President Donald Trump is in the middle of a trade war with China, with the administration having levied a tariff of 25% on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports.

Both sides are locked in negotiations to end the dispute, which has lasted for more than a year. Now Trump may be getting ready to open a new front against one of China’s neighbors: Vietnam.

During an interview on Wednesday with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo, Trump hinted he might impose tariffs on Vietnam, which has benefited from the US-China trade dispute.

Read more: US and Chinese consumers are ‘unequivocally the losers’ of trade war tariffs — here are the unexpected winners

“A lot of companies are moving to Vietnam, but Vietnam takes advantage of us even worse than China. So there’s a very interesting situation going on there,” Trump said.

When Bartiromo asked Trump whether he planned to impose tariffs on Vietnam, Trump didn’t directly answer the question, saying, “We’re in discussions with Vietnam.” He went on to describe Vietnam as “the single worst abuser of everybody” and vowed to increase tariffs on China again if a trade deal isn’t reached.

Read more: It’s been more than a year since the US-China trade war started. Here’s a timeline of everything that’s happened so far.

During the February summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un in Hanoi, Vietnam, Trump praised Vietnam’s attempt at reducing the trade imbalance. Vietnamese airline carriers made deals to purchase jets and other equipment worth $20 billion, Politico reported.

Vietnam is a major American trading partner in Asia. Bilateral trade between both countries has substantially increased since diplomatic relations were restored in 1995, two decades after the end of the Vietnam War.

In 2017, US trade with Vietnam amounted to $58.2 billion, according to the Office of the US Trade Representative. The top US exports to Vietnam are cotton, computer chips, and soy beans, while the US is biggest destination for Vietnamese goods, including textiles and electronics.

Source Article from https://www.businessinsider.com/president-trump-vietnam-tariffs-trade-war-target-2019-6

Southwest Airlines is among the companies that grounded Boeing 737 MAX aircraft because of a software failure that caused fatal crashes of Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines planes. The FAA said Wednesday it has found a new flaw in the plane that needs to be fixed.

Ralph Freso/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Ralph Freso/Getty Images

Southwest Airlines is among the companies that grounded Boeing 737 MAX aircraft because of a software failure that caused fatal crashes of Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines planes. The FAA said Wednesday it has found a new flaw in the plane that needs to be fixed.

Ralph Freso/Getty Images

The Federal Aviation Administration has found a new problem in Boeing’s troubled 737 Max that the company must address before the regulatory agency will allow the airplanes to fly passengers again. The discovery further delays the airliner’s return to service.

Southwest, American and United Airlines, the three U.S. carriers that fly Max jets, have already pulled the aircraft from their schedules through Labor Day weekend and this latest development could set back the plane’s return to commercial flight well into the fall.

Boeing’s popular narrow-body aircraft has been grounded since March after an Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max crashed shortly after taking off from the airport in Ethiopia’s capitol, Addis Ababa, killing all 157 people on board. It was the second crash of a Max plane in five months; as a Lion Air jet crashed in Indonesia last October, killing 189 people.

Investigators link both crashes, in part, to an automated flight control system that acted on erroneous information from malfunctioning sensors and put the planes into nose dives the pilots could not pull the planes out of.

Boeing has developed a software fix for that flight control system, called MCAS, but sources familiar with the situation tell NPR that in simulator testing last week, that FAA test pilots discovered a separate issue that affected their ability to quickly and easily follow recovery procedures for runaway stabilizer trim and stabilize the aircraft.

A statement from the regulatory agency says as part of a process designed to discover and highlight potential risks, “the FAA found a potential risk that Boeing must mitigate.”

Boeing says in a statement that the company is working on the required software fix to address the FAA’s request. A spokesman told NPR the company is committed to working closely with the FAA to safely return the 737 Max to service.

Just a few weeks ago, officials with the FAA and Boeing had suggested the 737 Max could be certified to fly airline passengers again by the end of this month. Now that timeline is being pushed back at least a few weeks, if not considerably longer.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/06/26/736430419/faa-finds-new-problem-with-737-max-jets-delaying-their-return-to-flight

Rosa Ramírez cries as she looks at photos of her son Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez, 25, and granddaughter Valeria, nearly 2, while speaking to journalists at her home in San Martín, El Salvador, on Tuesday. The drowned bodies of her son and granddaughter were found Monday morning on the banks of the Rio Grande.

Antonio Valladares/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Antonio Valladares/AP

Rosa Ramírez cries as she looks at photos of her son Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez, 25, and granddaughter Valeria, nearly 2, while speaking to journalists at her home in San Martín, El Salvador, on Tuesday. The drowned bodies of her son and granddaughter were found Monday morning on the banks of the Rio Grande.

Antonio Valladares/AP

Updated at 3:45 p.m. ET

Editor’s note: This story contains images that some readers may find disturbing.

The desperate and tragic plight of a father and daughter who drowned while trying to cross the border from Mexico into the U.S. has become a new flashpoint in the border crisis, after a photographer captured a haunting image that shows the pair lying facedown, washed onto the banks of the Rio Grande.

Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez, 25, died as he tried to bring his 23-month-old daughter, Angie Valeria, to safety and a new life in the U.S. Ramírez’s wife, Tania Vanessa Ávalos, says she watched from the shore as her husband and daughter were pulled away by a strong river current near the border crossing between Matamoros, Mexico, and Brownsville, Texas.

The small family was fleeing poverty in El Salvador and had secured a humanitarian visa in Mexico — but after spending two months in a migrant camp waiting to apply for asylum in the U.S., Martínez decided that they should try to cross the border on Sunday. Those details all come from the Mexican newspaper La Jornada, whose journalist, Julia Le Duc, was at the riverbank as Ávalos spoke to police and emergency workers.

Le Duc also photographed the bodies of Ramírez and his daughter, which were found after Ávalos alerted authorities in Mexico. Le Duc’s images show the pair lying along the riverbank, with their feet in the water and their heads on the reeds of dry land. The toddler is tucked into her dad’s T-shirt — an apparent attempt to keep her close as the current took them away. Her arm is flung around his neck.

The bodies of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and his nearly 2-year-old daughter, Valeria, lie on the bank of the Rio Grande in Matamoros, Mexico, where they were found Monday morning. They drowned while trying to cross the river to Brownsville, Texas. This photograph was first published in the Mexican newspaper La Jornada.

Julia Le Duc/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Julia Le Duc/AP

The shocking and unsettling image has drawn comparisons to other powerful photos, of the death of Aylan Kurdi, the 3-year-old Syrian boy who drowned in 2015 as his family tried to reach sanctuary in Greece, and of Omran Daqneesh, who was 5 when he was wounded in an airstrike in Aleppo.

In the same way those images focused the world’s attention on the humanitarian crisis in Syria and Turkey, the intense image from the Rio Grande comes as a stark reminder of the human toll of the immigration crisis. As in those earlier cases, it also shows the devastating effect strife and desperation often inflict on children and families.

On the same day Óscar Alberto and Valeria died, U.S. Border Patrol agents found four bodies along the Rio Grande in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley, about 55 miles west of Brownsville. In that case, three children — one toddler and two infants — died along with a 20-year-old woman.

In reports about the drowning in Matamoros, some of the details have varied. According to La Jornada, Ávalos said her husband had taken their daughter across the river and was returning to get his wife when he realized the little girl had not stayed on the bank — she was in the water. Valeria had apparently panicked when she saw her father go back across the river without her.

Ávalos said her husband was able to reach the little girl but wasn’t able to make it back to the shore. Their bodies were found Monday morning, about 550 yards from where they tried to cross, La Jornada reported.

The New York Times, meanwhile, says the family had entered the river together and that Ávalos swam back to the Mexican side, where she watched the water sweep away her husband and daughter. The newspaper cited Ávalos’ comments to government officials.

The family had attempted to cross at a relatively narrow section of the river. But as The Associated Press reports, local officials had recently warned that the river poses a perilous threat, especially because it has been coursing with water that was released from dams to supply irrigation projects.

“We are united to pain by this irreparable loss,” the Salvadoran president’s office said of the tragedy, after Ramirez’s cousin asked for the government’s help in bringing the bodies back home.

Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele granted the request, telling Foreign Affairs Minister Alexandra Hill to make arrangements and give the family financial support. Both the president and Hill also urged Salvadorans not to try to cross the U.S. border without going through legal channels.

“Someday we will finish building a country where these things do not happen,” Bukele said. “Someday we will finish building a country where migration is an option and not an obligation. In the meantime, we will do as much as we can. God help us.”

In the most recent fiscal year, there were 283 deaths across the U.S. southern border — with nearly 100 of those deaths reported in the Rio Grande Valley, according to the Border Patrol.

Migrants who want to enter the U.S. at legal border crossings often face long waits due to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection policy of “metering,” which is meant to manage the flow of migrants by blocking entry if no space is available in CBP’s processing facilities.

The U.S. agency says the practice of metering targets health and safety hazards. But in a report on the policy that came out last fall, Homeland Security’s inspector general said, “While the stated intentions behind metering may be reasonable, the practice may have unintended consequences.”

Citing interviews with Border Patrol officers and supervisors, the inspector general’s office said it found “evidence that limiting the volume of asylum-seekers entering at ports of entry leads some aliens who would otherwise seek legal entry into the United States to cross the border illegally.”

The Hispanic Caucus of the House of Representatives blamed the Trump administration for the deaths.

“They were driven to cross the river out of desperation — only after they tried to legally seek asylum,” the caucus said in a tweet. “They should be safe in the U.S. Instead, they are dead because of Trump’s cruel policies.”

On Wednesday, Trump blamed current U.S. immigration laws for the deaths. When he was asked how he felt about the photo of the dead father and daughter, the president replied, “I hate it.”

“I know it could stop immediately if the Democrats change the law. They have to change the laws,” Trump said, adding, “and then that father, who probably was this wonderful guy, with his daughter — things like that wouldn’t happen.”

Trump predicted that if asylum rules were changed and a wall were built, migrants wouldn’t try to cross the river. Speaking to reporters before he boarded Marine One at the White House, he added that conditions at the border prove he was right to say America has an immigration crisis.

“We have a crisis at the border,” Trump said.

Under President Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy for illegal immigration, the Department of Homeland Security has been criticized for its treatment of families and children, including the now-revised policy of separating minors from their parents.

Over the weekend, the bleak and unsanitary conditions under which more than 350 children were housed in a Border Patrol station in southwest Texas sparked an outcry, prompting the government to move most of those children to other facilities.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/06/26/736177694/a-father-and-daughter-drowned-at-the-border-put-attention-on-immigration

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved a bill that would grant $4.6 billion for border aid in a bid to stem illegal migration across the country’s southern border with Mexico.

The legislation will need to be reconciled with a separate different border aid bill passed by the House of Representatives before it is sent to President Donald Trump to be signed into law.

The White House has said Trump would veto the House version, which includes restrictions on U.S. immigration agencies and which does not include extra funding for the Defense Department and Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees.

Reporting by Susan Cornwell; Writing by Makini Brice; Editing by Tim Ahmann

Source Article from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-senate-passage/senate-approves-its-own-version-of-border-aid-bill-idUSKCN1TR2ZA

Congress is debating emergency humanitarian aid to care for migrants on the U.S.-Mexico border. The need is obvious. With virtually no barrier to stop them, thousands of migrants are crossing illegally into the United States every day. More than a million will come this year. U.S. law prevents border officials from quickly returning them. While they are being processed, some of the migrants, including children, are being kept temporarily in terrible conditions. American officials have an obligation to take care of them before those with no valid claim to be in the United States are returned to their home countries.

Capitol Hill Democrats are reportedly torn about an emergency aid measure. On one hand, they want to care for the migrants. On the other hand, they fear approving aid would empower President Trump to carry out a plan to deport illegal immigrants whose cases have received full legal due process and who have been ordered deported. Such deportations used to be relatively uncontroversial but are now, apparently, unacceptable to some Democrats.

This moment might be a time for introspection for those who have consistently downplayed the urgency of the situation on the border. Earlier this year, with the number of illegal crossings rising; with the nature of the crossers changing — more families and more children than in earlier years; with the testimony of border officials that they were unable to handle the situation — with all that happening, many Democrats and their supporters in the media forcefully denied that there was a crisis on the southern border. Here are a few — actually, more than a few — examples:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the situation “a fake crisis at the border.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it “a crisis that does not exist.”

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, “There is no crisis at the border.”

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries said, “There is no crisis at the border.”

House Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Eliot Engel called the situation “a fake crisis at the border.”

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler said, “There is no crisis at the border.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, said, “We don’t have a border crisis.”

Rep. Lloyd Doggett called the situation “a phony border crisis.”

Rep. Earl Blumenauer called it “a fake crisis at the border.”

Rep. Sanford Bishop called it “a crisis that does not exist.”

Reps. Jesus Garcia, Jose Serrano, Suzanne Bonamici, Donald Beyer, Pramila Jayapal, and Adriano Espaillat called it a “nonexistent border crisis.”

Former congressman and current California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said, “There is no border crisis.”

All are in public office and all have a say in determining policy. In the media, “Never Trump” Republicans, former Republicans, and other commentators have joined in.

Former Rep. Joe Scarborough, now with MSNBC, called the situation “an imaginary border crisis.”

Former Bush White House official Nicolle Wallace, also with MSNBC, said “There’s not a crisis.”

Former Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol called the situation “a fake crisis.”

GOP strategist Rick Wilson said, “There is no crisis on the border.”

Former conservative talk radio host Charlie Sykes said, “There is no crisis at the border.”

The Washington Post’s Max Boot called the situation a “faux crisis.”

The Post’s Jennifer Rubin said, “There is no crisis at the southern border.”

The Post’s editorial board called it a “make-believe crisis.”

And finally, lest anyone ignore the late-night Resistance, comedian Jimmy Kimmel called the situation “a fake border crisis.”

Are 26 examples enough? There are plenty more, for those who care to look.

The situation at the border is so terrible in part because those in power, and those cheering them on in the media, have steadfastly resisted commonsense measures to reduce the flow of illegal migrants — the large majority of whom do not have a valid claim of asylum — across the border. The resulting paralysis in border policy encourages more migrants to come, making the situation worse by the day.

Perhaps some of those quoted above only want to deny the president a victory, no matter how sensible. Perhaps others are simply looking for a partisan advantage. Perhaps some sincerely believe in open, or virtually open, borders. It does not matter what their motives are. The crisis — yes, crisis — at the border worsens every day they do not act.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-what-now-for-those-who-denied-a-crisis-at-the-border

A harrowing image of an El Salvadoran migrant and his 2-year-old daughter lying face down on the banks of the Rio Grande River after drowning is highlighting the risks that those face while trying to enter America – and is drawing reactions from presidential candidates to the Pope.

The photograph, captured Monday by journalist Julia Le Duc and published by Mexican newspaper La Jornada, shows the bodies of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and his daughter Valeria, who washed up ashore about a half mile away from international bridge that connects Matamoros, Mexico, and Brownsville, Texas. One of the image’s most striking features is that Valeria’s arm is draped around the neck of her father.

“I was drawn to the girl’s arm on her father,” Le Duc told the Associated Press as she described arriving at the scene. “It was something that moved me in the extreme because it reflects that until her last breath, she was joined to him not only by the shirt but also in that embrace in which they passed together into death.”

According to Le Duc’s reporting for La Jornada, Ramírez, 25, was frustrated that his family from El Salvador was unable to present themselves to U.S. authorities and request asylum – and decided to swim across the Rio Grande River on Sunday with Valeria.

Tania Vanessa Ávalos of El Salvador, center left, is assisted by Mexican authorities after her husband and nearly two-year-old daughter were swept away by the current while trying to cross the Rio Grande to Brownsville, Texas, in Matamoros, Mexico, on Sunday. (AP)

HOUSE PASSES $4.5 BILLION BILL TO AID MIGRANTS AT BORDER, SETTING UP SHOWDOWN WITH SENATE

He initially made it to the American side with Valeria and dropped her off there, before starting to return to help the next person who wanted to cross — his wife, 21-year-old Tania Vanessa Ávalos.

But Ramirez’s daughter then entered the water after seeing him leave, the reporting said. Martínez returned and was able to grab Valeria, yet the current swept them both away and they drowned.

WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGE BELOW

The bodies of Salvadoran migrant Oscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and his nearly 2-year-old daughter Valeria lie on the bank of the Rio Grande in Matamoros, Mexico, on Monday. (AP)

The photographer’s account, according to the Associated Press, was based on remarks by Ávalos to police at the scene — “amid tears” and “screams” — Le Duc said.

Details of the incident also were confirmed Tuesday by a Tamaulipas government official who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, and by Martínez’s mother back in El Salvador, Rosa Ramírez, who spoke with her daughter-in-law by phone afterward.

“When the girl jumped in is when he tried to reach her, but when he tried to grab the girl, he went in further … and he couldn’t get out,” Ramírez told the Associated Press.

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION BOSS OUT AMID CONTROVERSY OVER DETENTION CENTER CONDITIONS

From the scorching Sonoran Desert to the fast-moving Rio Grande, the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border has long been an at times deadly crossing between ports of entry. A total of 283 migrant deaths were recorded last year; the toll so far this year has not been released. Many attempt the dangerous journey to flee poverty and violence in their home countries.

Rosa Ramirez sobs as she shows journalists toys that belonged to her nearly 2-year-old granddaughter Valeria in her home in San Martin, El Salvador, on Tuesday. (AP)

In recent weeks alone, two babies, a toddler and a woman were found dead on Sunday, overcome by the sweltering heat; elsewhere three children and an adult from Honduras died in April after their raft capsized on the Rio Grande; and a 6-year-old from India was found dead earlier this month in Arizona, where temperatures routinely soar well above 100 degrees Fahrenheit.

Tamaulipas immigration and civil defense officials have toured shelters beginning weeks ago to warn against attempting to cross the river said to be swollen with water released from dams for irrigation. On the surface, the Rio Grande appears placid, but strong currents run beneath.

El Salvador’s foreign ministry said it was working to assist the Ramirez family including Ávalos, who was at a border migrant shelter following the drownings. The bodies were expected to be flown to El Salvador Thursday.

“Very regrettable that this would happen,” Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said Tuesday in response to a question about the photograph. “We have always denounced that as there is more rejection in the United States, there are people who lose their lives in the desert or crossing” the river.

Pope Francis, after seeing the image, was “profoundly saddened by their death, and is praying for them and for all migrants who have lost their lives while seeking to flee war and misery,” the Vatican said.

Jessica Vaughan, an official with the Center for Immigration Studies, told Fox News that while the photo is “heartbreaking,” lawmakers and activists need to shift their focus on working toward reducing the flow of migrants coming to the U.S.-Mexico border.

“Of course we should provide adequate care to migrants who come into our custody, but the real goal must be to end the policies that are encouraging people to make the dangerous choice of trying to come here illegally,” she said.

“Specifically, we need to work with Mexico and the Central American countries to discourage the illegal migration, as the Trump administration has done, but we also need to negate the judge’s ruling that requires the government to keep releasing anyone who crosses with a child… so that people in their home countries see that this is no longer an option worth risking their lives for,” added Vaughan, who is the center’s director of policy studies.

The image also drew reactions from Democratic presidential candidates gearing up for a 2020 election season in which immigration is expected to be a key issue.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“These families seeking asylum are often fleeing extreme violence. And what happens when they arrive? Trump says, ‘Go back to where you came from.’ That is inhumane. Children are dying. This is a stain on our moral conscience,” Sen. Kamala Harris tweeted.

“Trump is responsible for these deaths,” added Beto O’Rourke in another tweet.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/world/migrant-photo-father-daughter-border

MIAMI — President Donald Trump will be just a few keystrokes away from sending rhetorical airstrikes into the middle of the Democrats’ first 2020 presidential debate here on Wednesday night.

The top two contenders for the party’s nomination according to the polls, as well as the fourth- and fifth-place candidates — former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, and Sen. Kamala Harris of California — will be looming in the wings as possible targets before the second-night showdown on Thursday.

And armies of campaign operatives, pundits and Twitterati will be spinning the results electronically in real time.

Ultimately, the biggest presences in this first debate may not be physically in the room.

For most of the candidates actually on the stage, the basic challenge Wednesday will be introducing themselves to an electorate that has shown little interest in them so far.

Of the 10 candidates on stage Wednesday night, only Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts (third-place in the polls), former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas and Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey regularly register above 1 percent in national polls. That means — deep breath — former HUD Secretary Julián Castro; Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota; Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii; Washington Gov. Jay Inslee; New York Mayor Bill de Blasio; Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio; and former Rep. John Delaney of Maryland still have to introduce themselves to most voters, and turn them into fans fast.

For some, the handful of minutes they get to speak will surely feel like bite-size infomercials. But the need to differentiate means just about anything could happen.

O’Rourke has a lot riding on his performance, and he’ll be sandwiched in a potentially uncomfortable spot.

He’ll be literally betwixt and between Warren and Klobuchar — two decidedly substantive and accomplished rivals — on the stage. O’Rourke’s supporters insist that his turn as a glamor candidate earlier in the campaign doesn’t mean he lacks policy chops, but he’s been criticized for having a thin record of accomplishment compared to some of the women running who drew less attention at first.

Download the NBC News app for full coverage of the first Democratic debate

His ability to hang with them on substance will surely be put to the test Wednesday night.

During a two-hour flight here from Washington on Tuesday, Klobuchar immersed herself in a set of thick three-ring binders with pink soft-plastic covers, pausing to write longhand notes on index cards. She told NBC News that she wants to make sure that she can draw attention to the issues that she has put at the center of her campaign, including lowering the cost of prescription drugs for consumers.

Warren is determined to let voters know that she intends to make the economy and the political system work better for many people through “big, structural change,” a campaign aide said.

The good news for O’Rourke is that he has an opportunity to show he can handle himself against tough competition after having been caricatured as a candidate armed with a toothy grin and little to back it up. The bad news is there’s a chance that Warren, who is in the top tier of contenders, and Klobuchar, who is eager to stand out, could eviscerate him by dint of comparison.

O’Rourke’s fate is just one of many subplots that will play out during the two-hour contest of wits, which will air on NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo beginning at 9 p.m. ET. After nearly six months of campaigning, it’s the first time Democratic voters will get to see candidates competing against each other directly.

Warren is trying to build on the momentum she’s created in national and state-level polling. The debate should offer some clues as to whether she will be able to sustain it — a question that will also be answered in part by the performances Thursday of Biden and Sanders, who sit ahead of her in most surveys.

Booker, who has won praise for his ground operations in Iowa and South Carolina from local political insiders, has not seen a payoff so far in surveys. Like O’Rourke, he needs to keep donors and voters interested in a campaign that hasn’t taken off yet. That may require him to be more aggressive — not only toward the candidates on the stage and Trump but perhaps toward those who debate Thursday night.

Looming over all of the discussion will be Trump, who may decide to play a version of “Mystery Science Theater 3000” by weighing in from the Twittersphere. And the four candidates in the top 5 who aren’t on the stage until Thursday — Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg and Harris — won’t be far from mind, either.

It’s not clear how much the Wednesday night candidates will want to risk going after the Thursday night candidates — who will have 24 hours to formulate responses — but there are a host of issues that could prompt volleys. For example, Booker has taken Biden to task for fondly remembering his personal relationship with segregationist Sen. James Eastland, D-Miss., last week. Biden portrayed himself as an opponent of Eastland on policy, which was true in some cases but not in others.

Since then, NBC News reported that the Senate adopted a Biden amendment in 1975 designed to ensure that schools that maintained segregated classrooms — white children in one class, black children in another — did not lose federal funding as a result, and The New York Times published a report Wednesday about Biden’s work with Eastland and others on a series of crime laws that led to what critics have called the “era of mass incarceration.”

There can be little doubt that each campaign will claim afterward that its candidate had the “breakout” moment that will positively and permanently alter his or her trajectory in the nomination fight. But most, if not all, will be wrong.

The bar for that — like O’Rourke’s challenge in sticking with Warren and Klobuchar — will be high.

Even a split decision might leave him no better or worse off than he is now — which is sixth place in the Real Clear Politics average of national polls at 3.3 percent.

“I could see a situation where a Klobuchar or a Warren rack up points on substance, but Beto O’Rourke gives a great answer to a question that allows his team to claim some victory,” said Rodell Mollineau, a former Senate leadership aide and a partner at the public relations firm Rokk Solutions. “You have an opportunity to win on one or the other, and the ultimate winner will be the one who can win on both.”

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/do-or-die-mission-democrats-hitting-stage-wednesday-night-n1022156

Employees at the Wayfair headquarters in Boston are staging a walkout over the treatment of immigrants at the border, but their protest may harm the group they’d like to help.

The #WayfairWalkout on Wednesday is meant to protest the home goods company’s decision to sell products for migrant detention centers, as recent reports have indicated that there really is a crisis at the border.

Many outlets have reported terrible conditions at migrant detention centers, especially for children. Per ABC:

In response, Wayfair employees are protesting the company for selling to a contractor that manages facilities for migrant children. The Boston Globe reports that the plan began last week:

But the walkout will do little to help migrant children at the border. Shouldn’t the employees be glad that their company is supplying centers that appear to be severely lacking in resources? Wayfair thinks so.

“As a retailer, it is standard practice to fulfill orders for all customers, and we believe it is our business to sell to any customer who is acting within the laws of the countries within which we operate,” company leadership said in a statement to employees. “We believe all of our stakeholders, employees, customers, investors, and suppliers included are best served by our commitment to fulfill our orders.”

Predictably, however, Democratic leaders were quick to support the walkout. Elizabeth Warren said the employees were fighting for the “well-being of immigrant children,” and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called the move “brave.”

But migrant detention centers, especially those that house children, desperately need resources. So protesting a company’s decision to provide furniture for them seems illogical.

If employees want to aid migrants awaiting immigration and asylum hearings, they might consider helping their company provide them with the resources they desperately need. Otherwise, they’re just making immigrants sleep on the floor to own the cons.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/what-if-the-wayfair-walkout-actually-hurts-migrant-children

On Reddit, quarantines are a middle-ground approach to dealing with communities that engage in discussion or behavior that, while permitted, may be offensive to average users.

Under a quarantine, an alert warns visitors that a subreddit has struggled to address alleged violations of Reddit’s policy.

“Most recently the violations have included threats of violence against police and public officials,” reads the quarantine message presented to users who visit The_Donald.

Users have to agree to click through the warning to see the posts, which no longer appear in the general stream on Reddit, which bills itself as “the front page of the internet.” According to Reddit, it has 330 million monthly users, which makes it the fifth-most visited website. The site claims to have more than 130,000 communities, with an average of 21 billon monthly page views.

Other quarantined communities include subreddits centered on discussions of racism, violence, Holocaust revisionism and other forms of anti-Semitism.

The quarantine feature has been used on the site for several years. “The purpose of quarantining a community is to prevent its content from being accidentally viewed by those who do not knowingly wish to do so, or viewed without appropriate context,” Reddit said in an online description of the practice.

In a thread about the quarantine decision, a moderator and many users of the subreddit speculated that the move was intended to silence the community ahead of the 2020 election.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/us/politics/reddit-donald-trump-quarantined.html

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/2019-06-26/supreme-court-conservatives-weigh-scrapping-another-precedent

CLOSE

President Donald Trump kicked off his reelection campaign in Florida with a grievance-filled rally that attacked the press, the political establishment and Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation into Russian election interference. (June 18)
AP, AP

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly accused special counsel Robert Mueller of conducting a “witch hunt” against him, ratcheted up his attacks on Wednesday, alleging without evidence that Mueller had committed a crime by having “terminated” texts between FBI officials who privately derided him. 

During an interview with Fox Business Network, Trump claimed the public had not seen some communications between former FBI employees Peter Strzok and Lisa Page “because Mueller terminated them illegally. He terminated the emails, he terminated all the stuff between Strzok and Page.” 

“And that’s illegal,” he said. “That’s a crime.” 

But a December report from the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General on the recovery of texts messages from Strzok and Page’s devices did not determine that any crime had been committed, nor did it mention that Mueller was in any way involved in the loss of any exchanges between them. 

More: Robert Mueller to testify publicly before Congress next month

Strzok and Page both worked on the FBI’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, and joined Mueller’s staff after he was appointed as special counsel in 2017. Page left after her 45-day temporary assignment ended, while Strzok was removed when Mueller was informed that the FBI agent and Page had exchanged texts hostile to Trump and in support of his 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton. Some of the messages described Trump as an “idiot” and “loathsome.” 

The inspector general was unable to review any communications between Strzok and Page on the iPhones they were assigned during their time working for the special counsel’s office because the phones were returned to their factory settings when they were returned, which was done as a matter of routine. 

Texts between Strzok and Page between Dec. 15, 2017 and May 17, 2017, were lost because of a glitch in the FBI’s data collection system, but the inspector general was able to recover about 10,000 texts from each their devices. The report said there was no evidence that Strzok and Page had “attempted to circumvent the FBI’s text message collection capabilities. 

Trump accusation of illegal activity came the day after it was announced that Mueller will give public testimony before a congressional committee on July 17 about his report into Russia’s “sweeping and systemic” campaign to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. 

“Presidential Harassment!” Trump tweeted Tuesday in response to the news of Mueller’s testimony. 

“It never ends,” Trump lamented on Monday, repeating his previously expressed belief that “Mueller that obviously was not a Trump fan” and that he had hired “18 people that hated Donald Trump” to help conduct the investigation. 

Trump, who admitted last week he had not read the full report, repeated his mantra that Mueller report found no “collusion” and “no obstruction whatsoever.” 

Although Mueller’s report “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign,” it “did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Mueller did not bring charges against the president, but – far from finding “no obstruction whatsoever” – his report outlined several potential instances of potential obstruction and said, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” 

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/26/trump-accuses-mueller-crime-without-evidence/1572003001/

During a gut-wrenching scene in “Miracle,” the best amateur hockey players from across the country are taken to the brink of their physical limits while they stubbornly and repeatedly fail to recognize they no longer play for their individual college teams.

It takes grueling determination from the head coach to awaken the players that they now play for Team USA. It’s a gritty, emotional scene that ultimately captures one of the most patriotic sports moments to ever reach the big screen.

Watching Team USA unite together to give their very best while putting country and team-first can be inspirational.

US WOMEN’S SOCCER STAR MEGAN RAPINOE SAYS SHE’S ‘NOT GOING TO THE F—ING WHITE HOUSE’

Fast forward to Team USA’s women’s soccer team; a talented mix of players of various ages, socio-economic backgrounds, races, and sexual orientations. You know, Americans. They win a lot of games while fans sway American flags in the stands and little kids daydream about playing on the same field while wearing the red, white and blue.

Then there’s Megan Rapinoe. She is co-captain for Team USA. As should be expected, Rapinoe is arguably one of the best soccer players in the world. She won the World Cup and is an Olympic gold medalist. Nike and Samsung sponsor her. Just how talented is she? Ask her: “Because I’m as talented as I am, I get to be here, you don’t get to tell me if I can be here or not,” she said in a recent interview.

When she’s not playing soccer, she advocates for LGBT issues. She also served on a round-table for Hillary Clinton. Good for her.

She also can’t stand President Trump and seems intent on letting us all in on her feelings about that. She’s already announced she would refuse to visit the White House if invited to do so.

Until the U.S. team ruled all players needed to stand for the anthem, Megan Rapinoe showed a propensity to take a knee. Now she stands but refuses to put her hand over her heart or sing along with her teammates. Her actions are causing fans to boycott watching the team play. 

What a missed opportunity.

Our national anthem is a song about standing up for freedom despite all of the odds. When the bombs are bursting in air, the flag remains flying strong, giving hope and optimism that victory and freedom will win the day.

Captain Rapinoe has an opportunity to be a role model for all Americans, not just those that agree with her. She and she alone chose to put on the uniform and represent all of us.

How about just kicking butt, winning and enjoy it? That’s an American thing. So is encouraging all of us to enjoy the experience along with you.  It unites us. People from all backgrounds and political beliefs, including me, are proud of your accomplishments on the field and want the same freedoms and opportunities for you, your teammates and those who support your causes.

Visit the White House with enthusiasm if given the chance; it’s the center of the greatest nation on Earth that helped free more people around the world and expanded rights to more people than ever before.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

And if you truly want to help your cause, ask for a private meeting with the president to discuss your concerns. Half of us didn’t agree with our last president. Half don’t now. Get over it.

Stand up for your cause in a way that we can all support. Anything less is a missed opportunity.

CLICK HERE TO SEE MORE FROM JASON CHAFFETZ

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/jason-chaffetz-us-womens-soccer-star-megan-rapinoe-missing-a-big-opportunity-to-bring-our-country-together

Robert Mueller agreed Tuesday to testify before the House Judiciary Committee and House Intelligence Committee in an open session.

The special counsel is set to appear before both committees in separate but back-to-back hearings on Wednesday, July 17, according to Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who chair the judiciary and intelligence committees, respectively.

“Americans have demanded to hear directly from the Special Counsel so they can understand what he and his team examined, uncovered, and determined about Russia’s attack on our democracy, the Trump campaign’s acceptance and use of that help, and President Trump and his associates’ obstruction of the investigation into that attack,” Nadler and Schiff said in a joint statement. “We look forward to hearing his testimony, as do all Americans.”

The agreement came the same day the committees issued a subpoena to bring Mueller in to testify about his report detailing Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections and potential incidents in which Donald Trump obstructed justice.

William Barr, U.S. attorney general, center, speaks as Rod Rosenstein, deputy attorney general, right, and Ed O’Callaghan, principal deputy assistant Attorney General, listen during a news conference at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Thursday, April 18, 2019. Barr is set to release a redacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report today, and the document could leave everyone unsatisfied, President Donald Trump, lawmakers and the public. Photographer: Erik Lesser/Pool via Bloomberg

William Barr, U.S. attorney general, left, speaks as Rod Rosenstein, deputy attorney general, listens during a news conference at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Thursday, April 18, 2019. Barr is set to release a redacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report today, and the document could leave everyone unsatisfied, President Donald Trump, lawmakers and the public. Photographer: Erik Lesser/Pool via Bloomberg




“We further understand that there are certain sensitivities associated with your open testimony,” Nadler and Schiff wrote to Mueller earlier Tuesday, alluding to criminal investigations the special counsel has referred to other Justice Department offices. “Nevertheless, the American public deserves to hear directly from you about your investigation and conclusions.”

Schiff confirmed to CNN that the judiciary and intelligence committees will each have their own separate hearing to question Mueller on July 17. The intelligence committee will reportedly have an open session but later go into a closed session with Mueller’s staff, according to the network.

The agreement is a victory for Nadler, who has long sought public testimony from Mueller. The special counsel has previously expressed not wanting to publicly testify, but said that if he did, he would not go beyond the parameters of what’s in his lengthy report, which he said speaks for itself.

Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow told NBC that Mueller “said his testimony was his report. We expect that his testimony will be his report.”

In May, Mueller made a rare appearance before the cameras to encourage Americans to read the report, reiterating that while Trump could not be charged with a crime while in office, that does not mean he is exonerated.

Though nothing Mueller said during that appearance was new information, his statements before the cameras resulted in a wave of Democrats confidently calling for an impeachment inquiry into the president.

House Democrats are hoping Mueller’s public testimony on July 17 will provide similar clarity about the special counsel’s findings.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Love HuffPost? Become a founding member of HuffPost Plus today.

This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

Source Article from https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/06/25/robert-mueller-to-testify-before-house-judiciary-house-intel-committees/23756528/

Tesla looking to design its own battery cells to reduce reliance…

Tesla is working on new battery cell designs, and a way to make their own cells, with R&D teams in a lab near its car plant in Fremont, California.

read more

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/26/trump-raises-eye-popping-36-million-in-buildup-to-democratic-debates.html

“May I finish?” the witness asked. “May I please finish?”

The appeal was made in June 2013 by Robert S. Mueller III, then in the twilight of his term as the FBI director. Bent over the witness table in a House Judiciary Committee hearing room, he put up his left hand in protest.

The top law enforcement official asked Rep. Jim Jordan, the Republican of Ohio, to stop interrupting him. The lawmaker fired back: “I’m asking basic questions about the investigation.”

At issue six years ago in the oversight hearing were allegations that the IRS had improperly targeted conservative groups for scrutiny.

The topic when Mueller appears before Congress next month will be an even more explosive one. The former special counsel is scheduled to testify on July 17, before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees about his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible obstruction of justice by President Trump.

The president offered only an abbreviated response to the announcement Tuesday evening from the committee’s two Democratic chairmen. “Presidential Harassment!” Trump wrote on Twitter.

But the president’s loyalists in Congress — Jordan among them — will likely have much more to say to Mueller, whose 22-month investigation concluded with a report indicating that prosecutors did not decide whether Trump had engaged in criminal behavior because of Justice Department policy preventing the indictment of a sitting president.

Stepping down from his role in May, Mueller spoke briefly about his team’s findings, saying that if prosecutors “had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.” The Constitution, he said, “requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.”

“Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report,” he said at the time.

That vow is unlikely to stop lawmakers —— Republicans and Democrats alike — from trying to draw out the flinty former special counsel.

Rep. Douglas A. Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement that he hoped Mueller’s testimony would “bring to House Democrats the closure that the rest of America has enjoyed for months.”

Asked on Fox News Tuesday night what questions he would put to Mueller, Rep. Matt Gaetz, the Florida Republican who sits on the Judiciary Committee, did not list any specific questions but likened Mueller’s team to Chernobyl, the 1986 nuclear disaster in Soviet Ukraine.

For his part, the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, suggested on CNN that Democrats would aim to find out where Mueller disagreed with the framing of his report following its summary by Trump’s attorney general, William P. Barr.

Insight into their possible tactics in questioning Mueller, and into the way he might respond, lies in his previous appearances before Congress. They show that adversarial committee members have been ready to go after the top law enforcement official, pressing him for details about investigations and faulting him for being unable or unwilling to answer. So, too, the encounters show that Mueller has been an assertive witness, unafraid to return fire and accuse lawmakers of making erroneous claims.

“Your facts are not altogether—” Mueller told Rep. Louie Gohmert, the Texas Republican, during the same 2013 oversight hearing in which he clashed with Jordan over the IRS. Both men still sit on the Judiciary Committee.

As his microphone was cut off, the witness appeared to say that Gohmert’s facts were not “well-founded.”

The lawmaker was asking why the FBI had not canvassed Boston mosques before the detonation of two homemade pressure cooker bombs, which killed three people and injured hundreds more near the finish line of the Boston Marathon in April 2013.

“May I finish my—” Mueller continued.

But Gohmert interjected: “Sir, if you’re going to call me a liar, you need to point out specifically where any facts are wrong.”

The exchange ended in an impasse, as Mueller insisted he had already answered the lawmaker’s question, and Gohmert insisted he had not.

Mueller is well-practiced at answering questions before Congress and not answering others.

Since President George W. Bush nominated him to head the FBI in the summer of 2001, Mueller has made dozens of appearances before Congress. The man whose voice Americans hardly know has spent hours speaking into microphones at congressional hearings, preserved by C-SPAN.

Mueller has answered questions on a range of hot-button topics, in front of both friendly and hostile audiences. Beginning his tenure at the FBI just days before the 9/11 attacks, Mueller was called to testify before a joint House-Senate panel on intelligence gathering. In the years since, he has regularly appeared to defend budget requests and to comply with congressional oversight. He has been asked to weigh in on momentous questions, from the Patriot Act to Russian espionage.

Perhaps most pertinent to the topic of the July hearings is a line of questioning pursued at Mueller’s confirmation hearing in 2001.

The questioner was none other than Jeff Sessions, the former Alabama senator who was forced out as Trump’s attorney general in November. His resignation followed months of escalating attacks from the president, who resented the Cabinet official for recusing himself from handling the Russia investigation.

The confirmation hearing unfolded in the wake of the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, who was acquitted by the Senate in February 1999. The legal saga, fresh in the memory of Republican senators, prompted them to ask Mueller how he would manage an inquiry implicating the president.

The concern emphasized by the GOP lawmakers was that an FBI director — and law enforcement more generally — might be swayed by political pressure exerted by an attorney general. The worry finds a parallel today in criticism of Barr’s handling of Mueller’s conclusions.

“Under those circumstances, I hope that you will keep your options open, because you have a 10-year appointment,” Sessions told the nominee. “That is for a reason, so that if something serious occurs, and there has been a threat to the orderly operation of justice, that you would use that independence for a good reason.”

It wasn’t a question. But Mueller asked: “May I respond to that, Senator?”

“Please,” Sessions told him.

Mueller allowed that there could be circumstances in which he would “feel it necessary to circumvent the ordinary course of proceedings,” sidestepping the authority of the attorney general. He pointed to a situation “where one believes that political pressure is being brought to bear on the investigative process.” He said he might look “somewhere else in the executive, beyond the attorney general,” or else possibly disclose his misgivings to Congress.

“But I would look and explore every option if I believed that the FBI was being pressured for political reasons,” he said. “And if that were the situation as described here, I would explore other alternatives or a variety of alternatives in order to make certain that justice was done.”

Mike DeBonis contributed to this report.

More from Morning Mix:

Eric Trump says he was spit on by an employee at a Chicago cocktail bar

New White House press secretary yanked Arizona reporters’ access after critical coverage

A woman was fatally stabbed in the chest. Her identical twin sister has been charged.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/06/26/mueller-congress-testimony-investigation/

Three senators, four current or former representatives, a mayor, a governor and a former cabinet secretary all walk onto a stage … followed the next night by a former vice president, four senators, a congressman, a former governor, a mayor and a pair of entrepreneurs.

Millions of television viewers are getting their first extended look at the historically sprawling Democratic primary field over two nights in Miami this week.

The field is so large that the Democratic National Committee and NBC News split it into two 10-person debates, from 9 to 11 p.m. ET on Wednesday and Thursday, airing on NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo.

There will be half as many moderators as there will be candidates onstage each night: NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt, Today show anchor Savannah Guthrie, Telemundo and NBC Nightly News anchor Jose Diaz-Balart, Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd and MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow.

While watching the debate, you can follow along with live fact-checking and analysis at NPR.org, with many NPR reporters covering politics, health care, foreign policy, immigration and more.

Desperate to avoid the 2016 Republican primary field’s “undercard” debate stages, the Democratic National Committee and NBC divided the candidates into two groups, those polling at 2% or above and those polling below 2%. Through random drawing, the candidates in each group were evenly split between the two nights.

Up first on Wednesday night: Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, former Maryland Rep. John Delaney and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.

The system left Warren as the lone representative of the five top-polling candidates on Wednesday night. The other four — former Vice President Joe Biden, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, California Sen. Kamala Harris and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg — will all appear on the Thursday debate stage.

Also on Thursday’s stage will be Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, California Rep. Eric Swalwell, writer and spiritual guru Marianne Williamson and entrepreneur Andrew Yang.

Candidates will have to be succinct: The debate’s rules grant 60-second answers and 30-second follow-ups. There will be no opening statements. Each night will offer some chances for candidates to catch their breath — four commercial breaks among five segments during each two-hour event.

Loading…

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/06/26/735852558/democratic-presidential-debate-see-the-20-candidates-who-will-be-onstage