Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what’s happening in the world as it unfolds.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/16/politics/louisiana-election-results/index.html

Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what’s happening in the world as it unfolds.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/16/politics/iowa-poll-cnn-pete-buttigieg/index.html

Jennifer Williams, a special adviser to Vice President Pence for Europe and Russia, sat for a closed-door deposition on Capitol Hill on Nov. 7.

Susan Walsh/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Susan Walsh/AP

Jennifer Williams, a special adviser to Vice President Pence for Europe and Russia, sat for a closed-door deposition on Capitol Hill on Nov. 7.

Susan Walsh/AP

The House Intelligence Committee has released the transcript of the closed-door deposition at the impeachment inquiry into President Trump by a foreign service officer detailed to work in the office of Vice President Pence.

Jennifer Williams was assigned to Pence’s team in the spring to work on European and Russian issues. She was the first person from his office to testify in the inquiry into whether Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine while seeking a political favor. Trump denies he made such an offer.

At the time of her deposition on Nov. 7, her lawyer, Justin Shur, told NPR that Williams’ “testimony will largely reflect what is already in the public record.”

Williams is due to appear at an open hearing on Nov. 19.

Read her testimony transcript here.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/11/16/779946508/read-testimony-of-jennifer-williams-aide-to-vice-president-pence

A top White House budget official arrived in the Capitol on Saturday morning to testify privately in the Democrats’ swift-moving impeachment investigation into President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump opens new line of impeachment attack for Democrats Bloomberg to spend 0M on anti-Trump ads in battleground states New witness claims first-hand account of Trump’s push for Ukraine probes MORE‘s handling of foreign policy in Ukraine.

Mark Sandy, a senior official at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), is expected to lend new insights into Trump’s decision to freeze almost $400 million in U.S. aid to Kyiv over the summer as he was simultaneously pressing Ukrainian leaders to open investigations that might help the president politically.

The White House has sought to prevent administration officials from cooperating in the impeachment investigation, which it deems invalid. Sandy is the latest in a long list of officials to defy that blockade and agree to be interviewed under a Democratic subpoena.

Sandy entered the Capitol at roughly 9:45 a.m. and was escorted into the secure room, three floors below ground, where staffers of three House committees — Intelligence, Oversight and Reform, and Foreign Affairs — have been conducting their private depositions since Oct. 3.

He did not comment as he passed a crowd of reporters and a bank of TV cameras.

He will not be delivering an opening statement, his lawyer Barbara Van Gelder said Saturday morning.

Sandy’s name has popped up in previous depositions in reference to his role in freezing the aid to Ukraine in July. Laura Cooper, a senior Pentagon official overseeing Ukraine, testified last month that it was Sandy’s signature that appeared on the official memo imposing the hold.

The private deposition process is far different from the open hearings Democrats launched this week, featuring public testimony from some of the key witnesses who had previously appeared behind closed doors. Three of those witnesses have appeared so far: top diplomats William Taylor, George Kent and Marie YovanovitchMarie YovanovitchFox Business host lashes out at ‘big dumb baby’ Trump for attacking Yovanovitch during impeachment hearing Trump opens new line of impeachment attack for Democrats New witness claims first-hand account of Trump’s push for Ukraine probes MORE. Eight others are expected to testify publicly next week.

Sandy’s appearance makes him the 17th witness to be deposed in private. 

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/house/470772-white-house-official-arrives-to-testify-in-impeachment-probe

Potentially bombshell testimony in the impeachment inquiry came from an unexpected source Friday. David Holmes, an aide to top U.S: diplomate in Ukraine William Taylor, said in private testimony that he overheard President Donald Trump and the U.:S. envoy to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, talk about Ukraine in July. Holmes says he was at a restaurant in Kiev when he heard Trump on a cellphone call loudly asking Sondland if the president of Ukraine had agreed to carry out a probe on former Vice President Joe Biden. Sondland apparently told Trump that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky “loves your ass” and would do anything he asked.

“I then heard President Trump ask, ‘So, he’s gonna do the investigation?’ Ambassador Sondland replied that ‘he’s gonna do it,’ adding that President Zelensky will do ‘anything you ask him to,’” Holmes told lawmakers, according to a copy of Homes’ opening statement that was posted by CNN.

When the call ended, Holmes said he asked Sondland whether it was true that Trump didn’t really care about Ukraine. Sondland replied the president was only interested in “big stuff.” “I noted that there was ‘big stuff’ going on in Ukraine, like a war with Russia,” Holmes went on, “and Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant ‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the ‘Biden investigation’ that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.”

That testimony is key for several reasons. First, it undermines the defense by the White House that Trump didn’t really know what was going on. Plus it also raises even more questions about Sondland’s testimony, considering he had failed to mention to congressional investigators that he talked about Ukraine with Trump. And it also clearly throws a big question mark on Sondland’s earlier testimony that he had no idea Rudy Giuliani and Trump were interested in investigating a Ukrainian company because of its ties to Biden and his son, Hunter Biden. Holmes also confirmed again that there was some kind of quid pro quo, noting that Taylor told him in June that during a call with Zelensky “it was made clear that some action on a Burisma/Biden investigation was a precondition for an Oval Office meeting.”

Holmes said in his testimony that he only came to realize recently that he had information that could be of interest to the impeachment inquiry. “I came to realize I had firsthand knowledge regarding certain events on July 26 that had not otherwise been reported, and that those events potentially bore on the question of whether the president did, in fact, have knowledge that those officials were using the levers of our diplomatic power to induce the new Ukrainian president to announce the opening of a particular criminal investigation,” he testified.

Source Article from https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/david-holmes-confirms-trump-asked-about-ukraine-investigation.amp

“I believe it was accurate and complete,” Morrison said of the rough transcript. He said he recalled accepting all of Vindman’s proposed changes. Morrison’s recollection, though, contradicts the notes of Jennifer Williams, a top aide to Vice President Pence, who said that Burisma was mentioned on the call. Williams’s transcript was also made public Saturday.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senior-national-security-official-feared-leaks-of-trumps-call-to-ukrainian-leader-could-be-damaging/2019/11/16/3e88d768-08b9-11ea-8ac0-0810ed197c7e_story.html

As investigators continue to search for a motive behind the deadly shooting at a Southern California high school Thursday morning, the community of Santa Clarita is coming together to remember the children it lost.

Dominic Michael Blackwell, 14, and Gracie Anne Muehlberger, 15, died Thursday when another student opened fire at Saugus High School, injuring three others. The 16-year-old suspect, who shot himself, died Friday night

One 14-year-old boy was released from the hospital Thursday, and two girls, 14 and 15, were expected to be released soon.

GoFundMe pages that appeared to be created by family members of the two students killed had each raised tens of thousands of dollars by Saturday.

“Our vivacious, funny, loyal, light of our lives, Cinderella, the daughter we always dreamed to have, fiercely strong and lover of all things fashionable — was our best friend,” Gracie’s parents wrote on the GoFundMe page. “She is going to be missed more than words will ever be able to express. We will love you always Sweetpea!”

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/11/16/santa-clarita-mourns-shooting-victims-gracie-muehlberger-dominic-blackwell/4213427002/

WASHINGTON — The offer: A $1 million check from a major Democratic donor to a major Democratic group. The one condition: The money would be refunded if Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren becomes the party’s nominee.

That offer was rejected, according to an official familiar with it, but it was indicative of the larger anxiety felt by many in the Democratic Party’s elite circles about the state of the 2020 Democratic presidential field. “Ninety to 95 percent of our donor base is terrified about Warren,” said a prominent Democratic official.

Democrats, often prone to fretting about elections, have been increasingly worried that their large and divided presidential field, currently led by four imperfect front-runners, doesn’t have what it takes to beat President Donald Trump next year.

They worry that Biden is too old and stumbling; that Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, is too young and too inexperienced; and that Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are too far left and can’t win. And they tend to write off the rest of the field, assuming that if those contenders haven’t caught on yet, they never will.

That angst reached a fever pitch this week and helped push one new candidate and another potential challenger from the party’s more moderate wing into the race — former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, who announced he’s running, and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who’s thinking about it — just ahead of a New Hampshire filing deadline, which essentially barred the door to new candidates when it expired at 5 p.m. on Friday.

Former President Barack Obama, who is loath to speak publicly about internal party politics, felt the need to tell an influential group of donors on Friday night to essentially calm down,while also warning progressives that the country is “less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement.”

“Democratic voters and certainly persuadable independents or even moderate Republicans are not driven by the same views that are reflected on certain, you know, left-leaning Twitter feeds or the activist wing of our party,” Obama said at the private meeting of the Democracy Alliance donor group at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington.

“That’s not a criticism to the activist wing. Their job is to poke and prod and test and inspire and motivate,” he continued. “But the candidate’s job, whoever it ends up being, is to get elected.”

And Obama reminded them that he faced his own messy primary and won.

“Not only did I win ultimately a remarkably tough and lengthy primary process with Hillary Clinton, but people forget that even before that we had a big field of really serious, accomplished people,” he said.

Not everyone is so sure, though, even though polls show all of the party’s front-runners beating Trump at the moment in head-to-head tests.

“With stakes this high in the election, Democrats from coast to coast are in search of the perfect candidate,” said Rufus Gifford, the former national finance director for Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign and ambassador to Denmark. “That person doesn’t exist. He or she never has.”

Democratic voters have expressed little interest in expanding the field. Eighty-fight percent said they are “very” or “somewhat” satisfied with their present options in a September NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, while other surveys have found a sizable number of Democrats wanting to winnow their options.

But many party insiders, who have watched the field take shape and studied the candidates closely, feel none of them measure up to Obama, who remains the model presidential candidate for many in the party.

“Donors are casting around for someone who can fill those shoes because they feel that Joe Biden hasn’t closed the deal yet,” said David Brock, a Democratic fundraiser who runs a constellation of progressive groups, including Media Matters and American Bridge. “Donors are always kind of anxious, it’s in their DNA. They’re nervous that Biden has proven to be a shaky front-runner and they’re nervous about the rise of Elizabeth Warren and/or Bernie Sanders.”

President Barack Obama waves as he is followed by Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, right, upon his arrival on Air Force One at Logan Airport in Boston on March 5, 2014.Charles Krupa / AP file

And they looked around for other potential white knights:

  • Hillary Clinton? “I’m under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it,” the 2016 presidential nominee told the BBC.
  • Stacey Abrams? “I’ve been urged to reconsider. I have said no,” the former nominee for governor in Georgia said at lunch at the National Press Club.
  • Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown? “How many times do I have to answer this question? No. No, no, no,” Brown, who had considered running this year before deciding against it, told reporters in the Capitol.

In some circles, the search is driven largely driven by deep concerns that Warren or Sanders would fall to Trump and would be an albatross around the neck of Democratic candidates running for the Senate and House in 2020.

A new analysis by political scientist Alan Abromivitz found that support for “Medicare for All,” the single-payer health care plan Warren and Sanders favor, could have cost Democratic congressional candidates as much as 5 percentage points in the 2018 midterms.

Some on the left wonder which is scarier to donors: Warren or Sanders losing to Trump or winning against him and raising their taxes.

“Makes you wonder if they’re trying to save us from Trump or are they really just trying to save themselves from Bernie and Warren,” said Rebecca Katz, a former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who now advises insurgent progressive candidates.

Warren’s campaign has begun selling mugs to drink “billionaire tears” and engaged in public fights with wealthy financiers who feel, as many of them did under Obama as well, that they’re being unfairly targeted.

Former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, one of the more prominent Democrats on Wall Street, condemned Warren’s incivility against the wealthy while taking a not-so-subtle shot at the controversy over her Native American ancestry and DNA test.

Patrick Murray, the pollster who runs the well-regarded Monmouth University poll, said the unsettled state of the field is not uncommon, historically, and more a product of voters waiting to chose a candidate than not liking any of them.

“It’s not a sign of weakness,” he said.

Needless to say, the new entries are frustrating to candidates who have been pitching themselves for months, as alternatives to Biden on one hand and Warren and Sanders on the other, just as Patrick is now.

Obama himself praised the current field and said he was sure that in the end, “we will have a candidate who has been tested and will be able to proudly carry the Democratic banner.”

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/high-anxiety-jittery-democrats-fear-their-candidate-won-t-beat-n1084141

WASHINGTON – The impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump continued Saturday as the House Intelligence, Oversight, and Foreign Affairs Committees held a closed-door deposition with Mark Sandy, a career aide inside the White House budget office. 

Sandy, a former acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and currently the agency’s associate director for national security programs, is the first official from OMB to testify in the impeachment inquiry. 

His testimony is likely to shed light on the Trump administration’s withholding of nearly $400 million in military aid from Ukraine. 

The Democratic-led inquiry is based on a July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which Trump discussed military assistance for Ukraine and suggested Zelensky help with investigations into Joe Biden’s son Hunter and unsubstantiated allegations about Ukraine’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election.

Follow here for the latest updates on the impeachment inquiry: 

More:Intimidation among key takeaways from the Trump impeachment hearing with Marie Yovanovitch

Sandy arrives for his deposition 

Sandy has arrived for his closed-door deposition.

On Thursday, his lawyer told USA TODAY he would come testify if subpoenaed, while other White House officials have ignored subpoenas. 

“If Mr. Sandy is subpoenaed, he will appear for a deposition this Saturday,” Sandy’s attorney, Barbara “Biz” Van Gelder, told USA TODAY.

Mick Mulvaney the acting White House Chief of Staff and former head of OMB, defied his subpoena to appear before the committees on Nov. 8. 

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/16/live-trump-impeachment-inquiry-update-mark-sandy-appears-testify/4213313002/

WASHINGTON — A State Department official told impeachment investigators Friday that he overheard President Donald Trump talking with a US ambassador about “investigations” in Ukraine, according to people familiar with the testimony.

David Holmes, the political counsel at the US Embassy in Ukraine, said Trump was talking so loudly that Ambassador Gordon Sondland had to hold the phone from his ear.

Holmes said that allowed others at a restaurant in Kyiv to overhear the call that’s now part of the impeachment inquiry, according to one of the people, who were unauthorized to publicly discuss the testimony and were granted anonymity.

The conversation at the Kyiv restaurant came the day after Trump’s July 25 phone call with newly elected Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which the U.S. president pressed his counterpart to investigate Democrats and 2020 rival Joe Biden. A whistleblower’s complaint about that call sparked the impeachment inquiry.

Sondland opened the July 26 conversation by telling Trump that Zelensky “loves your ass.”

Trump responded, “So, he’s gonna do the investigation?”

“He’s gonna do it,” Sondland replied.

The Associated Press has viewed key excerpts of Holmes’ 10-page statement and a person familiar with the document confirmed its authenticity. The remarks were first obtained by CNN.

Holmes, a career foreign service officer, told investigators he did not seek the opportunity to testify. Like others in the inquiry, he was issued a subpoena to appear. He spent nearly seven hours with lawmakers.

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., said Holmes is a key witness to the impeachment investigation because he heard directly from Trump. That counters Republican complaints that the inquiry is based on hearsay from other officials testifying.

“He has firsthand knowledge of the conversation between Ambassador Sondland and the president of the United States,” Lieu said. “He overheard the conversation.”

US Ambassador to the EU Gordon SondlandReuters

After the call with Trump, which Sondland placed from his mobile phone at the outdoor table over lunch with Holmes and two other people, he remarked the president was in a “bad mood.”

Holmes asked the ambassador if it’s true that Trump “doesn’t give a s–t about Ukraine.”

Sondland told him the president did not “give a shit about Ukraine.” The president only cares about “big stuff,” Sondland said.

When the foreign service officer noted the importance of Ukraine, at war with Russia, Sondland clarified that he meant stuff that benefits the president, like the “Biden investigation.” Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, was pushing the Ukrainians to investigate former Vice President Biden.

Holmes’ job often required him to be the official note-taker at meetings. He said while he did not take notes from the lunch with Sondland, he has a “clear recollection” and believes other colleagues at the table do as well.

The Associated Press has already identified one of the other people who heard the call as Suriya Jayanti, a foreign service officer based in Kyiv.

Like other officials who have testified in the inquiry, he expressed alarm at the shifting situation in Ukraine with Giuliani’s influence.

Holmes, who testified after Friday’s public hearing with ousted US Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yonvakovitch, told investigators he had never seen anything like the campaign that led to her May recall.

The situation in Kyiv changed dramatically in spring, he said. Key policies, including resistance to Russian aggression, “became overshadowed by a political agenda being promoted by Rudy Giuliani” and others “with a direct channel to the White House.”

Ahead of one meeting, Sondland said: “Dammit Rudy. Every time Rudy gets involved he goes and f–ks everything up.”

Holmes said he heard John Bolton, the National Security Adviser, tell others about his frustration with Giuliani’s influence with the president. Bolton told William Taylor, the top diplomat in Ukraine, to send a first-person cable to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo about the situation.

Holmes first came to investigators’ attention after Taylor, the acting head of the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, testified Wednesday that a staff member overheard the conversation. The person was later identified as Holmes.

Holmes, who joined the Foreign Service in 2002, has served in Afghanistan, Colombia, India, Kosovo and Russia as well as on the National Security Council staff in Washington.

He won an award for constructive dissent from the American Foreign Service Association in 2014 for complaining about problems that an alternate diplomatic channel had caused in South Asia and recommending organizational changes to the State Department’s bureaucratic structure for the region.

Holmes made his concerns known through the State Department’s so-called “Dissent Channel,” which provides diplomats with a confidential way of registering serious concerns.

It’s similar to but distinct from the method — a personal cable to the secretary of state — that Taylor used to register his objections about Ukraine policy.

Source Article from https://nypost.com/2019/11/16/diplomat-overheard-trump-phone-call-discussing-investigations-in-ukraine/

WASHINGTON — The offer: A $1 million check from a major Democratic donor to a major Democratic group. The one condition: The money would be refunded if Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren becomes the party’s nominee.

That offer was rejected, according to an official familiar with it, but it was indicative of the larger anxiety felt by many in the Democratic Party’s elite circles about the state of the 2020 Democratic presidential field. “Ninety to 95 percent of our donor base is terrified about Warren,” said a prominent Democratic official.

Democrats, often prone to fretting about elections, have been increasingly worried that their large and divided presidential field, currently led by four imperfect front-runners, doesn’t have what it takes to beat President Donald Trump next year.

They worry that Biden is too old and stumbling; that Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, is too young and too inexperienced; and that Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are too far left and can’t win. And they tend to write off the rest of the field, assuming that if those contenders haven’t caught on yet, they never will.

That angst reached a fever pitch this week and helped push one new candidate and another potential challenger from the party’s more moderate wing into the race — former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, who announced he’s running, and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who’s thinking about it — just ahead of a New Hampshire filing deadline, which essentially barred the door to new candidates when it expired at 5 p.m. on Friday.

Former President Barack Obama, who is loath to speak publicly about internal party politics, felt the need to tell an influential group of donors on Friday night to essentially calm down,while also warning progressives that the country is “less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement.”

“Democratic voters and certainly persuadable independents or even moderate Republicans are not driven by the same views that are reflected on certain, you know, left-leaning Twitter feeds or the activist wing of our party,” Obama said at the private meeting of the Democracy Alliance donor group at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington.

“That’s not a criticism to the activist wing. Their job is to poke and prod and test and inspire and motivate,” he continued. “But the candidate’s job, whoever it ends up being, is to get elected.”

And Obama reminded them that he faced his own messy primary and won.

“Not only did I win ultimately a remarkably tough and lengthy primary process with Hillary Clinton, but people forget that even before that we had a big field of really serious, accomplished people,” he said.

Not everyone is so sure, though, even though polls show all of the party’s front-runners beating Trump at the moment in head-to-head tests.

“With stakes this high in the election, Democrats from coast to coast are in search of the perfect candidate,” said Rufus Gifford, the former national finance director for Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign and ambassador to Denmark. “That person doesn’t exist. He or she never has.”

Democratic voters have expressed little interest in expanding the field. Eighty-fight percent said they are “very” or “somewhat” satisfied with their present options in a September NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, while other surveys have found a sizable number of Democrats wanting to winnow their options.

But many party insiders, who have watched the field take shape and studied the candidates closely, feel none of them measure up to Obama, who remains the model presidential candidate for many in the party.

“Donors are casting around for someone who can fill those shoes because they feel that Joe Biden hasn’t closed the deal yet,” said David Brock, a Democratic fundraiser who runs a constellation of progressive groups, including Media Matters and American Bridge. “Donors are always kind of anxious, it’s in their DNA. They’re nervous that Biden has proven to be a shaky front-runner and they’re nervous about the rise of Elizabeth Warren and/or Bernie Sanders.”

President Barack Obama waves as he is followed by Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, right, upon his arrival on Air Force One at Logan Airport in Boston on March 5, 2014.Charles Krupa / AP file

And they looked around for other potential white knights:

  • Hillary Clinton? “I’m under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it,” the 2016 presidential nominee told the BBC.
  • Stacey Abrams? “I’ve been urged to reconsider. I have said no,” the former nominee for governor in Georgia said at lunch at the National Press Club.
  • Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown? “How many times do I have to answer this question? No. No, no, no,” Brown, who had considered running this year before deciding against it, told reporters in the Capitol.

In some circles, the search is driven largely driven by deep concerns that Warren or Sanders would fall to Trump and would be an albatross around the neck of Democratic candidates running for the Senate and House in 2020.

A new analysis by political scientist Alan Abromivitz found that support for “Medicare for All,” the single-payer health care plan Warren and Sanders favor, could have cost Democratic congressional candidates as much as 5 percentage points in the 2018 midterms.

Some on the left wonder which is scarier to donors: Warren or Sanders losing to Trump or winning against him and raising their taxes.

“Makes you wonder if they’re trying to save us from Trump or are they really just trying to save themselves from Bernie and Warren,” said Rebecca Katz, a former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who now advises insurgent progressive candidates.

Warren’s campaign has begun selling mugs to drink “billionaire tears” and engaged in public fights with wealthy financiers who feel, as many of them did under Obama as well, that they’re being unfairly targeted.

Former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, one of the more prominent Democrats on Wall Street, condemned Warren’s incivility against the wealthy while taking a not-so-subtle shot at the controversy over her Native American ancestry and DNA test.

Patrick Murray, the pollster who runs the well-regarded Monmouth University poll, said the unsettled state of the field is not uncommon, historically, and more a product of voters waiting to chose a candidate than not liking any of them.

“It’s not a sign of weakness,” he said.

Needless to say, the new entries are frustrating to candidates who have been pitching themselves for months, as alternatives to Biden on one hand and Warren and Sanders on the other, just as Patrick is now.

Obama himself praised the current field and said he was sure that in the end, “we will have a candidate who has been tested and will be able to proudly carry the Democratic banner.”

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/high-anxiety-jittery-democrats-fear-their-candidate-won-t-beat-n1084141

The crisis was over, the danger had passed, and Saugus High students were wandering bewildered through a sea of squad cars and news vans, trying to wrap their minds around what had just transpired on the campus quad.

I never thought this would happen in Santa Clarita.” That familiar refrain was all many students could think of to say when a newscaster stuck a microphone in their face.

They’d felt safe in the cosseted security of their close-knit suburban community, the hometown of so many law enforcement officers.. Now, they were those kids who’d lived through a campus shooting. They were suddenly swathed in vulnerability.

“It doesn’t seem like this is something that should happen here,” a sophomore named Adriana told a reporter. She’d heard the gunshots from her home, as she was setting off for campus. Hours later, I could hear the mix of fear and outrage in her voice.

“I’m honestly terrified to go to school. You never really know if something like this could happen again.” She didn’t feel prepared for this, she said.

But how on earth do you prepare for the prospect that one of your classmates — an ordinary kid, a Boy Scout who played chess, ran cross country, had a girlfriend, took AP classes — would begin the school day by pulling a gun from his backpack and shooting into a crowd on the quad?

How do you protect yourself from something you can’t predict and don’t understand?

***

That’s a question we’ve been asking ever since the shocking massacre 20 years ago at Colorado’s Columbine High School. The murder of a teacher and 12 students by a pair of misfit classmates on a deadly rampage jangled us free from the notion of school as a safe space.

That tragedy is blamed by experts for sparking a wave of school shootings that have taken more than 350 lives, shows no sign of ending and spawned an industry of school-shooter protection programs to prepare for what was once unthinkable.

“Students today should be as familiar with active shooter protocols as they are with fire drills or protocols for earthquakes and other natural disasters,” says USC professor Erroll Southers, a former FBI agent and director of the university’s Safe Communities Institute. For the last 20 years, he’s been visiting schools across the country, assessing everything from where the classroom windows are to how many kids sit alone in the lunchroom.

In some ways, protecting students has become its own sort of arms race, with schools going to such extremes that school-shooter training might actually traumatize the students it’s intended to protect.

“There’s a school of thought that you have to enact sensorial training drills — firing blank guns and tackling individuals — to make it a real life experience,” said Melissa Reeves, a Winthrop University professor who helped write a national curriculum for school crisis interventions. “But we don’t light a fire in the hallway to do fire drills.”

In fact, that kind of visceral experience can provoke such an intense emotional response that students wind up more scared than prepared.

Most schools prepare teachers and students as Saugus High did, with routine “lockdown” drills, often built on a hierarchical mantra of survival options: Run, hide, fight.

Critics worry that’s not enough to equip young people; that students will panic and freeze when a real crisis occurs.

But the response of Saugus High students and teachers to Thursday’s crisis suggests otherwise. They married instinct with preparation and did their campus and community proud.

I watched their stories unfold in news interviews on a day of relentless television coverage. Their presence of mind astounded me.

Students who could, fled the campus at the sound of gunshots and shouted warnings to others. There was panic and confusion, but there was no stampede.

Teachers guided kids away from danger, yanked them into classrooms, shoved them into safe spaces, and calmly issued orders — turn those cellphones off — that teenagers efficiently obeyed.

Behind locked doors, desks became barriers, fire extinguishers were marshaled as weapons, and students armed themselves with scissors, “just in case you have to fight back,” one boy told reporters.

And in the eerie quiet of a choir practice room, an injured student who’d stumbled in bloody from the quad assured worried schoolmates that she would be OK — as a teacher dressed her two bullet wounds with supplies from the classroom’s gunshot wound kit, lamenting only that she didn’t have a second kit.

***

The mere idea that classrooms today need gunshot wound kits makes me want to cry.

But that’s our new reality in this country. And no neighborhood can expect to be immune.

I could sense the students’ soul-searching as they tried to answer the question that virtually every reporter asked: How do you feel?

This was unfamiliar territory for them. They’d grown up in a community considered one of the safest cities for children in America. They went to school with kids they’d known all their lives.

And there they were, walking off campus in a single-file line, many in tears, with their arms above their heads like criminals on TV, being herded away from a crime scene.

They felt scared, confused, grateful, angry, stunned. And all the grown-ups had to offer them in the moment were hugs and refrains of “Thank God you are OK.”

I couldn’t stop thinking about Adriana casting about for some sign that things could be made OK, longing for the kind of protections that urban schools are trying to get rid of.

“We have open gates,” she complained. “We don’t check IDs. There’s no metal detectors. Maybe we need metal detectors.”

But who wants schools to look like penitentiaries?

“You could put all the physical protectors in place … and still there’s no way we can stop everything bad from happening,” said Reeves, a former president of the National Assn. of School Psychologists. “The more you make it like a fortress, the more they feel unsafe.”

Her advice has nothing to do with searches or equipment: “We’ve got to deal with this on the front end with kids, so they’re not feeling so hopeless and angry and desperate.”

It seems to me we’re all feeling a little desperate right now, wishing there was one right answer — just do this and you will be safe.

But that doesn’t really exist, inside or outside of school, in our world today.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-11-16/santa-clarita-school-shooting-sandy-banks

Soldiers belonging to China‘s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have briefly left their barracks to help Hong Kong residents clean up debris left over from anti-government demonstrations in a rare and highly symbolic troop movement unsolicited by the city’s embattled government.

Saturday’s action saw scores of soldiers from the garrison sporting crewcuts and identical gym kits conduct a lightning-quick removal of bricks and debris near their base, the AFP news agency reported.

More:

Confirming the brief deployment on Weibo, China’s Twitter-like social media platform, the PLA said it acted to open a debris-strewn road outside their Kowloon Tong barracks to traffic, winning “applause from residents” in the process.

A city spokesman meanwhile said the Hong Kong government did not request assistance from the PLA, which has previously stayed confined to its garrison during months of protestsbut the military initiated the operation as a “voluntary community activity”.

The presence of PLA troops on Hong Kong’s streets could stoke further controversy over the Chinese-ruled territory’s semi-autonomous status. 

Demosisto, a pro-democracy organisation, said Saturday’s clean-up operation could set a “grave precedent” if the city’s government invites the military to deal with internal problems, the Reuters news agency reported.

The developments followed some of the worst violence seen during more than five months of anti-government demonstrations after a police operation against protesters at the Chinese University of Hong Kong on Tuesday.

The authorities have since largely stayed away from at least five university campuses that had been barricaded by thousands of students and activists who stockpiled petrol bombs, catapults, bows and arrows and other weapons.

Many protesters appeared to have left the campuses by late Saturday, though some remained behind to man barricades. Hong Kong’s Cross-Harbour Tunnel was still blocked by protesters occupying Polytechnic University.

Months of unrest

The months-long protests that have rocked Hong Kong have been fuelled by widespread anger at the perceived Communist Party meddling in the former British colony, which was guaranteed its freedoms when it returned to the Chinese rule in 1997.

The protests started against a now shelved bill to allow extradition to China but have billowed into wider calls for democracy.

Beijing, for its part, denies interfering in Hong Kong and has blamed the unrest on foreign influences.


Chinese state media repeatedly broadcast comments made on Thursday by President Xi Jinping, in which he denounced the unrest and said “controlling chaos while restoring order” was the territory’s “most urgent task”.

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong‘s chief executive, has meanwhile condemned protesters as the “enemy of the people”.

In recent weeks, clashes between protesters and police have become increasingly violent. 

Two people have died this month as the clashes intensified, while the financial hub has been pushed into a recession by the turmoil.

A 70-year-old street cleaner died on Thursday after being hit on the head by brick police said had been thrown by rioters. On Monday, police blamed a rioter for dousing a man in petrol and setting him on fire. The victim is in critical condition.

On the same day, police shot a protester in the abdomen. He was in a stable condition as of Saturday.

Several streets remain strewn with debris, barricades and scarred by scorch marks from petrol bombs thrown during the demonstrations.

Source Article from https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/china-pla-soldiers-hong-kong-streets-voluntary-clean-191116135413276.html

  • Boeing has been pushing the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to speed up the return of its 737 Max jet, which has been grounded for eight months in the wake of two fatal crashes.
  • Reports by The New York Times and Reuters suggest that Boeing has pushed FAA officials to speed up testing and permit early deliveries of the plane.
  • In response, FAA chief Stephen Dickson posted a video to staff where he acknowledged “pressure” to accelerate to process, but encouraged them to resist.
  • This week, airline pilots accused Boeing of “arrogance” for pushing for a swift return, while American Airlines flight crew begged union officials to stop them being assigned to the plane.
  • Boeing said Saturday morning that the FAA and other regulators have sole control of the timetable for the jet’s return.
  • Visit Business Insider’s home page for more stories.

Boeing is exerting pressure on the Federal Aviation Administration to speed up the approval of its 737 Max jet to fly again, according to multiple reports, and seemingly confirmed by the agency’s head.

At the same time, airline crew and pilots are pushing back against any expedited timescale for the Max’s return, with some begging not to be assigned to the jets even after they return to service.

The Max has been grounded for eight months, since the second of two fatal crashes which killed more than 300 people between them.

The approval process centers on proposed fixes to an automated flight control system which malfunctioned in the two crashes. It has taken far longer than many in the aviation industry expected.

According to The New York Times and the Reuters news agency, Boeing has pushed the FAA on two fronts in the hope of getting the plane back in the air faster:

  • Pushing for pilots to test the new software on flight simulators before the FAA has finished vetting it.
  • Asking the FAA to let Boeing deliver newly-manufactured 737 Maxes to clients before it is approved to fly, to shorten the lag between approval and airlines putting passengers on it.

The FAA has resisted, The Times reported. It said engineers pointed out that it does not make sense to ask pilots to test software before it is fully vetted, since it could be changed during that process.

Senior figures at the FAA have encouraged staff to take all the time they need to keep assessing the plane, both in public and in private.

In a video message to staff, posted Friday on YouTube, agency head Stephen Dickson told staff to resist “pressure” being put on them to clear the plane soon. He did not name Boeing.

His comments on the Max begin around 55 seconds into the clip below:

Dickson says: “I know there’s a lot of pressure to return this aircraft to service quickly. But I want you to know that I want you to take the time you need and focus solely on safety. I’ve got your back.”

The Times reported that Dickson was personally lobbied by Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg over the request to begin deliveries sooner, and has yet to make a decision.

His caution echoes a Thursday letter from Dickson to the FAA’s head of safety, copies of which were given to regulators working on the 737 Max.

Boeing said earlier this week that it could be cleared to recommence deliveries of the plane as soon as mid-December, though the FAA has not committed to that timetable.

Tension over the timescale comes as employees who would be tasked with flying the plane express their worry over getting back on it.

On Friday, Business Insider’s Will Martin reported concerns from flight attendants at American Airlines

Lori Bassani, the head of Association of Professional Flight Attendants, a union representing staff at American, said: “I hear from flight attendants every day, and they’re begging me not to make them go back up in that plane.”

She said Boeing needs to share more information with her members about their safety changes before they will be happy to get back on.

Her words followed a harsh rebuke from Jon Weaks, the head of the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, who said Boeing was demonstrating “arrogance, ignorance, and greed” in its push to get the plane flying again.

Boeing on Saturday responded to accusations of pressure by insisting that the only people who are dictating the timetable of the 737 Max’s return are regulators.

Speaking at a news conference ahead of the Dubai Airshow, which begins Sunday, Boeing executive Stan Deal said: “The FAA and regulators around the world control the schedule” according to Reuters.

Source Article from https://www.insider.com/boeing-pressure-faa-737-max-staff-beg-not-to-fly-2019-11

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/2019-11-16/ukraine-leader-loves-your-ass-aide-heard-diplomat-tell-trump

On Friday, Mr. Barr hit back against criticisms of his view of executive authority.

“Some of you may recall when I was up for confirmation, all these Democratic senators saying how concerned they were about my adherence to the unitary executive theory,” Mr. Barr said.

“This is not new and it’s not a theory,” Mr. Barr said, calling his viewpoint a straightforward description of the powers that the Constitution gives the president. “Whatever the executive power may be, those powers must be exercised under the president’s supervision,” he said.

Mr. Barr’s assessment was a “highly contestable — and in my view, seriously mistaken — reading of history,” said Peter M. Shane, a former Justice Department official and Ohio State University law professor who specializes in the separation of powers.

“He over-reads the vesting of executive power, ignores the limitations on executive power implicit in other clauses, and ignores evidence of what voters in favor of ratification would have expected from the text,” Mr. Shane said. “He is, indeed, a maximalist.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/15/us/politics/barr-impeachment.html

Navy Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher leaves a military court on Naval Base San Diego in July. He was acquitted of murdering an Iraqi teen, but convicted on a lesser charge.

Gregory Bull/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Gregory Bull/AP

Navy Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher leaves a military court on Naval Base San Diego in July. He was acquitted of murdering an Iraqi teen, but convicted on a lesser charge.

Gregory Bull/AP

President Trump has issued pardons for two Army officers accused of war crimes in Afghanistan and restored the rank of a Navy SEAL who was acquitted of murder in Iraq.

“For more than two hundred years, presidents have used their authority to offer second chances to deserving individuals, including those in uniform who have served our country,” said White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham in a statement released late Friday. “These actions are in keeping with this long history.”

The officers include 1st Lt. Clint Lorance who has served six years of a 19-year sentence on two charges of second-degree murder and obstruction of justice after ordering his soldiers to open fire on three unarmed men in Afghanistan, killing two of them. He had been convicted in 2013.

The other pardoned officer is Maj. Matthew Golsteyn, a West Point graduate, who was awaiting trial for allegedly murdering a suspected Afghan bombmaker in 2010. The trial was scheduled for next year.

The president also restored the rank of Special Warfare Operator Chief Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL, who was convicted of posing with a corpse of an enemy combatant in Iraq. Gallagher had been acquitted of murder and other serious charges in July 2019.

Some current and former Pentagon officials say the pardons, while legal, could undermine the military justice system.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy had argued against clearing the three men as a bad example to other troops in the field, according to The New York Times.

Without saying whether he supported the exoneration of the three service members, Esper told reporters last week that he had “a robust discussion with the president” about their cases.

In May, Trump indicated that he favored leniency towards the service members whose cases were highlighted by conservative media.

“Some of these soldiers are people that have fought hard and long,” said the president. “You know, we teach them how to be great fighters, and then when they fight sometimes they get really treated very unfairly.”

In the White House statement, press secretary Grisham underscored the notion that Trump will have the last word on military justice.

“The President, as Commander-in-Chief, is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the law is enforced and when appropriate, that mercy is granted,” she wrote.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/11/15/780029994/trump-pardons-2-service-members-accused-of-war-crimes-and-restores-anothers-rank

GUILTY: ROGER STONE 

Convicted in November 2019 on seven counts including obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and lying to Congress about his communications with WikiLeaks. Due for sentencing on February 6, and faces up to 20 years in prison.  

Stone was a person of interest to Mueller’s investigators long before his January 2019 indictment, thanks in part due to his public pronouncements as well as internal emails about his contacts with WikiLeks.

In campaign texts and emails, Stone communicated with associates about WikiLeaks following reports the organization had obtained a cache of Clinton-related emails. 

According to the federal indictment, Stone gave ‘false and misleading’ testimony about his requests for information from WikiLeaks. He then pressured a witness, comedian Randy Credico, to take the Fifth Amendment rather than testify, and pressured him in a series of emails. Following a prolonged dispute over testimony, he called him a ‘rat’ and threatened to ‘take that dog away from you’, in reference to Credico’s therapy dog, Bianca. Stone warned him: ‘Let’s get it on. Prepare to die.’  

GUILTY: MICHAEL FLYNN 

Pleaded guilty to making false statements in December 2017. Awaiting sentence

Flynn was President Trump’s former National Security Advisor and Robert Mueller’s most senior scalp to date. He previously served when he was a three star general as President Obama’s director of the Defense Intelligence Agency but was fired. 

He admitted to lying to special counsel investigators about his conversations with a Russian ambassador in December 2016. He has agreed to cooperate with the special counsel investigation.

GUILTY AND GOING TO JAIL: MICHAEL COHEN

Pleaded guilty to eight counts including fraud and two campaign finance violations in August 2018. Pleaded guilty to further count of lying to Congress in November 2018. Sentenced to three years in prison and $2 million in fines and forfeitures in December 2018

Cohen was investigated by Mueller but the case was handed off to the Southern District of New York,leaving Manhattan’s ferocious and fiercely independent federal prosecutors to run his case. 

Cohen was Trump’s longtime personal attorney, starting working for him and the Trump Organization in 2007. He is the longest-serving member of Trump’s inner circle to be implicated by Mueller. Cohen professed unswerving devotion to Trump – and organized payments to silence two women who alleged they had sex with the-then candidate: porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal. He admitted that payments to both women were felony campaign finance violations – and admitted that he acted at the ‘direction’ of ‘Candidate-1’: Donald Trump. 

He also admitted tax fraud by lying about his income from loans he made, money from  taxi medallions he owned, and other sources of income, at a cost to the Treasury of $1.3 million.

And he admitted lying to Congress in a rare use of the offense. The judge in his case let him report for prison on March 6 and  recommended he serve it in a medium-security facility close to New York City.

GUILTY AND JAILED: PAUL MANAFORT

Found guilty of eight charges of bank and tax fraud in August 2018. Sentenced to 47 months in March 2019. Pleaded guilty to two further charges – witness tampering and conspiracy against the United States. Jailed for total of seven and a half years in two separate sentences. Additionally indicted for mortgage fraud by Manhattan District Attorney, using evidence previously presented by Mueller

 Manafort worked for Trump’s campaign from March 2016 and chaired it from June to August 2016, overseeing Trump being adopted as Republican candidate at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. He is the most senior campaign official to be implicated by Mueller. Manafort was one of Washington D.C.’s longest-term and most influential lobbyists but in 2015, his money dried up and the next year he turned to Trump for help, offering to be his campaign chairman for free – in the hope of making more money afterwards. But Mueller unwound his previous finances and discovered years of tax and bank fraud as he coined in cash from pro-Russia political parties and oligarchs in Ukraine.

Manafort pleaded not guilty to 18 charges of tax and bank fraud but was convicted of eight counts in August 2018. The jury was deadlocked on the other 10 charges. A second trial on charges of failing to register as a foreign agent due in September did not happen when he pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States and witness tampering in a plea bargain. He was supposed to co-operate with Mueller but failed to. 

Minutes after his second sentencing hearing in March 2019, he was indicted on 16 counts of fraud and conspiracy by the Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., using evidence which included documents previously presented at his first federal trial. The president has no pardon power over charges by district and state attorneys.

GUILTY: RICK GATES 

Pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States and making false statements in February 2018. Awaiting sentence

Gates, a Trump campaign official, was Manafort’s former deputy at political consulting firm DMP International. He admitted to conspiring to defraud the U.S. government on financial activity, and to lying to investigators about a meeting Manafort had with a member of congress in 2013. As a result of his guilty plea and promise of cooperation, prosecutors vacated charges against Gates on bank fraud, bank fraud conspiracy, failure to disclose foreign bank accounts, filing false tax returns, helping prepare false tax filings, and falsely amending tax returns.

GUILTY AND JAILED: GEORGE PAPADOPOLOUS

Pleaded guilty to making false statements in October 2017. Sentenced to 14 days in September 2018, and reported to prison in November. Served 12 days and released on December 7, 2018

 Papadopoulos was a member of Donald Trump’s campaign foreign policy advisory committee. He admitted to lying to special counsel investigators about his contacts with London professor Josef Mifsud and Ivan Timofeev, the director of a Russian government-funded think tank. 

He has agreed to cooperate with the special counsel investigation.  

Source Article from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7692705/Star-witness-against-Roger-Stone-says-feels-horrible-guilty-verdict.html