagon chief in January and comes amid heightened tensions with China over a range of issues, including security and trade, with the Trump administration locked in a protracted trade battle with Beijing.
A senior Chinese military official responded to Shanahan’s remarks on Saturday, saying U.S. actions on Taiwan and the disputed South China Sea were at odds with efforts to pursue regional peace and security.
“He (Shanahan) has been expressing inaccurate views and repeating old tunes about the issues of Taiwan and the South China Sea,” Shao Yuanming of the People’s Liberation Army told reporters after Shanahan’s speech, according to Reuters. “This is harming regional peace and stability.”
Yuanming emphasized that “China will have to be reunified,” saying that “if anybody wants to separate Taiwan from China, the Chinese military will protect the country’s sovereignty at all costs.”
Shanahan went after China while not mentioning the country by name during a speech at a major security summit in Singapore, blasting efforts to militarize man-made outposts in the region and accusing Beijing of destabilizing the area, The Associated Press reported.
“Perhaps the greatest long-term threat to the vital interests of states across this region comes from actors who seek to undermine, rather than uphold, the rules-based international order,” the Defense chief said, according to Reuters.
“If the trends in these behaviors continue, artificial features in the global commons could become tollbooths, sovereignty could become the purview of the powerful,” he continued.
Later, in response to a question, Shanahan stated, “We’re not going to ignore Chinese behavior, and I think in the past people have kind of tiptoed around that.”
The acting Pentagon chief’s remarks came as the Defense Department on Saturday released its first Indo-Pacific strategy report emphasizing “a free and open Indo-Pacific.”
The report calls for a region where “all nations, large and small, are secure in their sovereignty and able to pursue economic growth consistent with accepted international rules, norms, and principles of fair competition.”
“In particular, the People’s Republic of China, under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, seeks to reorder the region to its advantage by leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce other nations,” Shanahan stated in the report.
The document states that the U.S., meanwhile, “supports choices that promote long-term peace and prosperity for all in the Indo-Pacific.”
“We will not accept policies or actions that threaten or undermine the rules-based international order – an order that benefits all nations. We are committed to defending and enhancing these shared values,” the report adds.
Shanahan’s speech Saturday marked his first major international address since taking over as acting Pentagon chief in January and comes amid heightened tensions with China over a range of issues, including security and trade, with the Trump administration locked in a protracted trade battle with Beijing.
A senior Chinese military official responded to Shanahan’s remarks on Saturday, saying U.S. actions on Taiwan and the disputed South China Sea were at odds with efforts to pursue regional peace and security.
“He (Shanahan) has been expressing inaccurate views and repeating old tunes about the issues of Taiwan and the South China Sea,” Shao Yuanming of the People’s Liberation Army told reporters after Shanahan’s speech, according to Reuters. “This is harming regional peace and stability.”
Yuanming emphasized that “China will have to be reunified,” saying that “if anybody wants to separate Taiwan from China, the Chinese military will protect the country’s sovereignty at all costs.”
President Trump’s plan to slap new tariffs on Mexican imports, weeks after escalating his trade war with China, leaves the United States fighting a multi-front campaign that threatens more instability for manufacturers, consumers and the global economy.
The president’s bombshell announcement that he would impose 5 percent tariffs on Mexican imports, with the possibility of raising them to 25 percent if Mexico doesn’t stop migrants from crossing into the United States, left some economists fearing there were few limits to Trump’s appetite for trade conflict.
“In our view, if the U.S. is willing to impose tariff and non-tariff barriers on China and Mexico, then the bar for tariffs on other important U.S. trading partners, including Europe, may be lower than we previously thought,” Barclays economists said in a research note. “We think trade tensions could escalate further before they de-escalate,” Barclays added.
Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, called Trump’s move against Mexico a turning point for financial markets and the U.S. economy.
In global markets Friday, investors spooked by new tariff threats sought safety in German government bonds and the Euro rather than their customary dollar-denominated havens. This “seems to me an indicator that the concerns about the U.S. are rising,” Posen said.
The president’s latest move rocked business leaders who were already scrambling to reshape supply chains to avoid fallout from the U.S. confrontation with China. The added uncertainty may paralyze executives who can’t be sure their next supply chain location will be any safer than their last.
(David Zalubowski/AP)
“A lot of companies feeling pressure to get out of China are looking at Mexico if they want to serve the US market, Vietnam if they’re more focused on Asia,” said William Reinsch, a former Commerce Department trade official. “Trump’s action yesterday scrambles all those plans.”
In one example of a company caught in the crossfire, GoPro of San Mateo, Calif., last month announced it would move manufacturing of some of its cameras from China to Mexico, so that it could stop paying tariffs to import them to the United States — tariffs resulting from the U.S. trade war with China. Weeks later, GoPro now faces new tariffs to import those goods from Mexico. The company declined to comment Friday.
As U.S. companies race to find new tariff-free places to manufacture, so far few have reported returning production to the United States, despite the president’s stated aim of using trade policy to help bring jobs back home. Many are still seeking alternative locations overseas, where labor is cheaper.
Trump said he would impose the new tariffs because the Mexican government wasn’t doing enough to stem the flow of migrants, many of whom travel through Mexico from Central America. Some White House officials who support Trump’s approach believe the threat of tariffs is the only way to get the attention of Mexican leaders.
The Mexican government tried to defuse the tension Friday, saying the two sides would meet in Washington on Wednesday for high-level talks.
If no solution is found, Mexico is certain to impose retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, with likely targets including U.S. pork, beef, wheat and dairy products, said Former Mexican diplomat Jorge Guajardo.
Some prominent Republicans, including Senate Finance Chairman Charles E. Grassley, raised concerns that the new tariffs could threaten a trade agreement the Trump administration clinched only months ago with Mexico and Canada, to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement.
Others said the about-face treatment of Mexico would damage Trump’s ability to negotiate trade deals it is pursuing with other partners, including China and Europe.
“You can’t negotiate a trade agreement with someone and then turn around and whack them,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican economist and former Congressional Budget Office director.
In late March, Trump threatened to shut the entire southern border to curb illegal immigration, but backed down a week later after an outcry. That has left some wondering how seriously they should take the latest tariff threat.
If Trump follows through with new tariffs on Mexico, it would hurt U.S. economic growth and increase the possibility of the Federal Reserve reversing course and cutting interest rates this year, economists said.
“The drag to the US economy could be meaningful, especially if the tariffs reach 25%,” the upper limit that Trump has set, Bank of America Merrill Lynch economists wrote Friday. Even if the tariff remains at 5 percent, the effective cost could be higher because many parts cross the border several times as products are assembled, and the tariff must be paid upon each crossing into the United States.
U.S. automakers will be among the principal casualties. Last year, the United States imported roughly $350 billion in merchandise from Mexico, including about $85 billion in vehicles and parts, according to the International Trade Administration.
A full 25 percent tax “would cripple the industry and cause major uncertainty,” according to Deutsche Bank Securities.
“The auto sector – and the 10 million jobs it supports – relies upon the North American supply chain and cross border commerce to remain globally competitive,” said Dave Schwietert, interim president of the Auto Alliance, an industry group. “This is especially true with auto parts which can cross the U.S. border multiple times before final assembly.”
“Widely applied tariffs on goods from Mexico will raise the price of motor vehicle parts, cars, trucks, and commercial vehicles – and consumer goods in general — for American consumers,” the industry group said. “The potential ripple effects of the proposed Mexican tariffs on the U.S. North American and global trade efforts could be devastating.”
Consumers could pay up to $1,300 more per vehicle if the tariffs are implemented, according to Torsten Slok, chief economist for Deutsche Bank Securities.
Retailers, technology companies and textile manufacturers also will be hurt. U.S. mills now ship yarn and fabric to Mexico, where it is turned into apparel and exported back to American retailers. Last year, the U.S. textile industry exported $4.7 billion in yarn and fabrics to Mexico, its largest single market.
“Adding tariffs to Mexican apparel imports, which largely contain U.S. textile inputs, would significantly disrupt this industry and jeopardize jobs on both sides of the border,” said Kim Glas, president of the National Council of Textile Organizations.
The new dispute with Mexico came as the U.S.-China trade conflict continued to deepen.
China on Friday announced it would establish a blacklist of “unreliable” foreign companies and organizations, effectively forcing companies around the world to choose whether they would side with Beijing or Washington.
The new “unreliable entities list” would punish organizations and individuals that harm the interests of Chinese companies, Chinese state media reported, without detailing which companies will be named in the list or what the punishment will entail.
Chinese reports suggested the Commerce Ministry will target foreign companies and groups that abandoned Chinese telecom giant Huawei after the Trump administration added Huawei to a trade blacklist this month, which prohibited the sale of U.S. technology to the Chinese company.
At a time when Western corporations have cut back executive travel to China after authorities detained two Canadians on national security grounds in December, the new blacklist sent another shock wave through the business community.
“I think foreign and especially U.S. firms now have to worry that China is creating a new ‘legal pretext’ to at least impose exit bans on foreign individuals who make this new list, if not worse,” said Bill Bishop, the editor of the Sinocism newsletter, referring to the Chinese practice of not allowing designated foreigners to leave China.
Aside from the new blacklist, China in recently days also escalated threats to stop selling the U.S. so-called rare earths — 17 elements with exotic names like cerium, yttrium and lanthanum that are found in magnets, alloys and fuel cells and are used to make advanced missiles, smartphones and jet engines.
Analysts said it could take years for the United States to ramp up rare-earths production, after its domestic industry practically disappeared in the 1990s. Roughly 80 percent of U.S. imports of the material come from China, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s official mouthpiece, carried a stark warning for the United States this week in an editorial about rare earths: “Don’t say we didn’t warn you.”
That commentary surprised China experts because the People’s Daily, which often signals official positions with subtly codified language, uses that phrase sparingly: It famously appeared before China launched border attacks against India in 1962 and Vietnam in 1979.
Damian Paletta contributed to this story. Shih reported from Beijing.
Former FBI Director James Comey slammed Attorney General William Barr for “echoing conspiracy theories” in an interview on CBS.
“Bill Barr on CBS offers no facts. An AG should not be echoing conspiracy theories. He should gather facts and show them. That is what Justice is about,” Comey tweeted on Saturday.
Bill Barr on CBS offers no facts. An AG should not be echoing conspiracy theories. He should gather facts and show them. That is what Justice is about.
Barr spoke with CBS News after special counsel Robert Mueller delivered a roughly nine-minute statement about the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
In that interview, Barr contradicted the reasoning Mueller gave about why he did not make a determination on the question of whether President Trump obstructed justice. “I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision,” Barr said during an interview with CBS on Thursday. Barr said Mueller “had his reasons for not doing it” but declined to explain. “I’m not going to, you know, argue about those reasons,” he said.
Mueller, both in his report and in his public statement, contended that he “did not make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime” due to a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion that precludes a sitting president from being charged with a crime.
Barr disagreed with that reasoning. “The opinion says you cannot indict a president while he is in office, but he could’ve reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity,” he said. The attorney general also condemned Trump’s critics and accused the media of ignoring surveillance activities carried out against Trump’s 2016 campaign. “The media reaction is strange,” he said. “Normally the media would be interested in letting the sunshine in and finding out what the truth is. And usually the media doesn’t care that much about protecting intelligence sources and methods. But I do and I will.”
Barr is looking into the origins of the counterintelligence investigation into Trump’s campaign over misconduct concerns by some officials, including Comey, and has tasked U.S. Attorney John Durham with leading a review.
“I think the activities were undertaken by a small group at the top which is one of the, probably one of the mistakes that has been made instead of running this as a normal bureau investigation or counterintelligence investigation. It was done by the executives at the senior level, out of headquarters,” he said.
Asked if he was talking about Comey or former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Barr declined to be specific. “I’m just not going to get into the individual names at this point. But I just view that — I don’t view it as a bureau-wide issue. And I will say the same thing for other intelligence agencies. And they’re being very cooperative in helping us,” he said.
Trump has accused Comey, who oversaw the beginning of the counterintelligence investigation into his 2016 campaign, of committing “treason,” a crime that is punishable by death in the U.S. Barr said he disagrees with Trump’s “treason” accusation as a legal matter.
Virginia Beach officials on Saturday identified DeWayne Craddock, a longtime Virginia Beach city worker who had recently been terminated, as the gunman who stormed the beach community’s municipal complex on Friday afternoon and opened fire, killing at least 12 and injuring several others.
Mr. Craddock, 40, died in a shootout with the police. Here is what we know about him:
• Mr. Craddock worked as an engineer in the Department of Public Utilities, the city’s water and sanitary sewer services branch, for about 15 years. A recent city news release listed him as a contact person on a roads project.
• There was no immediate indication that Mr. Craddock targeted anyone in particular, officials said.
• He had a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from Old Dominion University. Before his job with the city, he worked for private firms specializing in site planning and infrastructure, and for the Army Training and Support Center, employment listings showed. He also served in the Army National Guard, according to news reports.
This is a widget area - If you go to "Appearance" in your WP-Admin you can change the content of this box in "Widgets", or you can remove this box completely under "Theme Options"
