Two days after the insurrection, he met with Trump for four hours to discuss quietly finishing his term and the potential of impeachment, among other topics. He then flew with him to Texas the next week and called fellow senators, urging them not to support a move to convict Trump in a trial and bar him from future office. In private and public, he has taken on Republicans who are critical of Trump, including McConnell, who he has pushed to change course.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lindsey-graham-donald-trump/2021/02/20/178afc0a-72ca-11eb-a4eb-44012a612cf9_story.html

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/20/neera-tanden-biden-presses-ahead-omb-pick-despite-pushback/4523573001/

When President BidenJoe BidenREAD: House Democrats’ mammoth COVID-19 relief bill House panel unveils .9T relief package Nunes lawsuit against CNN thrown out MORE appeared at a town hall with CNN’s Anderson Cooper this week, he declared that he was “tired of talking about Donald TrumpDonald TrumpUN report says Erik Prince violated arms embargo against Libya: report Lee after Romney’s impeachment vote: There’s enough room in GOP ‘for both of us’ Nunes lawsuit against CNN thrown out MORE” not once but twice. 

“I don’t want to talk about him anymore,” he told Cooper at one point. 

But a couple of minutes later, he was talking about Trump again. 

“You may remember in one of my debates with the former president, I asked him to condemn the Proud Boys and he wouldn’t do it,” Biden said. “He said ‘Stand by, stand ready,’ or whatever the phrase exactly was.” 

A month into his presidency, Biden has had a tough time shaking the ghost of Trump — even with the former president largely silenced by Twitter’s ban on his tweets.

In the first few weeks of Biden’s presidency, Trump’s impeachment trial loomed large, garnering much of the news cycles and headlines. 

The trial was only a week, but it was the dominant story as the Senate considered arguments to acquit or convict Trump. 

Even after it ended, there was a focus on the future of the post-Trump GOP, particularly as the former president traded blows with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellOn The Money: What’s next for Neera Tanden’s nomination The elephant in the room: Trump’s lingering power 17 state attorneys general call for canceling K in student loan debt MORE (R-Ky.).

Much of Biden’s agenda is also about rolling back Trump’s policies. On Friday, the U.S. formally rejoined the Paris climate accords that the U.S. exited under Trump. A day earlier, the Biden administration announced it was open to new talks with Iran after Trump pulled the U.S. out of the nuclear deal spearheaded by former President Obama. 

Democrats also rolled out an immigration reform proposal backed by Biden this week that is a 180-degree turn from the Trump years. 

It all makes Trump difficult to escape even when his all-caps tweets aren’t making headlines on their own. And it perhaps explains some of Biden’s evident frustration during the interview with Cooper.

“It’s kind of like when you wake up from a horrible nightmare,” said one Democrat close to the Biden White House. “You wake up but you’re still haunted by it the next day and maybe the next day after that.”

“And this is worse. It was a nightmare for so many of us for four years. So of course it’s going to linger for a while because it’s a tough thing to get over and because we’re trying to undo so much of the shit he did for four years,” the Democrat added. “That takes time.” 

Trump was also central to Biden’s presidential campaign. If it hadn’t been for Trump, Biden wouldn’t have run for president and his political career may have ended after 2016. 

“President Biden ran against everything Donald Trump did while in office and everything he stood for,” said Tobe Berkovitz, a communications professor at Boston University who has served as a political consultant. “It will be a challenge to pivot away from this line of communication.” 

There are risks to Biden talking about Trump too much, just as there are risks for any president focused on their predecessor. 

Trump was criticized for being focused on erasing Obama’s legacy to the detriment of his own agenda. 

Similarly, Republicans sought to hammer Obama for blaming a laggard economy on his predecessor, former President George W. Bush. 

Berkovitz said Trump “shouldn’t loom over Biden’s presidency,” but acknowledged the difficult balancing act. 

“Biden should be doing everything he can to put some distance between his White House and Trump’s policies and Trump’s White House,” he said. “But it’s tough to go cold turkey.” 

Appearing at the National Institutes of Health earlier this month, Biden went after Trump over his handling of COVID-19, saying he failed to set up adequate vaccination supplies. 

“While scientists did their job in discovering vaccines in record time, my predecessor — I’ll be very blunt about it— did not do his job in getting ready for the massive challenge of vaccinating hundreds of millions,” Biden said in remarks at the NIH. “He did not order enough vaccines. … It was a big mess. It’s going to take time to fix.” 

Vice President Harris has also invoked Trump’s name when talking about the vaccine challenges, saying his administration left no national strategy. 

“In many ways, we are starting from scratch on something that’s been raging for almost an entire year,” she told Axios on HBO. 

Trump can of course be a benefit to Biden, too, by playing the foil. 

“I have always believed that Biden benefits from the chaos of Donald Trump,” said Democratic strategist Joel Payne. “Biden’s decency and relative calm vis a vis Trump is a political benefit for the President and his team.” 

Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons agreed. 

“I don’t know if they wanted it but I bet they don’t mind it right now,” Simmons said. “As much as he reminds us how much of a whirlwind there was during the Trump White House and shows that contrast, it works in his favor.” 

At the same time, many see Trump’s absence from Twitter as benefitting Biden. 

Trump tiptoed back into the spotlight this week with interviews on Fox News and other cable networks after the death of conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh. 

But that wasn’t anything like Trump’s formerly-ever-present Twitter account. 

“There’s been a huge difference,” said David Litt, who served as a speechwriter to former President Obama. “It’s really remarkable to see how much the landscape has changed. If Trump was still on Twitter, the political press would be required to write about it all and it would create pressure on Biden to respond. 

“A Twitter-less Trump does put the Biden team in a much better position,” Litt added. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/539640-biden-seeks-to-escape-trumps-ghost

Police charge forward to disperse protesters in Mandalay, Myanmar, on Saturday. Security forces ratcheted up their pressure against anti-coup protesters, using water cannons, tear gas, slingshots and rubber bullets.

AP


hide caption

toggle caption

AP

Police charge forward to disperse protesters in Mandalay, Myanmar, on Saturday. Security forces ratcheted up their pressure against anti-coup protesters, using water cannons, tear gas, slingshots and rubber bullets.

AP

At least two people were killed during an anti-coup protest in Myanmar in the bloodiest day since the Feb. 1 military takeover that led to the arrest of the country’s de facto leader and kicked off weeks of nearly nonstop demonstrations.

According to multiple reports from Mandalay, the country’s second-largest city, police confronted striking ship workers and other protesters in an hours-long standoff. Some demonstrators are said to have flung projectiles at police, who attempted to disperse the hundreds-strong demonstration by firing off live rounds alongside tear gas, water cannons and rubber bullets. Reuters says witnesses found cartridges for live rounds alongside rubber bullets on the ground.

Both residents and protesters were forced to flee the area as security forces chased after them, The Associated Press reports. Some journalists also fled after being hit by tear gas and slingshot projectiles.

One man died on the scene after being shot in the head and another en route to receiving treatment after being shot in the chest, according to media reports that cited local journalists and medical workers. At least 20 others were injured, according to multiple reports.

Saturday’s deaths follow the death Friday of a young woman who was shot in the head during protests last week. The death of 20-year-old Mya Thwet Thwet Khine marked the first confirmed fatality to occur in the protests, which were spurred by the military takeover and arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi and members of her National League for Democracy party. The junta had seized power, baselessly claiming the landslide win for Suu Kyi’a party in a November election was the result of fraud.

Suu Kyi has been detained since her arrest and been charged with illegally importing walkie-talkies — a charge widely viewed as politically motivated — and violating Article 25 of the National Disaster Management Law.

The junta is facing sanctions from the U.S. and other countries.

Violence in the weeks of demonstrations had largely been limited, but recent protests in Myanmar have been met with crackdowns by security forces.

Earlier in the week in Mandalay, the AP notes, state railway workers joining a civil disobedience movement were met with similar force by security forces. Videos posted on social media showed muzzle flashes and police firing off slingshots and throwing rocks at buildings.

Police also used force in arresting protesters in the northern state of Kachin on Friday.

The army says one police officer has died of injuries sustained during the protests, Reuters reports.

Also on Saturday, in the cities of Yangon and Naypyitaw, young people held ceremonies for Mya Thwet Thwet Khine, the young woman who died Friday. She had been on life support after being shot in the head during protest in the capitol Naypyitaw.

Thousands also marched peacefully in several parts of Myanmar on Saturday, including in the northern town of Myitkyina and in Bagan and Pathein, Reuters reported.

NPR’s Michael Sullivan contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/02/20/969768969/2-killed-in-myanmar-in-worst-day-of-violence-since-feb-1-coup

It’s back to Texas for Heidi Cruz and the kids.

The family of Lone Star State Sen. Ted Cruz was spotted Saturday afternoon lining up at Cancun’s airport for the two-and-a-half-hour flight home.

The senator’s brood had carried on without him during their Wednesday-through-Saturday vacation at the Mexican resort, after Cruz himself was shamed into turning tail and abandoning the tone-deaf trip.

Cruz has faced massive blow-back for traveling to Cancun, with Houston’s own police chief chiding the senator for leaving millions of constituents behind to face historic cold weather, lingering power outages and mounting water shortages.

Even ex-N.J. Gov. Chris Christie has enjoyed a moment of schadenfreude at his expense.

Cruz had at one point blamed the trip on his daughters, who are ages 10 and 12, saying they had asked for the trip and he was just being a “good daddy.”

But now the kids will have to quarantine for seven to ten days from their pricey Houston private school.

The family of Lone Star State Sen. Ted Cruz was spotted Saturday afternoon lining up at Cancun’s airport for the two-and-a-half-hour flight home.

Source Article from https://nypost.com/2021/02/20/heidi-cruz-and-kids-fly-home-to-texas-after-cancun-holiday/

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/20/texas-gov-greg-abbott-thanks-biden-partial-disaster-declaration/4523099001/

The country should begin to thaw early next week, exposing the extent of the storm damage on the East Coast, Southeast and in devastated Texas, where there’s a critical drinking water shortage and many residents remain under a boil-water advisory. 

Officials in Harris County, Texas, the nation’s third most populous county, reported 10 hypothermia deaths on Friday and more than 600 carbon monoxide poisoning cases

Nearly four dozen people in Texas — where some residents froze to death in their homes without power or drinkable water — and nine other states hit by the storm had reportedly died as of Friday.

SOME TEXANS’ ELECTRICITY BILLS SKYROCKET AS HIGH AS $17,000 DURING WINTER STORM

After weeks of subzero temperatures and near-constant snowstorms, temperatures across the U.S. will start to moderate. 

Marny Tackett, front, recreation superintendent with the City of Plano, Josiah Prince, left, and Rebecca Hand, right, Volunteer Resources Coordinator with the City of Plano, hand out water to waiting vehicles at Grace Church in Plano, Texas, Friday, Feb. 19, 2021. In cooperation with the city, the church staff, volunteers, and city representatives have been handing water to those who have had their water shut off or pipes damaged in their homes as a result of the winter storm. (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez)

However, the thaw will be gradual, and the Great Lakes area will continue to see light snow through Sunday morning as a system moves across the Northeast, according to the National Weather Service

TEXAS HUSBAND FROZE TO DEATH IN HIS RECLINER: REPORT

A swath from the Plains to the Northeast will also experience frigid conditions between Sunday and Monday, and the upper Midwest should expect two to four inches of snow during that period.

Farther south, forecasts call for isolated thunderstorms in both the Mississippi Valley and Southeast. It’s a system that will strengthen, producing snow over the central Appalachians and parts of the Northeast on Monday.

In the Northwest, snow and lower-elevation rainfall will continue through the weekend.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

Heavy snowfall is expected across the Cascades and Rockies.

Fox News’ Brie Stimson contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/us/temperatures-climb-storms-deadly-deep-freeze-texas-water

As COVID-19 was breaking out in New York state last March, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order requiring nursing homes to accept patients who were presumed to have the virus. Following the order, about 9,000 COVID patients were brought into nursing homes across the state, likely leading to the virus’s rampant spread in those facilities.

Governor Cuomo responded to his mistake by listening to the demands of one of his top donors: the lobbying group for the nursing home industry. As The Daily Poster reported in May, he granted full corporate legal immunity to nursing homes, all the way up to the C-suite. At the time, New York Democratic Assemblyman Ron Kim warned that the liability protections removed a key deterrent to corporate misbehavior and effectively shielded nursing home executives from legal consequences if their cost-cutting, profit-maximizing decisions endangered lives.

Now the situation has exploded into a full-scale scandal: last week, Cuomo’s administration was caught on tape admitting it was withholding data about how many nursing home residents had been infected with COVID, and how many had died.

“License to kill”? New York Republicans are looking to form an impeachment commission to investigate Governor Andrew Cuomo’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis in nursing homes. Cuomo in New York City, September 8, 2020.
Spencer Platt/Getty

After Kim told The New York Post that it appeared that Cuomo was “trying to dodge having any incriminating evidence,” the governor reportedly lashed out at Kim both publicly and privately, including an alleged late-night phone call in which Cuomo threatened to “destroy” Kim. (A senior Cuomo adviser released a statement denying those threats and questioning Kim’s credibility.)

With federal law enforcement officials reportedly launching a probe into the Cuomo administration’s handling of nursing home deaths, the controversy is expected to be part of this coming week’s confirmation hearings for Attorney General nominee Merrick Garland.

For his part, threats of potential retribution haven’t persuaded Kim to back down from holding Cuomo accountable. On Friday, he called the governor an “abuser” on ABC‘s The View. Now, in a new interview, Kim explains what was really going on in New York’s nursing homes this spring, and how Cuomo’s corporate immunity order allowed nursing home executives to save money even at the expense of their residents’ safety.

What follows is an excerpt of Kim’s discussion with The Daily Poster/Newsweek. The transcript has been edited for clarity and brevity.

New details have emerged about what was going on in New York’s nursing homes last spring, as the pandemic was ravaging the state. What were you seeing and doing last spring?

Let’s start from the beginning. We are notified that COVID is spreading, and everyone is paranoid, no one knows what’s going on. The governor asked for extraordinary powers, and he wanted $40 million of emergency money right away to get ahead of COVID. My colleagues at the time said, “You can’t do this, you can’t support that.” But I actually sponsored that bill. I stood up and defended the governor and the commissioner, saying, “My constituents are completely worried. And despite whatever differences we may have with Cuomo’s administration, we need someone, in light of what’s going on in Washington, to step in.”

A month into it, the nursing home executive order comes out, the March 25 executive order, the infamous one that directs untested COVID patients to nursing homes. And we eventually found out there were 9,000 of these patients that were transferred. That happened, and right away, everyone said this is wrong.

Constituents started reaching out to me, saying things like, “My mom is stuck in a nursing home, and I know that COVID is transmitting in there and I can’t get access. She’s sleeping in a hallway, exposed, no PPE.”

They are outside, protesting, trying to get in. So I get involved and I realize what’s going on. And that’s when I realized the March 25 order and the impact this is having on the ground. And that’s when we started exposing the undercounting.

Just around that time, when I was helping all these constituents, my uncle, who was in a nursing home, passed away with presumed COVID. So I lived that experience personally: the trauma, the pain, of losing someone who died alone in excruciating pain. There are 15,000 other stories like that in New York state.

In April, Governor Cuomo put a provision into the state budget that granted legal immunity to all health care facilities, including nursing homes, and including the executives of those facilities. How did the corporate immunity order affect the situation, and how does it connect to the Cuomo administration underreporting nursing-home data?

Up to 9,000 COVID patients were being sent to nursing homes. And the nursing homes were telling the administration—which now the AG’s report shows—that we can’t take these people in. Like, “Half of our staff got COVID, they’re out. We don’t have enough staff, we don’t have the PPE.” And at that moment, Cuomo decided to give them legal immunity. That was their solution to that crisis, to the industry asking to be included in broad legal immunity.

They decided to protect the business interests of those who should have done everything possible, spent every dollar, to save people’s lives. But the moment they got the legal immunity, it was clear that they felt like they didn’t have to invest anymore in PPE, or hire more staff members. They completely shut down. They had a license to kill. That’s what the immunity was.

Can you clarify what information about the nursing homes was not being released?

They made a decision around May to not release the fatalities of nursing home residents who died in a hospital. In other states, nursing home residents who were transferred and died in a hospital were counted as nursing home residents. But Cuomo’s administration decided to separate that out. They made a unilateral decision to not include that.

We were ranked at number one, number two, for nursing home deaths consistently for a few weeks. And then all of the sudden, once they decoupled the numbers, we were in the middle of the pack. When we asked the commissioner during an oversight hearing in August, “Why aren’t you combining and disclosing the entire data?” their answer was, “Put your questions in writing, we will respond in a couple of weeks.” That’s how we left the oversight hearing.

New York Assemblyman Ron Kim tells Newsweek how Governor Cuomo’s corporate-immunity order affected what happened to nursing home residents. “He was trying to become the national hero against Trump.”
Hugh Hastings/Getty Images

It took them six months, after an AG report and lawsuits, and endless FOILs [Freedom of Information Law requests], to finally release the undercounted numbers, which was the premise of our private meeting with [Cuomo aide] Melissa DeRosa that included the chairs of the oversight committees from the hearing last week, last Wednesday.

During that call, DeRosa seemed to say that the administration made a deliberate decision not to release the information for fear of political or other consequences. Is that how you read it?

It almost felt like that movie with Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson, “A Few Good Men.” They had the script, my colleagues were just grilling and asking questions and interrupting. And at a point DeRosa jumps in and says, “Do you want the truth? You know, I’ll tell you the truth.” And that’s where she said, “This is what happened. Donald Trump was targeting us. And we could not let the Department of Justice have the data because we didn’t know how they were going to use that against our administration.”

Do you think they’re wrong to have feared the Justice Department misusing, or politically weaponizing, the information?

No. I think Donald Trump toxicity is real. The right-wing insurrectionist type of conservatism that we saw is all real. But what they did was not share information in real time that we could have used to legislate. If they shared all that data, we would have passed different policies. We would have gone in a different direction. We could have repealed legal immunity [for nursing home executives] entirely. Instead, they chose to not share that information with us because they didn’t want the Department of Justice to take a look at it.

Why was the Cuomo administration hiding data about nursing home deaths from state lawmakers?

That’s one of the questions that we have remaining. I do not know who was in that room pushing those policies. I don’t know exactly why they made a choice to hide that information.

I think others have surmised that it would make him look bad politically. He was in the middle of a book tour. He was trying to become the national hero against Trump. Having the highest number of [nursing home] deaths would probably not fit that narrative. I think that’s the best-case scenario, that it was just something out of vanity and personal fame.

I think the worst-case scenario is something that’s way, way more disturbing, which is that they made really horrible decisions. For example, how did these experimental drugs get into state-owned nursing homes, and veterans died taking them? Who made that decision and who had access to the governor’s office, directing that type of policy? I think there’s a lot to uncover there. My gut feeling is that there’s a lot more than just protecting Cuomo the politician. I think they made a lot of horrible policy decisions driven by industry and businesses. And that’s what they’re afraid for the public to know.

In August, you passed the bill to limit the corporate immunity order. The legislature didn’t have access to information at that time about what was happening in the nursing homes. With access to that information, would you have been able to push a full repeal of the order?

Right. If we had the full data set, I think we had a much stronger argument to repeal legal immunity.

What about Cuomo’s argument that the immunity order was necessary, because it was the only way to force nursing homes to take patients who might not have otherwise had somewhere to go?

There are two things. And both illustrate the incompetence of his managerial skills. The first part is they had already given out the immunity for volunteers and hospital workers through an executive order on March 23. I don’t think anyone argued against that. Yes, we need to recruit a lot of people and they need to feel safe that when they’re treating COVID, that they couldn’t be sued the next day if it wasn’t something horrible. You know, I think we understood that we needed to get volunteers. We extended the Good Samaritan Law, fine.

But the moment that they expanded beyond that and included the executives, the businesses, the corporations behind them, that’s when you knew this was no longer about volunteerism, but about protecting business interests. And the data showed that despite what the governor put out there, we had space in hospitals, we had a surplus of ventilators.

The trend was going in a different direction, but he still moved people out of nursing homes because, in my opinion, they were making space for the high-end surgeries, other things that are more profitable in the hospitals.

What do you make of Cuomo’s reaction to the scrutiny his administration is now receiving?

It’s a complete distraction. Acknowledge your mistakes, make an apology. What he has done over and over is try to implicate the assembly, the Senate, and punt and distract from the actual problem at hand. He does not want to talk about whether Melissa said there was a cover-up for political reasons. No reporter has been called on to grill him on that question.

He is good at punting and distracting, so he can get the public to focus on something else. But the facts are the facts, and it’s not going to go away and he’s in the wrong, and he needs to face the reality and the truth that he did something that could constitute an obstruction of justice by hiding information from the Department of Justice for his own political gain.

Correction 2/20, 10:00 a.m.: Ron Kim’s name was misspelled in the headline in an earlier version; this has been corrected.

Source Article from https://www.newsweek.com/andrew-cuomo-caved-donors-he-shielded-nursing-home-bosses-ron-king-says-1570702

As part of its efforts to wind down a Trump-era policy that kept tens of thousands of asylum-seekers outside U.S. territory, the Biden administration on Friday admitted the first group of migrants who had been previously required to wait in Mexico for their immigration court hearings.

U.S. border officials processed 25 Latin American asylum-seekers at the San Ysidro port of entry in southern California and allowed them to stay in the country for the duration of their proceedings. 

The Jewish Family Service of San Diego received the asylum applicants, who were required to test negative for the coronavirus, and transported them to a hotel in the area so they could quarantine, according to the non-profit’s chief executive officer, Michael Hopkins. The group included six families and five individuals from Honduras, Peru, Nicaragua, Guatemala and Cuba. 

“It’s the beginning of a new day for our country,” Hopkins told CBS News. “The Remain-in-Mexico program was in many ways inhumane.”

A U.S. government asylum officer who has interviewed people enrolled in the Trump-era policy praised the Biden administration’s effort, saying migrants allowed into the U.S. will now “have their claims fairly adjudicated.”  

“Today was a day filled with hope. We finally saw 25 people be welcomed with dignity,” Taylor Levy, an attorney who has helped dozens of asylum-seekers who were returned to Mexico, told CBS News. “It’s such a wonderful sigh of relief that finally, at least for the 25 people, there is going to be justice and hope.”

Migrants seeking asylum hearings wait at the border at the El Chaparral Port of Entry in Tijuana, Mexico, on Friday, Feb. 19, 2021. 

Bloomberg


To deter U.S.-bound migration, the Trump administration in 2019 enacted a program it dubbed the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), which ultimately led to more than 70,000 non-Mexican asylum-seekers being sent back to Mexico to await their U.S. court hearings.

Many were returned to places in northern Mexico plagued by violence and crime and waited months and even years for their U.S. court hearings while in squalid migrant tent camps. The largest camp is in Matamoros, Tamaulipas, an area the U.S. State Department warns Americans not to visit. 

The group Human Rights First documented more than 1,500 reports of assault, kidnapping, rape, threats and even murder against migrants the U.S. returned to Mexico under the MPP policy, according to a list updated Friday.

The chances of securing legal assistance also proved to be slim for most migrants returned to Mexico. More than 65,000 of the asylum-seekers subjected to the policy did not have lawyers representing them in court, according to government data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.

The Department of Homeland Security stopped placing asylum applicants in the MPP program shortly after the inauguration of President Biden, who strongly denounced the practice during his presidential campaign. 

The admission of 25 asylum-seekers in California on Friday marked the start of a new process the Biden administration created with the help of non-profits, international groups and the United Nations refugee agency to gradually take in migrants with pending Remain-in-Mexico cases so they can stay with family or friends in the U.S.

“Today, we took the first step to start safely, efficiently, and humanely processing eligible individuals at the border,” DHS secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement.  

An estimated 25,000 people could be eligible for phase 1 of the process, but the number of asylum-seekers that will be admitted during this stage will likely be less as many migrants with pending U.S. cases left Mexico and returned to their home countries. 

Recently apprehended migrants who were never enrolled in the program are not eligible for this process and continue to face rapid expulsion under a Trump-era public health order the Biden administration has retained for now. In his statement Friday, Mayorkas warned would-be migrants not to undertake the “perilous journey” north.

“Travel restrictions at the border remain in place and will be enforced,” he said.

After waiting months and sometimes years in Mexico, some people seeking asylum in the United States are being allowed into the country starting Friday as they wait for courts to decide on their cases.

Bloomberg


The U.S. is set to start processing more eligible asylum-seekers in the Texas’ Rio Grande Valley on Monday and in El Paso later next week. Once fully operational, ports of entry at these initial locations are expected to process roughly 300 migrants per day.

On Friday, the United Nations refugee agency unveiled a website where eligible migrants can register to receive an appointment to enter the U.S. DHS has said it will prioritize the admission of asylum-seekers who have waited in Mexico the longest, as well as those who are medically vulnerable or who face imminent danger.

The Biden administration is requiring all migrants to test negative for the coronavirus at staging locations in Mexico before being allowed into the U.S. Asylum-seekers who test positive will need to isolate in Mexico for 10 days. After completing that isolation period and not experiencing fever for 24 hours, those individuals could again be considered to enter the U.S., the State Department said Thursday.

DHS has said asylum-seekers allowed into the U.S. under the Remain-in-Mexico drawdown will generally not be sent to detention centers. Instead, they will be referred to local shelters and groups like Jewish Family Service so they can access temporary housing before leaving for their respective destinations in the U.S.

Hopkins, the CEO of the Jewish Family Service in San Diego, said his group plans to continue using hotels to provide temporary housing for asylum-seekers. Through private donations and funds from California and the federal government, Hopkins’ group will be offering newly admitted migrants clothing, food, other necessities like diapers and help arranging transportation. 

“Most come over with very little money and very little possessions,” Hopkins said.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/asylum-seekers-united-states-biden/

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny stands in a Moscow courtroom on Saturday. The court turned down an appeal against his prison sentence.

Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny stands in a Moscow courtroom on Saturday. The court turned down an appeal against his prison sentence.

Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP

A court in Moscow has turned down an appeal by the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny against his prison sentence, the latest legal defeat for the man who has emerged as the Kremlin’s most vocal critic.

Navalny, 44, was arrested in January after returning home from Germany, where he had been recovering from a near-fatal poisoning that he and Western governments have blamed on the Kremlin. The government of Russian President Vladimir Putin has denied the accusation, and earlier this month sentenced Navalny to 32 months in prison, saying he had broken the terms of a probation agreement tied to a 2014 embezzlement conviction. Navalny has called that case, and others against him, politically motivated.

Speaking from inside a courtroom cage on Saturday, Navalny sought to challenge the court’s determination that he was in violation of his parole, noting that he was convalescing in Germany under the glare of an international firestorm.

“I don’t want to show off a lot, but the whole world knew where I was,” Navalny said. “Once I’d recovered, I bought a plane ticket and came home.”

The judge rejected the argument, but did abbreviate his sentence by six weeks, ruling that the month-and-a-half that Navalny spent under house arrest in 2015 can count toward his prison term.

Navalny’s case has galvanized the opposition movement in Russia, sparking waves of protest in cities and towns across the country in January. The Russian government responded to the demonstrations with a mass show of force, detaining an estimated 11,000 people over the course of back-to-back weekends.

Yet even from prison the anti-corruption crusader has managed to frustrate the Russian authorities. In January, his team released a scathing investigation accusing Putin of corruption and detailing the construction of a lavish Black Sea palace allegedly built for the Russian leader using ill-gotten funds. The Kremlin has denied that Putin owns any such palace, calling the investigation “pure nonsense.”

Navalny has also found support from across much of the international community. Late last month, Secretary of State Antony Blinken called on the Russian government to release Navalny, and in a ruling on Tuesday, the European Court of Human Rights followed suit, citing “the nature and extent of risk to the applicant’s life.” Russia responded to the order by the Strasbourg, France-based court — of which Moscow is a member — by calling the ruling unlawful.

Addressing the court just before the verdict on Saturday, Navalny urged his supporters to press on in their fight against corruption, quoting from the Bible and even comparing Putin at one point to the villain from “Harry Potter.”

“The government’s task is to scare you and then persuade you that you are alone,” Navalny said. “Our Voldemort in his palace also wants me to feel cut off.”

“To live is to risk it all,” he said. “Otherwise, you’re just an inert chunk of randomly assembled molecules drifting wherever the universe blows you.”

Navalny was due back in court later on Saturday in a separate case for which he faces charges of defaming a World War II veteran — a charge that carries a possible fine of 950,000 rubles, or roughly $13,000.

The libel case stems from a pro-Kremlin video put out last year that sought to rally support for constitutional changes that could keep Putin in power until 2036. Navalny called participants in the video — which included actors, other celebrities, sports figures and one war veteran — “traitors” and “people without conscience,” but he has rejected the slander charges against him, describing them as part of a larger effort to undermine him.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/02/20/969716772/russian-court-denies-appeal-of-jailed-kremlin-critic-alexei-navalny

Authorities in the US have deported a 95-year-old man who acknowledged working as a guard in a Nazi concentration camp.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or Ice, said in a statement that Friedrich Karl Berger, a German citizen, was sent back to Germany this month for serving as a guard of a Neuengamme concentration camp subcamp near Hamburg in 1945.

The case was investigated by the US Department of Justice. Berger was ordered expelled by a Memphis, Tennessee, court in February 2020 but will not face trial in Germany because prosecutors dropped the case against him for lack of evidence.

According to an Ice statement, Berger served at the subcamp near Meppen, Germany, where prisoners – Russian, Polish, Dutch, Jewish and others – were held in “atrocious” conditions and worked “to the point of exhaustion and death”.

Berger has admitted serving as a guard for a few weeks near the end of the war but has said he did not observe any abuse or killings, news agencies have reported.

Berger admitted he guarded prisoners. He also accompanied prisoners on the forced evacuation of the camp that resulted in the deaths of 70 prisoners.

He had been living in the US since 1959.

A spokesman for the prosecutor’s office in Celle said police in the German state of Hesse had been asked to question Berger on his return to Germany. A police spokesman said there was no live investigation linked to him and he is a free individual and has not been taken in custody.

In recent years, prosecutors have brought charges against several former Nazis, seizing the last opportunity to secure justice for the millions who perished in concentration camps.

Earlier this month, prosecutors charged a 100-year-old German man with being an accessory to 3,518 murders committed while he was allegedly a guard at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp.

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/20/us-deports-former-concentration-camp-guard-95-germany

(CBS NEWS) – President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief plan would provide a third round of federal stimulus checks to millions of Americans. Yet while lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed support for the proposal, there is less agreement on who should be eligible for the $1,400 direct payments.

Congressional Democrats are moving forward with Mr. Biden’s relief plan through a process called budget reconciliation, which would allow the Senate to approve the effort without any Republican support. As the process moves forward, House and Senate committees will discuss spending priorities before drafting and voting on legislation.

On February 4, the Senate approved a bipartisan plan introduced by Democratic Senator Joe Manchin and Republican Senator Susan Collins to block “upper income citizens” from the next round of stimulus checks. Notably, however, the plan doesn’t define “upper income.” The measure would ensure that “the struggling families that need it most” would receive the checks, Collins said in a statement.

The amendment adds “uncertainty whether all the Senate Democrats will support President Joe Biden’s full plan, with Joe Manchin already expressing doubts about the need to send $1,400 stimulus checks to those that might not need the money,” Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics, told investors in a research note.

On Thursday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told CNBC that the stimulus package should move through Congress over the “next couple of weeks,” getting closer to enactment. She noted that Mr. Biden wants “to make sure that [the next stimulus check is] appropriately targeted so they go to people in need. You know, not to very high-income people who don’t need it.”

But, she added, the economy is still in need of stimulus, with millions of families continuing to cope with income and job losses. “We have an unemployment rate that if properly measured in some sense, is really close to 10%,” Yellen said. “In addition to over 9 million people unemployed, we have 4 million who’ve dropped out of the labor force, another 2 million who have seen reduced hours.”

Are stimulus checks helping the economy?

The U.S. economy continues to struggle with higher-than-normal layoffs and other setbacks. Almost 800,000 people applied for jobless benefits in the week ending February 6, a dip from the previous week, the Labor Department said Thursday. At the same time, new economic data released on February 17 indicates that the second stimulus check is working as intended, with retail sales jumping 5.3% in January, or five times higher than expected.

“Those outsized gains in big ticket discretionary items suggests the $900 billion fiscal stimulus passed late last year is working as intended — with most Americans receiving $600 per person stimulus checks early in the month, while monthly unemployment insurance payments were increased,” noted Michael Pearce, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics, in a report.

At the same time, it’s clear that millions of households are still suffering from income and job losses. The number of Americans applying for jobless aid rose last week to 861,000, reversing several weeks of steady declines, the Labor Department said on Thursday. The latest jobless numbers “paint a bleak labor market picture,” Oxford Economics economist Lydia Boussour said in a Thursday research report.

“The economy remains weak, the jobs recovery has lost momentum, and there are nearly 10 million fewer jobs than in February of 2020,” the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said on Thursday. It added that millions should be helped by Mr. Biden’s proposed stimulus package.

House Democrats completed their markups of the bill without any major changes to Mr. Biden’s $1.9 trillion proposal, Height Security analyst Hunter Hammond wrote in a February 12 research note. The bill will move through more House committees, likely reaching a vote during the week of February 22, he said. The analyst predicts that the Senate will vote on the bill by the beginning of March.

Here’s what the experts are saying about the next stimulus check and who may be eligible.

Why are income limits an issue?

The first two government stimulus checks — $1,200 for the first round and $600 for the second round — also set income thresholds that made higher-income households ineligible for the payments. In both earlier rounds, single people who earned up to $75,000 and married couples who earned up to $150,000 received the full payments.

People with higher earnings got smaller payouts as their incomes rose, until the payments cut off entirely for higher-income families. In the first round, the phaseout stood at $99,000 for single people and $198,000 for married couples.

In the second round, the phaseout was slightly lower — $87,000 a year per single person and $174,000 per married couple. But that was a function of the smaller size of the checks, given that the law reduced both checks by 5% for every $100 earned above the income limits for full payments.

Recent economic research indicates that finances have stabilized for many middle- and higher-income families who have managed to work from home during the coronavirus pandemic. That is stirring debate among lawmakers and experts over whether the direct aid should be targeted toward lower-income households, who are more likely to feel the ongoing economic impact of COVID-19 and its spread.

Households earning under $78,000 annually quickly spent their second stimulus checks after receiving them in January, while those with incomes above that level socked away most of the money, according to research from the Opportunity Insights Economic Tracker, a nonprofit group led by Harvard economics professor Raj Chetty.

“Since the middle of June, the recession in jobs for higher-income households is over — employment has been just like it was before the pandemic” because their jobs can be done remotely, Michael Stepner, an economist with Opportunity Insights, told CBS MoneyWatch.

Are there new income limits to get a check?

Not yet, as nothing has been decided. Still, Mr. Biden has expressed a willingness to negotiate, with the president saying he would insist on $1,400 checks while suggesting he was willing to direct the checks to people who need the most help.

That could result in Democrats lowering the income threshold to qualify for a payment to single people who earn $50,000 or less and married couples with income of $100,000 or less, according to the Washington Post. If that occurs, millions of households who received the prior two stimulus checks likely wouldn’t qualify for the third.

For instance, the IRS said it sent 30 million payments to households earning more than $75,000 during the first round of stimulus checks. Under the income thresholds reported by the Washington Post, it’s likely many of those households wouldn’t qualify for the full $1,400 check.

But on February 8, House Democrats pushed back on those lower limits, proposing to keep the income thresholds at the same level as for the previous checks. That would ensure the full $1,400 relief payments would go to individuals making $75,000 or less, while couples earning $150,000 would be entitled to $2,800 relief payments. The payments would ratchet down for incomes above those levels, phasing out entirely for single people earning $100,000 and couples earning $200,000.

“There is a discussion right now about what that threshold will look like. A conclusion has not been finalized,” said White House press secretary Jen Psaki.

At a CNN event on Tuesday, Mr. Biden emphasized his commitment to a large stimulus effort. “The overwhelming consensus is, in order to grow the economy a year, two, three and four down the line, we can’t spend too much,” Mr. Biden said. “Now’s the time we should be spending. Now is the time to go big.”

What do the experts say?

Wall Street analysts aren’t banking on many changes, with Goldman Sachs expecting the same income thresholds as with the first checks — $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for married couples.

Some lawmakers are pushing back against limiting the payout to a smaller group of households, such as Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont.

“It is absurd that some Democrats think we should tell a worker making $52,000 a year that they are ‘too rich’ and cannot get the full $2000 benefit we promised,” he wrote February 7 on Twitter.

The ranks of adults experiencing financial hardship in January was little changed from December, despite the rollout of the second round of stimulus checks, according to Morning Consult economist John Leer. Most of the struggles were experienced by people earning less than $50,000 in annual income, he said.

A third round of $1,400 checks would allow 22.6 million adults to pay their expenses for more than four months without going into more debt or eating into their savings, his analysis found.

“Low-income households and parents were the most desperate to receive their second stimulus checks and are the most likely to need additional stimulus going forward,” Leer wrote in his analysis. “According to a survey conducted at the beginning of February, Americans with annual household incomes under $50,000 already spent roughly 67 percent of money they received.”

By comparison, households earning more than $100,000 spent about 50% of their stimulus checks, his analysis found.

Some lawmakers are pushing back against limiting the payout to a smaller group of households, such as Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont.

“It is absurd that some Democrats think we should tell a worker making $52,000 a year that they are ‘too rich’ and cannot get the full $2000 benefit we promised,” he wrote February 7 on Twitter.

The ranks of adults experiencing financial hardship in January was little changed from December, despite the rollout of the second round of stimulus checks, according to Morning Consult economist John Leer. Most of the struggles were experienced by people earning less than $50,000 in annual income, he said.

A third round of $1,400 checks would allow 22.6 million adults to pay their expenses for more than four months without going into more debt or eating into their savings, his analysis found.

“Low-income households and parents were the most desperate to receive their second stimulus checks and are the most likely to need additional stimulus going forward,” Leer wrote in his analysis. “According to a survey conducted at the beginning of February, Americans with annual household incomes under $50,000 already spent roughly 67 percent of money they received.”

By comparison, households earning more than $100,000 spent about 50% of their stimulus checks, his analysis found.

When would I get a $1,400 check?

Not for several weeks, analysts predict. The House and Senate committees must first draft and vote on legislation. It’s likely that the relief bill would be passed by mid-March, Barclays analysts said in a February 10 research note. Democratic lawmakers have said they want to pass a new relief bill before the current $300 in weekly additional jobless aid expires on March 14.

“As we have written, we continue to expect a $1-2 trillion stimulus package – an early estimate that seems very reasonable in hindsight – by mid-March, when the most recent extension for unemployment assistance expires,” Barclays analysts wrote. “If policymakers need more time to finalize the details, they may consider a short-term extension” of unemployment aid.

Once the relief bill is passed, it must be signed by Mr. Biden. After that, the IRS would direct stimulus checks to eligible households. Based on past payment schedules, checks could arrive via direct deposit within a week of Mr. Biden signing the bill.

However, people who don’t have banking accounts or payment information on file with the IRS would likely have to wait longer for paper checks or prepaid debit cards to arrive in the mail.

Not for several weeks, analysts predict. The House and Senate committees must first draft and vote on legislation. It’s likely that the relief bill would be passed by mid-March, Barclays analysts said in a February 10 research note. Democratic lawmakers have said they want to pass a new relief bill before the current $300 in weekly additional jobless aid expires on March 14.

“As we have written, we continue to expect a $1-2 trillion stimulus package – an early estimate that seems very reasonable in hindsight – by mid-March, when the most recent extension for unemployment assistance expires,” Barclays analysts wrote. “If policymakers need more time to finalize the details, they may consider a short-term extension” of unemployment aid.

Once the relief bill is passed, it must be signed by Mr. Biden. After that, the IRS would direct stimulus checks to eligible households. Based on past payment schedules, checks could arrive via direct deposit within a week of Mr. Biden signing the bill.

However, people who don’t have banking accounts or payment information on file with the IRS would likely have to wait longer for paper checks or prepaid debit cards to arrive in the mail.

With reporting by the Associated Press.

Copyright 2021 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved.

Source Article from https://www.kktv.com/2021/02/20/third-stimulus-check-will-you-get-a-1400-check/

Millions of Americans in the South are heading into another night of freezing temperatures without clean water or enough to eat. At food banks and water distribution sites, lines now stretch as long as a mile.

President Biden says he’ll sign a new emergency declaration for the state of Texas, where half of the state is still under a boil water notice. Millions more in Louisiana and Mississippi are facing the same crisis Friday night.

Things are so bad in San Antonio that firefighters struggled to get water from the hydrants to fight off an enormous blaze. Thousands of homes have been destroyed by pipes that have burst and families are now worried how they’ll pay for the clean-up.

At least 44 deaths have been linked to severe weather this week. The economic toll from the storms could reach as high as $50 billion.

In Houston, Andrew Rudnick has called at least 100 plumbers to repair his burst pipes. Rudnick and his wife Megan have a 6-month-old daughter, Reese, and they’re desperate for help.

“What’s it like having a 6-month-old and no water in your house for days on end?” CBS News asked.

“It’s scary to have to ask a neighbor to use their outdoor hose to fill a pot so that you can boil water for your baby’s bottles,” Megan said.

They’re also worried about mold and may have to tear down the walls themselves.

“It’s definitely overwhelming, we’re just talking about where we’re going to stay tonight,” Andrew Rudnick said. 

Half the state’s population — more than 14 million — still don’t have drinkable water. In the Dallas area, they’re preparing to give out 25,000 meal kits this weekend. Beyond Texas, taps are dry in parts of Louisiana and Mississippi as crews race to thaw frozen water mains.

The storm stopped millions in their tracks — but not Jenny Passman’s baby. She had to give birth in her living room, with no power or running water.

It could be next week before the boil water advisory is lifted, according to Texas officials. 

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-water-crisis-winter-storm-power-outages/



WASHINGTON (Reuters) — President Joe Biden’s push for a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill took a step forward on Friday as a U.S. House of Representatives committee unveiled the legislation Democrats hope to pass by late next week.




The 591-page bill, stitched together by the House Budget Committee, would carry out Biden’s proposals to provide additional money for COVID-19 vaccines and other medical equipment.






Biden toured a Pfizer vaccine manufacturing plant in Portage, Michigan, amid efforts to ramp up production, with only about 15% of the U.S. population vaccinated against the coronavirus so far.




He said he was open to proposals to make the package less expensive. Referring to Republican critics, Biden said, “Let me ask them what would they have me cut, what would they have me leave out.”




Besides the additional funding for medical supplies, major components of the massive aid plan focus on stimulating the country’s economy, which has struggled over the past year under job layoffs and shuttered businesses resulting from a pandemic that has killed nearly 500,000 Americans. The plan would offer direct payments to households, extended federal unemployment benefits, aid to state and local governments, and other steps.






House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she was aiming for a vote in the Democratic-controller chamber on passing the bill — a top priority of the new Democratic Biden administration — by the end of next week.




Earlier on Friday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a fellow Democrat, said his deeply divided chamber will pass the bill before March 14, when the latest round of federal unemployment benefits expire.




While Schumer said he welcomed “constructive amendments” by Republicans, he added in a letter to rank-and-file Democrats: “Make no mistake: the era of Mitch McConnell’s legislative graveyard is over.”




Senator McConnell, a Republican, served as majority leader from 2015-2020 and had proudly labeled himself the “Grim Reaper” of legislative initiatives from the Democratic House.




Included in the House bill is a controversial proposal to gradually raise the federal minimum wage, now set at $7.25 an hour, to $15 by 2025.






The provision faces multiple difficulties: Republicans oppose it and at least two moderate Senate Democrats have warned they, too, would vote against it, which would sink the wage increase in a Senate split 50-50.




More importantly, the Senate parliamentarian might prohibit the measure altogether, under arcane Senate rules governing “reconciliation” bills such as this one that allow it to move through the chamber by simple majority votes. Most other bills need to have the backing of at least 60 senators to clear procedural hurdles.




Read the full 591-page bill for yourself:






The House Budget Committee is set to meet Monday to weigh amendments to the bill before sending it to the full House for debate and passage.




(Reporting by Richard Cowan; Additional reporting by Alexandra Alper in Portage, Michigan; Editing by Leslie Adler and Diane Craft)




© Copyright Thomson Reuters 2021



Source Article from https://myfox8.com/news/stimulus-check-latest-house-democrats-advance-1-9-trillion-covid-19-aid-bill/

A Moscow court on Saturday rejected Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny’s appeal against his prison sentence, even as the country faced a top European rights court’s order to free the Kremlin’s most prominent foe.

Speaking before the verdict, Navalny urged Russians to stand up to the Kremlin in a fiery speech mixing references to the Bible and “Harry Potter.”

WHITE HOUSE SAYS NO G-7 INVITE FOR RUSSIA

A lower court sentenced Navalny earlier this month to two years and eight months in prison for violating terms of his probation while recuperating in Germany from a nerve agent poisoning that he blames on the Kremlin. Russian authorities have rejected the accusation.

Navalny, 44, an anti-corruption crusader and President Vladimir Putin’s most vocal critic, appealed the prison sentence and asked to be released. The Moscow City Court’s judge on Saturday only slightly reduced his sentence to just over 2 1/2 years in prison, ruling that a month-and-half Navalny spent under house arrest in early 2015 will be deducted from his sentence.

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny gestures as he stands in a cage in the Babuskinsky District Court in Moscow, Russia, Saturday, Feb. 20, 2021. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)

The activist’s arrest and imprisonment have fueled a huge wave of protests across Russia. Authorities responded with a sweeping crackdown, detaining about 11,000 people, many of whom were fined or given jail terms ranging from seven to 15 days.

Speaking before the verdict, Navalny referenced the Bible as well as “Harry Potter” and the animated sitcom “Rick and Morty” as he urged Russians to resist pressure from the authorities and challenge the Kremlin to build a fairer and more prosperous country.

RUSSIA MOVES TO EXTINGUISH PRO-BAVALNY ‘NLASHLIGHT’ PROTESTS

“The government’s task is to scare you and then persuade you that you are alone,” he said. “Our Voldemort in his palace also wants me to feel cut off,” he added, in a reference to Putin.

“To live is to risk it all,” he continued. “Otherwise, you’re just an inert chunk of randomly assembled molecules drifting wherever the universe blows you.”

Navalny also addressed the judge and the prosecutor, arguing that they could have a much better life in a new Russia.

“Just imagine how wonderful life would be without constant lying,” he said. “Imagine how great it would be to work as a judge when no one would be able to call you and give you directions what verdicts to issue.”

He insisted that he was unable to report to the authorities in line with his probation requirements while he was convalescing in Germany after his poisoning, emphasizing that he returned to Russia immediately after his health allowed.

“I wasn’t hiding,” he said. “The entire world knew where I was.”

GUN-WAVING ROBBER HOLDS UP TV REPORTER, CREW WHILE FILMING IN ECUADOR

Navalny said he was an atheist before but has come to believe in God, adding that his faith helped him face his challenges. He said he believed the Bible saying that those who hunger and thirst for righteousness are blessed, and that he felt no regret in returning home.

A police van carrying the Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny, left, escorted by road police vehicles arrives at the Babushkinsky district court prior to the start of his trial in Moscow, Russia, early Saturday, Feb. 20, 2021. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)

“Even though our country is built on injustice and we all face it, we also see that millions of people want righteousness,” Navalny told the court. “They want the righteousness and sooner or later they will have it.”

Russia has rejected Western criticism of Navalny’s arrest and the crackdown on demonstrations as meddling in its internal affairs.

In a ruling Tuesday, the European Court of Human Rights ordered the Russian government to release Navalny, citing “the nature and extent of risk to the applicant’s life.” The Strasbourg-based court noted that Navalny has contested Russian authorities’ argument that they had taken sufficient measures to safeguard his life and well-being in custody following the nerve agent attack.

The Russian government has rebuffed the Strasbourg-based court’s demand, describing the ruling as unlawful and “inadmissible” meddling in Russia’s affairs.

In the past, Moscow has abided by the ECHR’s rulings awarding compensations to Russian citizens who have contested verdicts in Russian courts, but it never faced a demand by the European court to set a convict free.

In a sign of its long-held annoyance with the Strasbourg court’s verdicts, Russia last year adopted a constitutional amendment declaring the priority of national legislation over international law. Russian authorities might now use that provision to reject the ECHR’s ruling.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

Later on Saturday, Navalny will also face proceedings in a separate case on charges of defaming a World War II veteran. Navalny, who called the 94-year-old veteran and other people featured in a pro-Kremlin video “corrupt stooges,” “people without conscience” and “traitors,” has rejected the slander charges and described them as part of official efforts to disparage him.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/world/moscow-court-rejects-navalnys-appeal

ORLANDO, Fla. — Gov. Ron DeSantis laid out a new legislative proposal Friday to restrict voting by mail, which is a method most often used in the past by his own political party.

That is, until the 2020 presidential election, when, for the first time in years, more Florida Democrats voted by mail than Republicans

The proposal also comes despite no major problems with the 2020 election in Florida.

“Last November, Florida held the smoothest, most successful election of any state in the country,” DeSantis said in a statement. “While we should celebrate this feat, we should not rest on our laurels. Today, we are taking actions to ensure Florida remains a leader on key issues regarding our electoral process, such as ballot integrity, public access to the election information, transparency of election reporting, and more.”

The governor’s office released a series of highlights the proposal would address, including several measures that are already required or limited by law

Ballot Integrity

  • Address the use of ballot drop boxes.
  • Address ballot harvesting so that no person may possess ballots other than their own and their immediate family.
  • No mass mailing of vote-by-mail ballots—only voters who request a ballot should receive a ballot.
  • Vote-by-mail requests must be made each election year.
  • Vote by mail ballot signatures must match the most recent signature on file.

“Ballot harvesting” is already considered a first degree misdemeanor crime in Florida.

Florida Statute 104.0616 states: “Any person who provides or offers to provide, and any person who accepts, a pecuniary or other benefits in exchange for distributing, ordering, requesting, collecting, delivering, or otherwise physically possessing more than two vote-by-mail ballots per election in addition to his or her own ballot or a ballot belonging to an immediate family member, except as provided in ss. 101.6105-101.694, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree…” 

Supervisors of Elections do not currently mass mail unrequested vote-by-mail ballots, also called “absentee ballots” in Florida. Current law also requires a voter’s signature on file with the state to match that on the returned mail ballot.

Florida is among 24 states and Washington D.C. that currently allow someone chosen by the voter to return their ballot. Twelve states define individuals who are eligible to return a voter’s ballot, such as a family member or caregiver. Alabama is the lone state that requires only the voter themselves to return their mail ballot.

“A vote-by-mail ballot refers to a ballot that you request and pick-up or have delivered to you without having to vote at the polls during early voting or on Election Day,” Florida Department of State’s Division of Elections has posted online. “A voter must first be registered to vote before he or she can request a vote-by-mail ballot. Unless otherwise specified, a request to receive a vote-by-mail ballot covers all elections through the end of the calendar year for the second ensuing regularly scheduled general election. If a vote-by-mail ballot is returned undeliverable, it will cancel a request for future elections and must be renewed.” 

Transparency in the Elections Process

  • Political parties and candidates cannot be shut out from observing the signature matching process.
  • Supervisors of Elections must post over-vote ballots to be considered by the canvassing board on their website before the canvassing board meets.
  • Prohibits counties from receiving grants from private third-party organizations for “get out the vote” initiatives.

Transparency in Elections Reporting

  • Requires real-time reporting of voter turnout data at the precinct level.
  • Supervisors of Elections must report how many ballots have been requested, how many have been received, and how many are left to be counted.

In Florida, candidates, campaigns, and political parties can assign “poll watchers” and volunteers to review every step of the election process, including observing a county’s election canvassing board to ensure a fair election.

Florida law also allows ballots and early votes to be counted as soon as they are received — often weeks before Election Day — thus allowing Supervisors of Elections to post preliminary turnout and vote data as soon as polls across the state are closed. Central Florida Supervisors of Elections also regularly post hourly and daily election data, including the differences in ballots requested and cast.

“The Florida Supervisors of Elections (FSE), an association of Florida’s 67 elections officials, has long served as a resource for legislators as they consider changes to Florida’s election laws,” FSE said in a statement. “While we have not yet seen the proposed legislation referenced in the press release issued by Gov. Ron DeSantis today, we look forward to sharing insight with legislators as to how any proposed legislation might impact the conduct of elections or the voter experience in Florida.”

DeSantis’ proposal was immediately met with criticism of being a political ploy.

“Please explain what you meant when you just said ‘something needs to be done’ about vote-by-mail drop boxes and they must be ‘reined in.’ Asking for millions of Republican and Democratic Florida voters who used them in 2020,” Orlando area State Rep. Carlos Guillermo Smith (D) tweeted shortly after the governor’s press conference Friday.

Florida Republicans traditionally vote by mail more than Florida Democrats; that was until 2020.

In the most recent election (2020), Florida Democrats cast 683,487 more votes by mail than Florida Republicans:

  • 2020 Republican Votes by Mail: 1,506,223
  • 2020 Florida Democrat Votes by Mail: 2,189,710
  • 2020 No Party Affiliation Votes by Mail: 1,159,744

Comparatively, Florida Republicans cast 54,208 more vote by mail ballots than Florida Democrats in 2018; 58,244 more vote by mail ballots than Democrats in 2016, and 127,668 more vote by mail ballots than Democrats in 2014.

  • 2018 Republican Votes by Mail: 1,080,808
  • 2018 Florida Democrat Votes by Mail: 1,026,600
  • 2018 No Party Affiliation Votes by Mail: 516,390

 

  • 2016 Republican Votes by Mail: 1,108,053
  • 2016 Florida Democrat Votes by Mail: 1,049,809
  • 2016 No Party Affiliation Votes by Mail: 574,213

 

  • 2014 Republican Votes by Mail: 833,420
  • 2014 Florida Democrat Votes by Mail: 705,752
  • 2014 No Party Affiliation Votes by Mail: 338,648

The pandemic played a reversing role in the 2020 election. Traditionally Florida Republicans vote by mail more than Florida Democrats and Florida Democrats cast more early votes than Florida Republicans.

In 2020, with concerns and precautions due to the pandemic, Florida Republicans voted early more than Florida Democrats, and Florida Democrats cast more vote by mail ballots than Florida Republicans.

Source Article from https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/news/2021/02/19/gov–desantis-proposes-changes-to-florida-s-vote-by-mail-laws

WASHINGTON (AP) — When Joe Biden walked into the Oval Office for the first time as president a month ago, his pens were ready. Already.

Lining a fine wooden box, they bore the presidential seal and an imprint of his signature, a micro-mission accomplished in advance of his swearing-in.

Four years ago, pens were just one more little drama in Donald Trump’s White House. The gold-plated signature pens he favored had to be placed on rush order in his opening days. Over time, he came to favor Sharpies over the government-issued pens.

On matters far more profound than a pen, Biden is out to demonstrate that the days of a seat-of-the-pants presidency are over.

He wants to show that the inflationary cycle of outrage can be contained. That things can get done by the book. That the new guy can erase the legacy of the “former guy,” as Biden has called Trump.

On policy, symbolism and style, from the Earth’s climate to what’s not on his desk (Trump’s button to summon a Diet Coke), Biden has been purging Trumpism however he can in an opening stretch that is wholly unlike the turmoil and trouble of his predecessor’s first month.

The test for Biden is whether his stylistic changes will be matched by policies that deliver a marked improvement from Trump, and a month is not long enough to measure that. Further, the length of Biden’s honeymoon is likely to be brief in highly polarized Washington, with Republicans already saying he has caved to the left wing of the Democratic Party.

The first time the nation saw Biden in the Oval Office, hours after he was sworn in, he sat behind the Resolute Desk with a mask on his face.

Trump, of course, had eschewed masks. Not only that, but he had made their use a culture war totem and political cudgel even as thousands of Americans were dying each day from a virus that properly worn masks can ward off.

Though Biden wore a mask in the campaign, seeing it on the face of the new president at the desk in the famed Oval Office made for a different message. Biden wished to make a sharp break with his predecessor while his administration came to own the deep and intractable crises that awaited him.

The strategy had been in the works since before the election and began with Biden at the desk signing a flurry of executive orders. The intent was clear: to unwind the heart of Trump’s agenda on immigration, the pandemic and more while also rejoining international alliances and trying to assure historic allies that the United States could be relied upon once again.

“The subtext under every one of the images we are seeing from the White House is the banner: ‘Under new management’,” says Robert Gibbs, who was press secretary for President Barack Obama.

“Whether showing it overtly or subtly, the message they are trying to deliver, without engaging the former president, is to make sure everyone understands that things were going to operate differently now and that hopefully the results would be different, too.”

In a whiteout of executive actions in his first weeks, Biden reversed Trump’s course on the environment and placed the Obama health law at the center of the pandemic response with an extended special enrollment period for the insurance program that Trump swore to kill.

The Iran nuclear deal that Biden’s predecessor abandoned is back on the diplomatic plate. The U.S. is back in the World Health Organization as well as the Paris climate accord.

But memberships and diplomatic outreach only go so far. The world wants to see how far Biden will actually go in making good on climate goals, whether he will steer more help to poorer countries in the pandemic and whether his words of renewed solidarity with NATO may only last until the next pendulum swing of U.S. politics.

In addition, Biden faces the reality that over the past four years China has moved in to fill the void left by the United States on trade, and allies have learned to rely less on the U.S. during the more hostile Trump era.

One month into Trump’s presidency, he had already lost his national security adviser and his choice for labor secretary to scandal. The revolving door of burned-out, disgraced or disfavored aides was already creaking into motion.

Forces in the bureaucracy were leaking information and resisting his policies. Revelations were emerging about an FBI investigation into his campaign’s contacts with Russian intelligence officials, a precursor of a special inquiry that would eventually morph into impeachment. Judges had already blocked his order to suspend the refugee program and ban visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Biden’s first month has been comparatively drama-free, with many of his Cabinet picks approved and no evident convulsions among his staff other than the departure of a White House press officer who made a profane threat to a journalist.

After 40 years in Washington, eight years as Obama’s vice president and two failed presidential campaigns before his successful one, Biden has had a lifetime to think about the mark he wants to make as president and how to get rolling on it.

“Nobody who observed Joe Biden as a candidate should be surprised by any of this,” said senior adviser Anita Dunn. “He had no learning curve in terms of the issues but also in how to be president.”

There have been challenges nonetheless: the distraction of Trump’s post-presidential impeachment trial, a more narrowly divided Senate than his predecessor faced and a nominee to lead the Office of Management and Budget who’s been busy deleting years of social media posts assailing Republicans and some on the Democratic left.

Much of what Biden has set out to do has been to mark a change from Trump in both style and substance.

The Democrat framed his first month as one to start to “heal the soul” of the nation, repair the presidency and restore the White House as a symbol of stability and credibility.

He has acted to lower Washington’s partisan rancor, disengaging almost completely from the Trump impeachment spectacle that consumed the capital for much of the month and not watching it live on TV. Yet his early efforts to work with Republicans on COVID-19 relief have stalled.

Gone are the predawn tweets that rattled Washington with impromptu policy announcements and incendiary rhetoric. Gone are the extended, off-the-cuff, combative exchanges with the “enemy of the people” mainstream press.

Gone are rosy projections about the virus, with ill-fated promises that the nation is “rounding the corner” on the pandemic.

In contrast with his predecessor, Biden has leveled with the public about the pandemic and the resulting economic devastation, acknowledging that things would get worse before they got better.

“You had the former guy saying that, well, you know, we’re just going to open things up, and that’s all we need to do,” Biden told his first town-hall meeting as president, this past week. “We said, no, you’ve got to deal with the disease before you deal with getting the economy going.”

A pattern emerged: The president and his team would deliberately set expectations low — particularly on vaccinations and school reopening — then try to land a political win by beating that timetable.

How low? On Friday in Michigan, he held out only the possibility that the country will be returning to normal by the end of the year. “God willing, this Christmas will be different than last but I can’t make that commitment to you,” he said.

Biden’s team has installed a new discipline within the walls of the West Wing. The new president has only held one extended question-and-answer session with reporters, and his exchanges in the Oval Office or before boarding Marine One have been brief.

The messages from the White House track with the assessments Biden delivered in his inaugural address: The U.S. is being tested and the answers will not be easy.

The daily press briefings are back, this time with sign language. Pets roam the White House lawn again. Fires crackle in the White House fireplace. Biden says he begins his day by working out, making coffee and eating yogurt or Raisin Bran.

At his town hall event in Wisconsin, Biden repeatedly talked about how he doesn’t want to talk about the former guy.

“I’m tired of talking about Donald Trump, don’t want to talk about him anymore,” he said. “For four years, all that’s been in the news is Trump. The next four years, I want to make sure all the news is the American people.”

That’s a tall order. The ex-president maintains his hold on millions of supporters and his lock on much of the Republican Party, whether he ends up running again or not.

But to the extent Biden can, he is doing what Obama foresaw during the 2020 campaign if the Democrat won. Biden and running mate Kamala Harris would make it possible to ignore the Washington circus again, Obama told a rally, and give Americans some predictability whether they like Biden’s course or not.

“You’re not going to have to think about them every single day,” Obama said. “It just won’t be so exhausting. You’ll be able to go about your lives.”

Source Article from https://apnews.com/article/biden-inauguration-joe-biden-donald-trump-biden-cabinet-iran-nuclear-b7838bf96681674211b2b2b3a421385e

At a CNN town hall on Tuesday night, President Biden was asked if he supported the idea of forgiving up to $50,000 of student loan debt for individuals.

His answer: No. He supports cancelling $10,000 in debt, he explained. But he said he is wary of erasing big chunks of loans for people who went to Ivy League schools: “The idea that … I’m going to forgive the debt, the billions of dollars in debt, for people who have gone to Harvard and Yale and Penn …”

Instead, he explained, he’d rather use that money for other priorities, like early childhood education or making community college free.

But here’s the problem: Regardless of the broader question about whether loan forgiveness is a good idea, Biden’s comments do not reflect the true picture of the $1.6 trillion owed by federal student borrowers, or of the borrowers who would benefit most from forgiveness.

Most student loan borrowers did not go to a highly selective colleges, because most students do not go to those schools. People who go to Ivy League schools represent less than 0.5% of the nearly 15 million undergraduate college students in the U.S., and a lot of them don’t have to take out student loans to do it.

“Misperceptions that higher education graduates are all from elite institutions are pervasive, and do not help educate the public about the value of postsecondary education,” says Fenaba Addo, an associate professor who studies student loan debt at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Think about it: Students who do go to the most selective schools tend to come from wealthy families, and many pay full tuition. Last year, 54% of undergraduates at the University of Pennsylvania, for example, didn’t even qualify for financial aid, according to data from the school. At Harvard, the number was 45%.

These highly selective colleges have long struggled to enroll students who aren’t from the top tier of wealth in this country. A new report shows that, even today, low-income students who qualify for federal Pell grants make up less than 16% of enrollment at many of these schools.

And, for students at these institutions who do need financial aid? Many offer financial aid packages aimed at keeping students free from federal student loans. At Harvard, only 2% of the undergrad population receives any federal student loans, according to the College Scorecard.

Instead of focusing, as Biden did, on who shouldn’t get the benefit, we should be focusing on who would really benefit from loan forgiveness, argues Jalil Mustaffa Bishop, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania.

He says using the Ivy Leagues to argue for a much smaller amount of debt reduction, or none at all, is misleading: “The idea that small-level, or no debt cancellation is the best way forward because a trivial amount of rich people may benefit is a talking point to distract,” he says. Households with student debt tend to have the least amount of wealth, federal data shows. The people who struggle to repay their student loans tend to be those that didn’t graduate and have small debt amounts.

“If [Biden] is concerned that the rich or elite will benefit,” Bishop adds, then there are policy approaches to deal with that: “He can focus on increasing taxes on households making over $400,000 as he promised during his campaign.”

Bishop’s research focuses on the burden of debt on Black borrowers, who are often the ones hardest hit by student debt. They face labor market discrimination, higher rates of unemployment, lower family wealth and other forms of systemic racism.

He argues that the $50,000 figure for loan forgiveness could go a long way towards reducing the inequalities in a system that both forces Black families to take out more debt, and to have more difficulty paying those loans back.

Addo, at UNC-Chapel Hill, agrees: “We know that Black borrowers struggle with repayment independent of their institution type and whether or not they completed a degree.”

And so her advice for President Biden the next time he’s asked about this issue? If you only get three sentences to talk about debt forgiveness, she says, “why not acknowledge that a 1.7 trillion dollar debt is an indication of a serious problem.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/02/20/969639380/fact-check-biden-s-comments-on-loan-forgiveness-and-elite-colleges

Republicans have also railed against the process Democrats have employed to advance the bill, citing dozens of legislative amendments that Republicans offered in various committees, which Democrats rejected. Last week, top Republican senators complained in a letter to Democratic committee leadership about plans to bypass Senate hearings on the House bill, describing it as “the outsourcing of their own committee gavels to the House.”

The Republican pushback is complicated by the pandemic’s ongoing economic pain, with millions of Americans still out of work and the recovery slowing. It is also hampered by the fact that many of the lawmakers objecting to Mr. Biden’s proposals supported similar provisions, including direct checks to individuals, when Mr. Trump was president.

“What they’ve tried to do is pick apart individual pieces of it,” Representative Richard E. Neal, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said in an interview. “But I think on an overall basis, you have to contrast that with how well this is being received across the country.”

Some Republican lawmakers and aides acknowledge the challenge they face in trying to explain to voters why they object to the package, particularly after reaching agreement with Democrats on several rounds of aid earlier in the crisis. Many of those negotiations were contentious and stretched for months; Mr. Biden has said he will not wait for Republicans to join his effort, citing the urgency of the economy’s needs.

“We’ve shown over five different bills we can do it together,” said Senator Shelley Moore Capito, Republican of West Virginia and one of the lawmakers who had met privately with Mr. Biden to discuss both economic relief and infrastructure plans. “I think we’re going to have to draw a contrast of what’s in there and does not make sense.”

While explaining their opposition to voters would be a challenge, she said, supporting the bill is not an option for most Republicans.

“The price tag in the end is just so inordinately high and has too many extraneous things in it to gain any real support in the Republican Party.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/19/us/politics/republicans-stimulus-biden.html