February, 2021 | últimas notícias

WHO team in Wuhan dismisses lab leak theory, continues hunt for intermediary coronavirus host – The Washington Post

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/coronavirus-who-china-investigation-wuhan/2021/02/09/2af3c44c-6a79-11eb-a66e-e27046e9e898_story.html

26 views no comments

Capitol Insurrection: More Than 200 People Charged And What We Know About Them – NPR

An explosion caused by a police munition is seen while supporters of then-President Donald Trump gather in front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6.

Leah Millis/Reuters

hide caption

toggle caption

Leah Millis/Reuters

An explosion caused by a police munition is seen while supporters of then-President Donald Trump gather in front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6.

Leah Millis/Reuters

Editor’s note: This story includes explicit language.

Nearly every day since insurrectionists stormed the U.S. Capitol, the list of those charged in the attack has grown longer. The government has now identified more than 200 suspects in the Jan. 6 rioting, which ended with five people dead, including a U.S. Capitol Police officer.

As Congress considers a presidential impeachment in response to the attack, those criminal cases provide clues to key questions surrounding the Capitol breach: Who exactly joined the mob? What did they do? And why?

To try to answer those questions, NPR is examining the criminal cases related to the Capitol riot, drawing on court documents, public records, news accounts and social media.

Jump to our database of individuals charged

A group this large defies generalization. The defendants are predominantly white and male, though there were exceptions. Federal prosecutors say a former member of the Latin Kings gang joined the mob, as did two Virginia police officers. A man in a “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt took part, as did a Messianic Rabbi. Far-right militia members decked out in tactical gear rioted next to a county commissioner, a New York City sanitation worker, and a two-time Olympic gold medalist.

Still, NPR’s examination did identify certain commonalities.

Loading…

There were those with connections to extremist groups or fringe ideas. At least 13 defendants appear to have expressed support for QAnon, the pro-Trump conspiracy theory.

At least 10 of the defendants appear to have links to the Proud Boys, a far-right gang. The group was recently declared a terrorist group in Canada. Their values have been widely described as racist, misogynist, anti-immigrant and hateful against other minority groups.

At least four of the defendants have alleged ties to the Oath Keepers, which the Anti-Defamation League calls an “anti-government right-wing fringe organization.”

The group is known to target and recruit current and former law enforcement officers and military veterans. At least three of the defendants are allegedly affiliated with the Three Percenters, another anti-government extremist organization.

About This Story

This is a project from NPR’s Investigations and News Apps teams. NPR’s Tom Dreisbach, Dina Temple-Raston, Arezou Rezvani, Meg Anderson, Monika Evstatieva, Barbara Van Woerkom, Austin Fast and Emine Yücel contributed reporting to this project, and NPR’s Connie Hanzhang Jin and Alyson Hurt built the database.

The presence of current and former law enforcement officers, as well as military service members and veterans, has especially alarmed government officials. NPR found at least 15% of those charged had possible ties to the military or to law enforcement.

Experts say there’s little evidence that current or former members of the military are more susceptible to radicalization, but Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has called combating extremism in the ranks a top priority.

Lawmakers who support impeaching former President Donald Trump argue that he “incited a violent mob to attack the United States Capitol.” There is some evidence of that in court documents: Some who allegedly stormed the Capitol explicitly said they were inspired by Trump.

“IF TRUMP TELLS US TO STORM THE F***IN CAPITAL IMA DO THAT THEN!” one defendant wrote. “I thought I was following my President,” said yet another.

Most of the people charged in connection with the storming of the Capitol face allegations primarily related to breaching the building. But a smaller number face more serious charges and a greater threat of prison time if convicted.

Eleven are accused of committing conspiracy, one of the most serious charges brought. Twenty-five are accused of committing acts of violence, particularly against Capitol Police. At least 15 are suspected of causing property damage, such as breaking windows or doors to gain entry to the building. And 11 face allegations of theft, such as the man who was photographed carrying House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s lectern or one woman who allegedly took a laptop from Pelosi’s office.

Explore the database below.

Loading…

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/02/09/965472049/the-capitol-siege-the-arrested-and-their-stories

36 views no comments

Here’s who is likely to get a third stimulus check under the latest relief package – CNBC

Democrats unveiled final details of the third Covid-19 relief package Monday night, and there’s good news for Americans who are considered dependents, including college students and disabled adults. Under the latest provisions, they’ll be eligible to receive the $1,400 stimulus payments.

The latest relief package, which is expected to pass Congress in the coming weeks through a budget reconciliation process, includes $1,400 payments for both children and non-child dependents, such as college students, disabled adults and even older Americans who are claimed as a dependent for tax purposes.

Previous rounds of stimulus checks were limited to child dependents, which meant roughly 13.5 million adult dependents missed out on the payments, according to an analysis of the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey by the People’s Policy Project think tank.

According to details released by the House Ways and Means Committee, the new relief package is set to pay out up to $1,400 to individual Americans making less than $75,000 and couples earning less than $150,000 in adjusted gross income (AGI).

The payments will start to phase out for those with higher AGI, as it did with the previous stimulus payment cycles. Individuals making more than $100,000 ($200,000 for those married, filing jointly) will not be eligible. However, the AGI used to calculate stimulus payments can be from 2019 or 2020 tax year, according to the latest proposal.

The details released on Monday confirm that Democrats are not planning to limit the number of Americans eligible for stimulus payments in the third relief package, a shift from earlier discussions this month. Some Democrats had proposed limiting this round of stimulus payments to those earning less than $50,000 and couples making less than $100,000.

Meanwhile Republicans outlined a plan to send up to $1,000 checks to individuals earning up to $40,000 per year ($80,000 for couples).

Progressive lawmakers, including Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have been vocal in their opposition to limiting eligibility for the latest round of stimulus checks.

Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal (D-Mass.) said his committee will vote this week on the stimulus payment plans, along with several other legislative proposals that are part of the relief package. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said on Friday that she expects Congress will “finish our work [on the relief package] before the end of February.”

Check out: House Democrats’ relief plan does not change income limits for $1,400 stimulus checks

Don’t miss: Here are the 5 best personal loans of December 2020

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/09/will-dependents-get-1400-stimulus-check.html

19 views no comments

Shooting at health care clinic in Buffalo, Minnesota, leaves 5 injured – CNN

By Carma Hassan and Eric Levenson, CNN

Updated 2:34 PM ET, Tue February 9, 2021

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/09/us/buffalo-minnesota-shooting/index.html

18 views no comments

Palm Beach officials discuss banning Trump from Mar-a-Lago resort – Business Insider – Business Insider

Palm Beach officials will discuss whether Trump can continue to live at his Mar-a-Lago resort.
Some neighbors say Trump can’t legally live there because it is a members’ club.
Trump’s attorneys say he can because he is an employee of the club.
Visit the Business section of Insider for more stories.

Palm Beach, Florida, officials will formally discuss whether former President Donald Trump is allowed to remain living at his Mar-a-Lago resort after some of his neighbors complained that he wasn’t legally entitled to because of a decades-old agreement.

Meeting notes for the Palm Beach Town Council meeting on February 9 show officials are due to discuss the matter on Tuesday via videoconference after a presentation on the subject from John C. Randolph, Palm Beach’s town attorney.

The move came after an attorney for neighbors of Trump wrote to Palm Beach authorities last month requesting that the town council inform the former president he was not allowed to live at the resort, saying it would avoid an “embarrassing situation” in which he is evicted.

The neighbors say that a 1993 agreement converting the site from a private residence into a members’ club prevents the former president or anyone else from living there for more than three times a year for up to a week each time.

Trump has lived at the luxury resort, which he billed as his “winter White House,” since leaving office in January. He was a lifelong New Yorker but last year switched his primary residence from Trump Tower in Manhattan to Mar-a-Lago. The move was said to be primarily tax-related, but Trump spent a large amount of time at the Florida resort during his presidency.

Randolph indicated in a memorandum sent last week to Palm Beach’s mayor and town council that Trump’s legal right to reside at Mar-a-Lago could hinge on whether Trump is technically employed by the club. Local laws say “a private club may provide living quarters for its bona fide employees only.”

“This issue, therefore, hinges primarily on whether former President Trump is a bona fide employee of the club,” Randolph wrote.

Randolph added in the memorandum, dated January 28, that Trump’s neighbors, their attorneys, and representatives for Trump should all be able to make presentations at the meeting.

Trump’s attorneys said the legal case had “no merit” because the 1993 usage agreement for Mar-a-Lago did not say the owner of the property could not reside there.

In a January 28 letter sent to Randolph, they said Trump had previously lived at Mar-a-Lago for extended periods without protestation from Palm Beach authorities.

They added that while the agreement prevented the use of guest suites for more than three nonconsecutive weeks a year, Trump used the owner’s suite, which is not subject to the same limits.

The attorneys also insisted that Trump was an official employee at the club, given his role as club president.

Source Article from https://www.businessinsider.com/palm-beach-officials-discuss-trump-ban-mar-a-lago-resort-2021-2

20 views no comments

FBI Called In After Hacker Tries To Poison Tampa-Area City’s Water With Lye – NPR

Officials in Oldsmar, Fla., say residents were never at risk from a recent computer hack at its water treatment plant. But they say they’re taking steps to ensure it can’t happen again.

deepblue4you/E+/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

deepblue4you/E+/Getty Images

Officials in Oldsmar, Fla., say residents were never at risk from a recent computer hack at its water treatment plant. But they say they’re taking steps to ensure it can’t happen again.

deepblue4you/E+/Getty Images

It started with a cursor moving on its own, sliding across a computer screen at the water treatment plant in Oldsmar, Fla. Someone had taken remote control of a plant operator’s machine – and in just a few minutes, they increased the level of sodium hydroxide in the city’s drinking water by a factor of 100. After spiking the caustic substance to unsafe levels, the hacker immediately left the system.

The plant operator quickly reset the sodium hydroxide level back to normal parameters before the rogue action posed a threat to the water supply, officials say. But the incident, which took place Friday, is now being investigated by local authorities as well as the FBI and Secret Service, according to Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri.

“The hacker changed the sodium hydroxide from about 100 parts per million to 11,100 parts per million,” Gualtieri said on Monday, during a briefing about the attack. “This is obviously a significant and potentially dangerous increase. Sodium hydroxide, also known as lye, is the main ingredient in liquid drain cleaners. It’s also used to control water acidity and remove metals from drinking water.”

At one point in the briefing, Gualtieri was asked if he would call the incident an attempted bioterrorism attack.

“It is what it is,” he replied. “Someone hacked into the system, not just once but twice,” to take control of the system and change the water chemistry to unsafe levels.

If the person who conducted the hack is identified, Gualtieri said, they would likely face state felony charges, with the potential for federal charges depending on the circumstances, such as the place where the hack originated.

Oldsmar is a small city northwest of Tampa, roughly 12 miles away from Raymond James Stadium, which hosted the Super Bowl two days after the hacking attack. Oldsmar draws its water from wells; its system is separate from other nearby communities, the officials said.

The intruder broke into the system at least twice on Friday, taking control of a plant operator’s computer through the same methods a supervisor or specialist might use. The hack didn’t initially set off red flags, because remote access is sometimes used to monitor the system or trouble-shoot problems, Gualtieri said.

The first intrusion was fleeting and didn’t cause concern. But hours later, the hacker returned. And as the operator looked on, the sodium hydroxide settings were moved to dangerous territory. After resetting the system to normal levels, the operator raised the alarm. The sheriff was called; soon, federal investigators were also involved.

“Obviously, these investigations are very complicated right now,” Gualtieri said. “We do not have a suspect identified, but we do have leads that we’re following. We don’t know right now whether the breach originated from within the United States or outside the country.”

The FBI’s field office in Tampa confirms that its agents are working with the city and the sheriff’s office to find the person responsible.

The hack was clearly the act of someone trying to harm others, the sheriff said. But he and officials in Oldsmar also stressed that while the hack was a serious intrusion, public health was never at risk. In addition to the plant operator’s vigilance, they said, the water system has sensors that would have raised the alarm if pH levels suddenly skyrocketed. And it would have taken more than a day for the water to reach any customers, they added.

“We have pH alarms throughout the system,” City Manager Al Braithwaite said. “So obviously if you change the alkalinity level, the pH changes. That would have been an alarm throughout the entire system. So, even if we hadn’t noticed it right away, it would have alarmed to all our people to notice it quickly.”

The remote-access program that allowed the change to be made is now disabled, Braithwaite said, and the city is making further upgrades to its systems. And he said the attack on Oldsmar’s infrastructure didn’t come as a complete surprise. “We talk about it, we think about it, we study it,” he said.

The good news in the incident, said Mayor Eric Seidel, is that Oldsmar’s safety and monitoring protocols worked as intended. But the message now, he added, is that they’re needed – in his and other communities.

Everyone should realize “these kind of bad actors are out there, it’s happening,” Seidel said. “So really, take a hard look at what [safety measures] you have in place.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/02/09/965791252/fbi-called-in-after-hacker-tries-to-poison-tampa-area-citys-water-with-lye

19 views no comments

House Freedom Caucus crew heads to Florida – Politico

Presented by SoftBank Group

With help from Melanie Zanona.

Two major congressional priorities — impeachment and Covid relief — are colliding in Washington. The outcome of the impeachment trial seems to be a foregone conclusion, though senators and observers will be confronted by a dark chapter in the nation’s history.

President Joe Biden, meanwhile, is staying out of the trial process and seeking to nail down Covid relief without losing the support of any Democrats, who he needs on board to ensure the success of its passage for his first legislative win.

TRANSITIONS

Mike Abboud is now national press secretary for House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. He most recently was a senior adviser in the bureau of global public affairs at State.

The Republican Governors Association is adding three new regional press secretaries: Maddie Anderson (previously comms director for Rep. Elise Stefanik), Will Reinert (previously press secretary for Congressional Leadership Fund) and Chris Gustafson (previously Michigan comms director for the RNC). …

Maggie Farry is now a policy analyst at New America’s Open Technology Institute after previously working as a policy adviser for Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.).

TODAY IN CONGRESS

The House is out.

The Senate convenes at 1 p.m.

AROUND THE HILL

10:30 a.m.: Schumer and other top Democrats will hold a news conference to discuss “to discuss how critical work on President Biden’s American Rescue Plan will continue during the Senate impeachment trial.”

1 p.m.: The Senate meets to hear arguments from the impeachment managers and Trump’s lawyers to debate the constitutionality of the impeachment trial. After the arguments the Senate will vote, at a simple majority threshold, on whether the Senate has jurisdiction under the Constitution to try the former president.

3 p.m.: The House Education and Labor Committee is having a full committee markup of a Committee Print to comply with reconciliation directives included in section 2001 (b) of the Concurrent Resolutions on the Budget for FY2021.

TRIVIA

MONDAY’S WINNER: Jacob Murphy was the first person to correctly guess that Russian President Vladimir Putin stole Robert Kraft’s Super Bowl ring in 2005. Kraft had given it to him to check out and then when he put out his hand for the Kremlin leader to return him the ring, Putin put it in his pocket, and then left the room surrounded by his security detail.

TODAY’S QUESTION: From Jacob: Who is the only presidential candidate to win a majority of popular votes cast but lose the Electoral College count? And in what year did that happen?

The first person to correctly guess gets a mention in the next edition of Huddle. Send your answer to [email protected].

GET HUDDLE emailed to your phone each morning.

Within the Democratic caucus, Mr. Biden’s team has avoided other pitfalls he witnessed during the Obama administration, when White House spokesmen dismissed activists as “the professional left” and banished intraparty critics from the administration’s circles of influence. Instead, Mr. Biden’s White House has welcomed many such critics to virtual meetings, and the chief of staff, Ron Klain, has encouraged progressive criticism on his Twitter feed.

Melissa Byrne, a progressive activist, discovered as much when she wanted to prod Mr. Biden to focus on forgiving student loan debt. To complement her steady stream of tweets, Ms. Byrne bought full-page ads in The News Journal, a newspaper that was delivered to Mr. Biden’s Delaware house daily during the presidential transition.

Ms. Byrne expected some bristling from Mr. Biden’s team over her public protests. Instead, her efforts were encouraged. Mr. Klain told her to keep up the pressure, inviting her to more Zoom meetings with the transition team.

“We just kept being able to have people at the table,” she said. “That showed me that we could do cool things like sit-ins and banner drops, but we could also be warm and fuzzy.”

The singular focus on the pandemic has enabled Mr. Biden to align the central promise of his campaign — a more effective government response — with the priorities of party officials in battleground states, who say that voters expect Mr. Biden to deliver a competent vaccine distribution along with direct economic relief. Already, there is widespread agreement within the party that Democrats will be judged in the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential contest by their handling of the twin crises.

“Needles and checks — that’s got to be the focus,” said Thomas Nelson, the executive of Wisconsin’s Outagamie County. Mr. Nelson was a Sanders delegate in 2020 and is running in the 2022 election for the seat held by Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican. “People in my county, we need those checks.”

Mr. Biden has also paid attention to other policy matters. He has signed about 45 executive orders, memorandums or proclamations enacting or at least initiating major shifts on issues including racial justice, immigration, climate change and transgender rights.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/09/us/politics/joe-biden-democratic-party.html

20 views no comments

Biden and Democrats prepare to act fast on judges, having learned lesson from Trump – CNN

By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter

Updated 7:00 AM ET, Tue February 9, 2021

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/09/politics/judges-biden-democrats-trump/index.html

17 views no comments

Third stimulus check: Will you get a $1,400 check? – 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 passing Mr. Biden’s relief plan through a process called budget reconciliation, which would allow the Senate to pass 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. That’s expected to occur later this week, according to economists at Goldman Sachs.

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.

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. 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 the coronavirus pandemic.

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 — 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.

Mr. Biden has said he will not allow the per-person payments to fall below $1,400 but has indicated flexibility on the income thresholds.

“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.

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.

Biden pushing relief bill even without GOP

03:33

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.

When would I get a $1,400 check?

Not for several weeks, according to analysts. The House and Senate committees must first draft and vote on legislation.

“At this stage, we will learn much more about the details, size and timing of particular provisions,” Goldman Sachs economists noted. “However, the key decision might not be made for another few weeks, when the Senate is likely to take up its version of the COVID-relief bill.”

There’s a strong likelihood that a stimulus package valued at $1.5 trillion to $2.25 trillion will pass by the end of March, according to Heights Securities analyst Hunter Hammond. “We expect there to be tension about the overall cost, both from a political standpoint and an economic one,” he said.

Lawmakers are keeping an eye on the March 14 expiration of expanded unemployment benefits, which include an extra $300 in weekly federal jobless aid. But that could “take until late March if things do not go smoothly,” Goldman Sachs noted.

Once the relief bill is passed, it must be signed by Mr. Biden. After that, the IRS will direct the 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 might have to wait longer for paper checks or prepaid debit cards to arrive in the mail.

—With reporting by the Associated Press.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/third-stimulus-check-income-threshold-2021-02-09/

20 views no comments

Dems propose $1,400 payments, tax breaks for families with kids as part of Biden COVID-19 relief package – KTLA Los Angeles

House Democrats on Monday proposed an additional $1,400 in direct payments to individuals as Congress began piecing together a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package that tracks President Joe Biden’s plan for battling the pandemic and reviving a still staggering economy.

Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee would expand tax credits for families with children, for lower-earning people and those buying health insurance on marketplaces created by the 2010 Affordable Care Act. The panel, which plans to approve the measure by week’s end, would also provide health care subsidies for some unemployed workers.

Less than three weeks into his presidency, Biden has declared that vanquishing the virus and resuscitating the economy are his top priorities. The coronavirus pandemic has killed over 460,000 Americans while the economy has lost 10 million jobs since the crisis began last year.

Monday’s Ways and Means unveiling of its piece of the package — at over $900 billion, nearly half of Biden’s entire plan — came with Congress’ Democratic leaders hoping to rush the legislation to the president for his signature by mid-March, when existing emergency unemployment benefits expire. Their schedule reflects a desire by Biden and congressional Democrats to show they can respond swiftly and decisively to the crisis, even if, as seems likely, they must muscle past solid Republican opposition.

“While it is still our hope that Republicans will join us in doing right by the American people, the urgency of the moment demands that we act without further delay,” said Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass.

Texas Rep. Kevin Brady, top Republican on that committee, criticized Democrats for driving ahead on the massive measure “without bipartisan compromise.” He said the GOP wants to focus on vaccine distribution and more targeted relief for workers, families and small businesses — essentially previewing amendments Republicans are expected to propose during committee votes this week, some of which might win Democratic backing.

House Education and Labor Committee Democrats also previewed their plans Monday. Their $350 billion package includes $130 billion to help schools reopen safely, $40 billion for colleges battered by the pandemic and a plan to gradually raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. The minimum wage increase faces an uphill climb, and even Biden has conceded it likely won’t survive.

The Financial Services Committee proposal includes $50 billion to help the Federal Emergency Management Agency handle pandemic costs, plus $25 billion for struggling rental property owners and people at risk of homelessness. Transportation and Infrastructure Committee spending would include grants of $30 billion for struggling public transit agencies with starkly reduced ridership.

Democrats have only narrow House and Senate majorities. Besides Republican opposition that could be unanimous, Democrats will have to balance party moderates who worry about a package going too far and progressives eager to push Biden as far leftward as they can.

In one potential battleground within the party, the Ways and Means Democrats proposed limiting the full $1,400 relief payments to individuals making $75,000 or less, and phasing them out until they end completely at $100,000. Couples who make up to $150,000 would be entitled to $2,800 relief payments, which would gradually diminish and fully disappear for those earning $200,000.

The income levels at which people qualify for the direct payments has caused rifts among Democrats, with moderates arguing that relief should be more narrowly targeted to people most in need. Biden has said he will not allow the per-person payments to fall below $1,400 but has indicated flexibility on the income thresholds.

“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.

Congress approved $600 per person direct payments in December. The additional $1,400 would bring the total to $2,000. Democrats have sought that amount for months, and it won support from then-President Donald Trump during his unsuccessful reelection campaign, even as it was opposed by many congressional Republicans.

The Ways and Means proposal would increase emergency jobless aid to $400 weekly from its current $300. Benefits would last until Aug. 29, instead of March 14 as now scheduled. The new amount is still below the original $600 extra weekly benefit that was enacted last March but expired July 31.

The plan would fight child poverty by increasing the child tax credit for families for one year. Now a maximum $2,000 annually, it would grow to up to $3,600 per child under 6 and as much as $3,000 for those up to age 17. Payments of the credit would be made monthly, even to families that owe no federal income taxes — a change from current policy.

The bill also provides several pathways for people to get and keep health insurance, including an early test of Biden’s pledge to build on Obama’s health care law.

One section would sweeten the subsidies provided under former President Barack Obama’s health law. The Biden administration has already announced a three-month special sign-up period for ACA coverage starting next Monday. The more generous financial assistance in the House bill would be available for this year and next.

The bill would also cover 85% of the cost of premiums for workers trying to preserve their job-based health insurance after getting laid off. A federal law known as COBRA already allows them to temporarily keep their old employer’s health plan, but they typically have to pay prohibitively high premiums. The assistance would be available through Sept. 30.

For workers without children, the plan proposes a significant expansion of the earned-income tax credit — a refundable credit currently claimed by taxpayers who earn an average $20,000 a year. The EITC is viewed by its proponents as a major anti-poverty tool for working people.

The legislation calls for the maximum credit for workers without children to be nearly tripled and for wider eligibility. It also contains tax breaks for some restaurants that have received pandemic aid.

The bills’ details were announced as a report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said boosting the minimum wage to $15 an hour would increase joblessness even as it boosts wages for millions of workers.

Progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., author of the minimum wage legislation, want Democrats to fight for it now. It faces opposition from the GOP and some Democratic moderates wary that it will hurt small businesses during the pandemic.

Source Article from https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/dems-propose-1400-payments-tax-breaks-for-families-with-kids-as-part-of-biden-covid-19-relief-package/

18 views no comments

Trump was ‘loving watching the Capitol mob,’ former White House official tells CNN – Business Insider – Business Insider

Former aides told CNN that Donald Trump enjoyed watching his supporters storm the US Capitol.
He was “loving watching the Capitol mob,” a former senior White House official told the outlet.
The House impeached Trump last month, charging him with inciting an insurrection.
Visit the Business section of Insider for more stories.

Former aides to Donald Trump told CNN that Trump enjoyed watching his supporters assault the US Capitol in the final days of his presidency.

The January 6 Capitol riot, which broke out soon after Trump gave a speech near the White House falsely claiming he won the 2020 election, resulted in five deaths, including the killing of a US Capitol Police officer.

As the violence unfolded last month, Republicans and Democrats alike pleaded with Trump to intervene — to call on his supporters to stop. For hours, however, he remained largely silent, ensconced at the White House and, reports indicate, consuming cable news.

CNN quoted a former senior Trump official as saying the president was enjoying what he saw on the screen: people — some in MAGA hats and with Trump flags — breaking into the home of the federal government’s legislative branch.

Trump was “loving watching the Capitol mob,” the unnamed former official told CNN.

Last month, The Washington Post reported that Trump was slow to act on calling for an end to the riot — which he did hours after it began in a video posted to Twitter in which he called the rioters “special” — because he was watching it live on television.

“He was hard to reach, and you know why? Because it was live TV,” a Trump advisor told The Post. “If it’s TiVo, he just hits pause and takes the calls. If it’s live TV, he watches it, and he was just watching it all unfold.”

The Democratic-controlled House impeached Trump soon after, charging him with inciting an insurrection. His second impeachment trial in the Senate is set to begin Tuesday.

Have a news tip? Email this reporter: cdavis@insider.com

Source Article from https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-was-loving-watching-the-capitol-mob-white-house-official-2021-2

23 views no comments

Democrats roll out a plan to send $1,400 stimulus payments to Americans earning up to $75,000 a year. – The New York Times

House Democrats on Monday rolled out a key plank of President Biden’s stimulus plan, proposing legislation to send direct payments of $1,400 to Americans earning up to $75,000 and households with incomes up to $150,000.

The plan, drafted the day before key committees are scheduled to being meeting to consider it, is at odds with proposals from some Republicans and moderate Democrats who want to curtail eligibility for direct payments, targeting it to lower income people. Mr. Biden has said he is open to such modifications.

For now, the measure would allow individuals earning up to $100,000 and households earning up to $200,000 to be eligible for some payment, though the size of the checks would phase out gradually for those with incomes above $75,000, or $150,000 for a family.

The bill, unveiled by Representative Richard E. Neal, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, was one of a series that Democrats presented on Monday ahead of a week of legislative work to solidify the details of Mr. Biden’s stimulus proposal.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/08/us/politics/biden-democrats-stimulus.html

16 views no comments

‘I Said The Opposite’: Criticism Of Trump’s Impeachment Defense Intensifies – NPR

Lawyer Bruce L. Castor Jr, a member of former President Donald Trump’s legal team, is seen on Capitol Hill Monday.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

Lawyer Bruce L. Castor Jr, a member of former President Donald Trump’s legal team, is seen on Capitol Hill Monday.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

A constitutional law professor whose work is cited extensively by former President Trump’s lawyers in their impeachment defense brief says his work has been seriously misrepresented.

In a 78-page brief filed in the U.S. Senate Monday, Trump’s lawyers rely heavily on the work of Michigan State University Professor Brian Kalt, author of the seminal article about impeachment of a former president. His work is cited 15 times in the Trump brief, often for the proposition that the Senate does not have the authority under the constitution to try an impeached ex-president.

The problem is that Kalt’s 2001 book-length law review article concluded that, on balance, the historical evidence is against Trump’s legal argument.

“The worst part is the three places where they said I said something when, in fact, I said the opposite,” Kalt said in an interview with NPR.

Trump’s lawyers argue that the Senate lacks jurisdiction because the president is already out of office, making an impeachment trial pointless. Kalt argues that impeachment is about more than removal; it’s about accountability and deterrence. “The framers worried about people abusing their power to keep themselves in office,” he adds. “The point is the timing of the conduct, not the timing of the legal proceeding.”

Kalt is among more than 170 leading constitutional scholars who have formally weighed in on this issue, telling the Senate that contrary to Trump’s assertion, it does have the authority to try Trump.

There are relatively few scholars on the other side. But among them is the highly respected Columbia Law Professor Philip Bobbitt. “If you look at the text of the Federalist Papers,” Bobbitt argues, “getting the person out of office … is the object.”

Those who argue for the Senate trial, such as Yale Law Professor Akhil Amar, contend that it makes no sense to allow a president who commits serious offenses in the final weeks or months in office, and who is impeached by the House of Representatives while he is in office, to escape from a trial by the Senate.

“[Do] you want to give someone a ‘get out of jail free’ card at the end of the administration so they can do anything they like and be immune from. … the high court of impeachment?” Amar asks.

Even as scholars across the political spectrum are increasingly voicing support for a Senate trial, they acknowledge that there are precedents both ways: In 1797 senator William Blount was expelled from the Senate and still impeached and tried by the Senate after he was gone. So too was William Belknap, secretary of war, who resigned just 40 minutes before his impeachment in 1876. Nevertheless, he was still tried by the Senate. In both cases, the Senate voted that it had authority to hold a trial, but failed to get the necessary two-thirds vote for conviction.

If there is a precedent the other way, it is the case of President Nixon, who resigned rather than face almost certain impeachment in the House and conviction in the Senate. But after he left office, there was no attempt to revive the impeachment proceedings.

There is another legal defense that Trump’s lawyers are pushing hard. They contend that a Senate trial and conviction would be in violation of his free speech rights. “The unsupported idea that because Mr. Trump was an elected official … he has fewer rights under the First Amendment than anyone else,” is “sophistry,” they argue. And they contend that nothing Trump said on Jan. 6 or before was any different from what Democratic members of the House said in urging on Black Lives Matter protesters.

Not so, says Peter Keisler, a conservative Republican who served as acting attorney general in the George W. Bush administration.

“The First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech simply doesn’t apply to impeachment,” he says. “This isn’t a criminal prosecution which seeks to render someone’s speech illegal.” Trump is entitled to hold whatever opinions he wants, and to express them, Keisler says. “But he is not entitled to assert a First Amendment defense against removal or disqualification from office … because the founders were in particular worried about. … the ways in which demagogues could become tyrants.”

The distinction between a criminal proceeding and an impeachment is critical. Take, for example, the incendiary speech that the Supreme Court upheld (Brandenburg v. Ohio) in 1969 as constitutionally protected. The speech, given by a Ku Klux Klan leader, sprinkled with threats of “revengeance,” called for Black citizens to be sent to Africa and Jewish Americans to be sent to Israel.

While the Supreme Court threw out the Klan leader’s criminal conviction, Keisler says those same opinions would nonetheless be grounds for impeachment and conviction if uttered by a president.

Suppose, he suggests, that a president just announced publicly: “I intend to use my office for personal profit. And I don’t regard myself as bound by the Constitution.” Those are speech activities, Keisler observes. “They are all protected from prosecution, but, of course, any president who did or said such things could — and should — be removed from office.”

Indeed, if convicted, the worst that could happened would be that the Senate, by majority vote, could ban him from future federal office.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/09/965590112/i-said-the-opposite-criticism-of-trumps-impeachment-defense-intensifies

25 views no comments

House Democrats’ stimulus check plan would exclude families earning more than $200,000 – CNN

By Katie Lobosco, CNN

Updated 9:48 PM ET, Mon February 8, 2021

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/08/politics/stimulus-checks-house-democrats/index.html

22 views no comments

Biden move to replace U.S. attorneys looms – POLITICO

Acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson is expected to hold a conference call Tuesday with U.S. attorneys to inform nearly all those holding presidential appointments that they are being asked to resign, the official said, confirming a CNN report about the plans.

The prosecutors are expected to be given weeks rather than days to wind up their work, a person familiar with the plan said. Many Trump-appointed prosecutors resigned prior to the inauguration.

By seeking resignations on that timeline, the Biden administration is all but guaranteeing that nearly all U.S. attorneys’ offices will move to oversight by acting officials for a time until nominees are put forward by the White House and confirmed.

Traditionally, senators enjoy great sway over the selection of U.S. attorney nominees, as well as veto power through the Senate Judiciary Committee’s blue-slip process.

The U.S. attorney jobs — 93 in all — are considered plum posts for up-and-coming lawyers, including those with political ambitions.

The process of replacing the chief prosecutors, which happens with every change of party in the White House, often triggers charges that it was too abrupt and counter-charges that the administration is not moving swiftly enough.

The Biden administration’s move, coming before a new attorney general is even in place, is occurring sooner than the similar action four years ago, but the timeline for the prosecutors to depart seems more lax. In March 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions asked 46 U.S. attorneys to step down immediately. However, a few were allowed to remain for a time because they had spent years as line prosecutors in the department and were nearing retirement age.

Wilkinson’s request is expected to apply to 56 prosecutors. The remainder are already career prosecutors serving on an acting basis or interim U.S. attorneys appointed by federal judges.

The removal of U.S. attorneys amid a president’s term has sometimes produced political fireworks. The midterm dismissal of eight chief federal prosecutors in December 2006 caused a firestorm that ultimately led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales from the Bush administration.

Last June, an attempt by Attorney General William Barr to engineer the departure of Geoffrey Berman, the acting U.S. attorney in Manhattan, was met with unusual resistance from Berman and prompted an outcry from Democrats, the legal community, and prosecutors in Berman’s office.

Barr had planned to replace Berman with the Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, Craig Carpenito. Ultimately, Barr backed down from that part of the plan. Berman agreed to exit, but was replaced by the top career prosecutor in the office, Audrey Strauss.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/08/biden-replace-us-attorneys-looms-467821

21 views no comments

‘Era of small government is over’: Democrats upsize Covid package with more cash relief – NBC News

23 views no comments

GA Secretary of State opens investigation into Trump – Business Insider – Business Insider

Georgia is investigating a call Donald Trump made as his presidency wound down.
On the call, Trump asked Georgia’s secretary of state to “find votes” to help him win.
David Worley, a Democratic state election official, said the inquiry could preface criminal charges.
Visit the Business section of Insider for more stories.

Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, has opened an investigation into former President Donald Trump over his efforts to pressure Georgia state officials to illegally overturn legitimate election results, Reuters reported.

Raffensperger’s office said that the inquiry was “fact-finding and administrative in nature” and that findings would be referred to the Republican-majority Georgia board of elections.

The investigation centers on a call Trump made to Raffensperger in January, during Trump’s final days in office, when the president asked the state’s top official to “find 11,780 votes” to help him win Georgia.

Raffensperger, a Republican, pushed back against Trump’s claims during the call that cast doubt on the integrity of the election. Election officials across Georgia disputed Trump’s claims that the election was fraudulent or unfair.

Once the state completes its investigation into the call, it could refer findings to the state’s attorney general or elsewhere for prosecution.

“The secretary of state’s office investigates complaints it receives,” Walter Jones, a spokesman for the office, told Reuters in a statement Monday. “The investigations are fact-finding and administrative in nature. Any further legal efforts will be left to the attorney general.”

The New York Times reported that Fani Willis, the Democratic district attorney of Fulton County, was also considering launching a criminal inquiry into Trump’s actions.

Trump also repeatedly called and pressured Georgia’s Republican governor, Brian Kemp, and taunted him on Twitter in an attempt to have Kemp call a special legislative session to overturn the state’s election results.

David Worley, the only Democrat on Georgia’s elections board, told Reuters the administrative inquiry could preface criminal charges.

“Any investigation of a statutory violation is a potential criminal investigation depending on the statute involved,” he said, adding, “The complaint that was received involved a criminal violation.”

Worley also said he would initiate a motion at Wednesday’s elections board meeting to formally refer the inquiry to the Fulton County district attorney’s office.

Jason Miller, a senior advisor to Trump, told the Associated Press there was “nothing improper or untoward about a scheduled call between President Trump, Secretary Raffensperger and lawyers on both sides.”

Insider has reached out to the Trump Organization, the Georgia secretary of state’s office, and the state election board for comment.

Source Article from https://www.businessinsider.com/ga-secretary-of-state-opens-investigation-into-trump-2021-2

44 views no comments

Biden administration sends conflicting signals on school reopenings | TheHill – The Hill

The Biden administration has sent conflicting signals about when and how to expect schools to reopen, with the White House at times appearing to downplay messaging from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen Psaki The Memo: Democrats, GOP face dangers from Trump trial Biden administration sends conflicting signals on school reopenings White House says Biden ‘head nod’ didn’t signify shift on Iran MORE has sought to minimize the scope of a CDC study that identified schools as low-transmission zones for the coronavirus and has brushed back CDC Director Rochelle WalenskyRochelle Walensky Buttigieg: Officials consider negative COVID-19 test requirement on domestic flights Overnight Health Care: New COVID-19 cases nationally drop below 100K for first time in 2021 | CDC warns states against lifting restrictions amid threat of virus variants | Health officials warn COVID-19 eradication unlikely Biden administration sends conflicting signals on school reopenings MORE for saying that the science supports the notion that teachers can return to classrooms before they’ve been vaccinated.

At one point, Psaki said Walensky was speaking in her “personal capacity” when she said that teachers being vaccinated should not be a prerequisite for returning to in-person learning.

The mixed messaging underscores the tricky politics Biden faces as elected officials clash with teachers unions in Democratic strongholds over how quickly to reopen classrooms.

Some public health experts are chiding the White House for downplaying analysis from CDC leaders, warning that the apparent tension could undermine the agency’s authority at a pivotal moment for the virus.

“I don’t know if there is a split, but it was alarming last week when the White House implied that the CDC director was speaking in her personal capacity, because when it comes to safety and what is required to reduce or mitigate the spread, that’s a CDC question that should only be answered by the CDC,” said Jennifer Nuzzo, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

“I found that worrisome because we have to affirm and assert CDC’s expertise here. It’s a particularly tricky issue and it’s important to be clear that there is no political interference and that there is no agency more qualified to weigh in on this than the CDC,” she added.

The Biden administration has made it a point of pride to have science drive their pandemic response after the Trump administration sought to downplay the virus and clashed with its own health experts.

The White House position is that they’re waiting for official CDC guidance on school reopenings, rather than relying on CDC studies or remarks from agency leaders about what the science says.

A White House aide said “there is zero daylight between the CDC and WH on reopening” and that as soon as CDC guidance is released, the White House will “lift it up.” Walensky says the CDC guidance on school reopenings should be out in the next few days.

Democrats insist that they’re united behind the Biden plan to reopen schools once Congress passes a COVID-19 relief bill that includes an additional $130 billion for schools to implement additional safeguards aimed at mitigating the spread of the virus.

But Democratic divisions are spilling into public view as tensions boil over between elected officials and unions in states and cities run by Democrats.

Democratic governors and mayors from Chicago to San Francisco feel enormous pressure to reopen schools as data shows children are falling behind in their studies, delinquency rates are rising and many young people are suffering isolation trauma.

Most private schools for wealthy children are open, while most public schools remain closed, raising concerns about equity in education for low-income students and racial minorities.

At the same time, unions, which have enormous sway in the Democratic Party, are expressing concern about reopening public schools too quickly as new viral strains emerge.

Some unions are saying their teachers won’t return to the classroom until they’ve been vaccinated, putting them at odds with the CDC.

California Gov. Gavin NewsomGavin Newsom Biden administration sends conflicting signals on school reopenings Political dysfunction and teacher unions are keeping California kids out of school Governors mark ‘Ronald Reagan Day’ MORE (D) and Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfood (D) have criticized the unions for what they describe as unrealistic demands. Republicans have been hammering Democrats on school reopenings, viewing it as a potent wedge issue heading into the midterm elections.

“The administration seems to be trying to balance providing consistency for students by opening schools — a relief to some parents — and the valid concerns from teachers and their unions to make sure their safety is a priority before returning to the classroom,” said Basil Smikle, who served as the executive director of the New York Democratic Party.

Biden has set a goal of reopening schools in his first 100 days, but data released by the CDC has put pressure on the administration to move quickly.

CDC researchers wrote in a study last month that there is “little evidence” that the coronavirus can be widely transmitted in schools when precautions like masking and social distancing are in place.

Psaki at the time questioned whether that study should apply to public schools in cities, saying it was conducted in “an area that was more rural in Wisconsin.”

At a recent CNN town hall, Walensky acknowledged that in an urban “high-prevalence community, you’re going to still have high transmission in the schools,” although it will be less than it is in the broader community.

Walensky said Monday that the threat of transmission in all schools is low when appropriate precautions are taken.

“There’s very little transmission happening within the schools, especially when there’s masking and social distancing occurring,” she said.

A spokesperson for the CDC told The Hill that Walensky’s comments about teachers not needing to be vaccinated before returning to school was “based on [Walensky’s] review of the science.”

The White House has said it will not take a position on that issue until the CDC releases official guidance, separate from the CDC’s studies or Walensky’s personal review.

But public health experts have bristled at Psaki downplaying Walensky’s remarks on teacher vaccinations, saying it undermines the CDC to claim that her statements do not represent official guidance.

“Biden said [he] wouldn’t interfere with scientists, but that’s what this walk back is,” Joseph Allen, associate professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said over Twitter. “Undermining new CDC Director 3 weeks in is not a good look.”

One Democratic strategist said the White House is “walking a tightrope on the issue.”

“This is all new for everyone and I don’t think anyone has the answers if we’re being real,” the strategist said. “I think they’re trying to figure things out as they happen and that’s why there’s no real consistency happening. I think it’s a question of the White House finding their footing.”

Democratic strategist Joel Payne said that while there may be disagreements over how far to go in ensuring schools reopen safely, that the public understands the Biden administration’s core view is to move to reopen as quickly and as safely as possible once a relief package is passed.

“The president has set some aggressive goals for getting students back to school and I’m sure there will be some tough conversations among the president’s advisers about how best to do that,” he said. “But I still think the public understands the overall position and objective of the Biden administration is to reopen schools as soon and as safely as possible.”

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/537897-biden-administration-sends-conflicting-signals-on-school-reopening

26 views no comments

Myanmar’s military overturned a democratic election. Now they’re warning protesters not to ‘destroy democracy’ – CNN

By Helen Regan, CNN

Updated 4:21 AM ET, Tue February 9, 2021

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/08/asia/myanmar-coup-protests-democracy-intl-hnk/index.html

26 views no comments

Trump lawyer withdraws request not to have impeachment trial on Sabbath – CNN

By Ali Zaslav, Lauren Fox, Ted Barrett and Manu Raju, CNN

Updated 9:25 PM ET, Mon February 8, 2021

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/08/politics/sabbath-request-withdrawn-david-schoen/index.html

26 views no comments

últimas notícias

Ultimas Noticias

About This Story

TRANSITIONS

TODAY IN CONGRESS

AROUND THE HILL

TRIVIA

Follow Us

Why are income limits an issue?

Are there new income limits to get a check?

What do the experts say?

When would I get a $1,400 check?

últimas notícias

Ultimas Noticias

About This Story

Follow Us

Why are income limits an issue?

Are there new income limits to get a check?

What do the experts say?

When would I get a $1,400 check?

Suggest a Correction