Noticias Do Dia

Demonstrators protesting against recent legislative measures introduced by the government of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stand outside parliament on Dec. 16, 2018 in Budapest, Hungary.

Laszlo Balogh/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Laszlo Balogh/Getty Images

Demonstrators protesting against recent legislative measures introduced by the government of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stand outside parliament on Dec. 16, 2018 in Budapest, Hungary.

Laszlo Balogh/Getty Images

Updated at 7:33 p.m. ET

Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, a darling of Europe’s far-right, has tightened his grip on power in ways that have shocked the European Union.

His ultranationalist Fidesz party has gamed the electoral system, shut down most independent media, forced out an American university and even created new administrative courts that will be directly controlled by the government.

But none of these measures have generated the type of outrage in Hungary that has greeted a new law that allows employers to ask staff to work up to 400 hours of overtime per year. Employers can delay these overtime payments for up to three years.

Critics call it the “slave law.”

Thousands have protested every night outside parliament in Budapest since Fidesz lawmakers approved the measure on Wednesday. About 10,000 protesters marched to parliament on Sunday, waving Hungarian and European Union flags, and holding up hand-made banners. One read: “All I want for Xmas is democracy.” One group of protesters also demonstrated outside the state-run TV headquarters. Media loyal to the government have largely ignored the protests.

“It’s the first time I’ve seen signs that there’s a united opposition building against Orbán,” says Gabor Gyori, a senior analyst at the Budapest-based Policy Solutions think tank. “He did something that has upset a large segment of the population, even his own supporters.”

A new poll by the Republikon Institute, a liberal think tank, shows that 63 percent of Orbán supporters disapprove of the new overtime law. More than 95 percent of his critics also disapprove.

Labor union leaders point out that Hungarians are already upset about low wages and poor workplace conditions. “And now to give employers, especially multinational companies who want even lower wages, so much more power over workers, it’s very unfair,” says Laszlo Kordas, head of the Hungarian Trade Union Confederation.

Just before parliament voted on the overtime law on Dec. 12, Orbán told lawmakers that it will help remove “bureaucratic rules” for workers who want to put in more hours and “earn more.” The law allows employers to make individual contracts with workers, bypassing unions.

Hungary’s unemployment rate is low, about 3.7 percent, partly because of an exodus of its skilled workers to other EU member-states such as Germany, Austria and the United Kingdom, where wages are higher. Other countries with labor shortages often turn to immigrants, but Gyori says Orbán has been so vitriolic against immigration that “he’s painted himself into a corner.”

“Our population is shrinking,” Gyori says. “This labor shortage will only get worse.”

Kordas says Orbán and others in his party are clueless about working conditions for most Hungarians because most are “professional politicians who have never worked real jobs in the real world. They have no idea what actual working people have to go through.”

The protests have gained steam partly because labor unions have joined forces with student activists at Central European University, which is leaving Hungary next year under pressure from Orbán, who has demonized its founder, billionaire philanthropist George Soros, a Holocaust survivor and Hungarian-born Jew. (Soros’ Open Society Foundations has contributed financially to NPR in the past.)

Orbán claims Soros was behind a conspiracy to “flood” Europe with Muslim asylum-seekers. The prime minister’s allies are also blaming Soros for organizing the protests against the overtime law. Gergely Gulyas, Orbán’s chief of staff, declared that the protesters display “open anti-Christian hatred.”

Viktor Mak, a 26-year-old Hungarian-American student at CEU, says authorities are also claiming the protesters are dangerous.

“They are sending police to tear-gas us and they claim we’re the ones who are violent,” he says. “Everyone hates this law. Who wants to work overtime and not get paid for it for three years?”

One government minister, János Sül, quoted in the Hungarian website Pakspress.hu, said the young protesters have “never worked a day in their lives.” A spokesman for Gulyas, the prime minister’s chief of staff, said in an email to NPR that Orbán’s critics are spreading lies about the law and that “any overtime permitted by the law can only be performed with voluntary employee consent.”

Kordas, the union leader, rolls his eyes at the comment. “It’s hard to make that argument when employers have all the leverage over their workers,” he says.

Gyori, the political analyst, adds that there’s also anger that Orbán’s lawmakers rammed the law through parliament without consulting unions or the political opposition. Fidesz altered election rules so that the party controls two-thirds of parliament, even though it received only 49 percent of the popular vote in last spring’s election.

As a result, opposition lawmakers are virtually powerless. They were reduced to blowing whistles and sirens and singing the Hungarian national anthem in an attempt to delay the vote on the overtime vote last week. The measure passed Hungary’s parliament by a vote of 130 to 52 with one abstention.

“The problem with Orbán is that he fears the uncertainty that comes with democracy, so he stifles opposition to avoid the fallout of unpopular decisions,” Gyori says. “He will do anything to avoid that uncertainty.”

But some die-hard Orbán supporters say it’s the protesters who are sowing uncertainty.

Kalman Molnar, a 93-year-old eye doctor, says he’s never seen a Hungarian leader “as great as Viktor Orbán.” As night fell, Molnar bundled himself in a greatcoat, pulled on his black beret, and shuffled toward the protests “out of curiosity.”

“Even if 100,000 of them turned out, it wouldn’t matter,” he said, over the chants of the crowd. “They will always be the minority.”

Freelance journalist Mate Halmos contributed reporting from Budapest

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2018/12/16/677111463/protests-grip-hungary-in-response-to-overtime-measure-that-critics-call-a-slave-

A day before fired FBI Director James Comey is set to again testify behind closed doors with House Republicans, a party leader is predicting that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s case against ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn will soon be thrown out of court.

California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” that the FBI had “tricked” Flynn into not having a lawyer and had improperly “post-dated” documents to “morph” them into critical evidence against him. He promised Comey would face tough questioning about the episode.

“Tomorrow is going to be a very different day for Comey, particularly in light of what we’ve learned — the misconduct during the Flynn investigation was all about, thanks to a judge that demanded to understand what had happened,” Issa told host Maria Bartiromo, referring to U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s order last week that led Mueller to turn over key documents in the case.

He continued: “I would not be surprised a bit if the conviction of Flynn is overturned, because of the Justice Department and FBI’s misconduct — and that in fact, we go potentially all the way to the Supreme Court, with new protections — when the FBI and the Department of Justice lies to someone and tricks them into making statements, and then charges them with a lie they entrapped them in. … This kind of conduct we haven’t seen in a long time.”

In explosive court documents filed last week by Flynn’s legal team, it was revealed that FBI agents in his case deliberately did not instruct Flynn that any false statements he made could constitute a crime, and decided not to “confront” him directly about anything he said that contradicted their knowledge of his wiretapped communications with former Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

A memo written by then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe stated that he called Flynn and “explained that I thought the quickest way to get this done was to have a conversation between [Flynn] and the agents only. … I further stated that if LTG Flynn wished to include anyone else in the meeting, like the White House Counsel for instance, that I would need to involve the Department of Justice.”

The court documents also showed that the FBI’s interview report documenting Flynn’s statements — known as an “FD-302” — was dated August 22, 2017, nearly seven months after the actual Flynn interview took place in the White House. Addititonally, the 302 that Mueller filed apparently describes an interview conducted by federal authorities on July 19, 2017 not with Flynn, but with Peter Strzok, the agent who led the Flynn interview and said he did not feel Flynn was lying at the time.

Strzok was fired from the Russia probe in late July 2017 — just days after he apparently gave the interview that formed the basis for the 302 — for his apparent anti-Trump bias. No audio recording or other transcription of Flynn’s comments to the FBI has been produced, and none appears to exist.

It was not clear from Mueller’s heavily redacted Friday filing whether a written 302 report of Flynn’s interview, which FBI policy dictates should have been written soon after the interview was conducted, ever existed. Mueller was required to turn over all Flynn-related memoranda and documents to the court.

ANTI-TRUMP FBI AGENT’S PHONE WIPED AFTER MUELLER FIRES HIM FOR BIAS — RECORDS OFFICER CAN’T RECALL IF PHONE HAD TEXTS

Additional documents released by the Mueller team on Friday in response to Judge Sullivan’s order reveal that the decision to interview Flynn about his contacts with the Russian ambassador was controversial within the Justice Department. One FBI document said then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates “was not happy” when Comey informed her that the FBI planned to talk to Flynn.

The report also said several unnamed people back at FBI headquarters “later argued about the FBI’s decision to interview Flynn.” On Jan. 23, 2017 — just one day before the Flynn interview — The Washington Post, citing FBI sources, reported that the FBI had wiretapped Flynn’s conversations with Russian officials and cleared him of any wrongdoing.

Former FBI Director James Comey, with his attorney, David Kelley, right, speaking to reporters after a day of testimony before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, on Capitol Hill in Washington on Dec. 7.
(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Comey admitted last week that he personally directed two FBI agents to break normal protocol by interviewing Flynn at the White House because he felt the FBI could get “away with” it, early on in the Trump administration, which he characterized as disorganized.

Judge Sullivan technically has the authority to void Flynn’s guilty plea and dismiss the case against him if he unearths government misconduct, or finds that the plea would constitute a miscarriage of justice that the court should not accept.

Sullivan — who overturned the 2008 conviction of former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens after government misconduct came to light — could take that drastic step if he finds that the FBI withheld exculpatory witness reports from the Flynn team, lacks evidentiary basis for its charge, or improperly coerced Flynn into not bringing a lawyer to his fateful January 2017 interview.

GREGG JARRETT: MICHAEL FLYNN IS INNOCENT

Speaking to “Fox News Sunday” earlier in the day, Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani said Flynn had been “railroaded” and “framed” — and even though Giuliani acknowledged Flynn had lied to Vice President Pence about his communications with Russia, he said the FBI’s conduct was still reprehensible.

“What they did to General Flynn should result in discipline,” Giuliani charged. “They’re the ones who are violating the law.”

HOW FLYNN WAS PUSHED NOT TO HAVE A LAWYER

In a tweet Sunday, Comey showed no signs of backing down, forcefully condemning President Trump as a “liar” for criticizing federal authorities’ raid on his former attorney Michael Cohen.

“Remember, Michael Cohen only became a ‘Rat’ after the FBI did something which was absolutely unthinkable & unheard of until the Witch Hunt was illegally started,” Trump wrote on Twitter early Sunday. “They BROKE INTO AN ATTORNEY’S OFFICE! Why didn’t they break into the DNC to get the Server, or Crooked’s office?”

In April, federal agents raided Cohen’s home, office and hotel room as part of their investigation into bank fraud and campaign finance charges he later admitted he had committed. At the time, Trump characterized the move as an “attack on our country” and remarked that “attorney-client privilege is dead.”

But later Sunday, Comey emphasized that agents had acted pursuant to a lawful search warrant, and that attorneys are not immune from searches — especially when they are suspected of engaging in wrongdoing on behalf of clients.

FBI COMPLETELY MISSES JUDICIARY COMMITTEE DEADLINE TO EXPLAIN MYSTERIOUS RAID ON CLINTON WHISTLEBLOWER

“This is from the President of our country, lying about the lawful execution of a search warrant issued by a federal judge,” Comey wrote on Twitter. “Shame on Republicans who don’t speak up at this moment — for the FBI, the rule of law, and the truth.”

Any communications with attorneys in furtherance of a new crime are not usually protected by any privilege. A special master was appointed in the case by a federal court judge to ensure that Trump’s privileged communications were separated from non-privileged ones.

Cohen, who as Trump’s attorney also had the ability to compromise Trump’s attorney-client privilege by disclosing their communications himself, was sentenced this week to 36 months in prison.

The former Trump loyalist had earlier claimed in court that he had committed a campaign finance violation “at the direction” of Trump — although top legal experts and a former Federal Election Commission chairman have said that obtaining a criminal conviction for such alleged violations is often extremely difficult.

Comey testified earlier this month behind closed doors with House Republicans probing his oversight of the Hillary Clinton email probes and the early days of the Russia investigation. He is expected back on Monday for more testimony.

After he was questioned by House Republicans the first time on Dec. 7, Comey derided the GOP — which will lose the majority in the House in January, and with it their subpoena power — as hopeless partisans.

“Today wasn’t a search for truth, but a desperate attempt to find anything that can be used to attack the institutions of justice investigating this president,” Comey said. “They came up empty today, but will try again. In the long run, it’ll make no difference because facts are stubborn things.”

COMEY ADMITS FBI AGENTS BROKE PROTOCOL, GOT ‘AWAY WITH’ FLYNN INTERVIEW WITHOUT INVOLVING LAWYERS

A key focus of questioning from lawmakers was Comey’s decision to draft the 2016 statement recommending against filing criminal charges in the Clinton email probe before the former secretary of state was even interviewed, as well as the alleged political bias demonstrated in a slew of text messages and leaks by top FBI officials.

“What they did to General Flynn should result in discipline.”

— Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani

But a Justice Department lawyer prevented Comey — who had briefly sued to avoid testifying behind closed doors, before dropping that effort — from answering all of the Republicans’ questions, according to lawmakers at the hearing.

A 235-page transcript of Comey’s remarks and the questions posed to him was later released, pursuant to an agreement between Comey and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

It showed that Comey claimed “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember” in response to dozens of questions concerning key details about his time as FBI chief.

Asked if he recalled who drafted the FBI’s “initiation document” for the July 2016 Russia investigation, Comey said, “I do not.” He again claimed not to know when asked about the involvement in that initiation of Strzok, whose anti-Trump texts later got him removed from the special counsel’s probe.

When asked if the FBI had any evidence that anyone in the Trump campaign conspired to hack the DNC server, Comey gave a lengthy answer referring to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation as to why he couldn’t answer.

“Did we have evidence in July of (2016) that anyone in the Trump campaign conspired to hack the DNC server?” Comey asked rhetorically. “I don’t think that the FBI and special counsel want me answering questions that may relate to their investigation of Russian interference during 2016. And I worry that that would cross that line.”

When pressed further by Gowdy about what “factual predicate” the bureau had to launch a counterintelligence investigation, Comey again claimed that answering that question would be a “slope” that would ask him to reveal what the FBI “did or didn’t know about Russia activity” as it related to the 2016 election.

“You can’t tell us, or you won’t tell us?” Gowdy asks.

“Probably a combination of both … To the extent I recall facts developed during our investigation of Russian interference and the potential connection of Americans, I think that’s a question that the FBI doesn’t want me answering. So it’s both a can’t and a won’t,” Comey replied.

MORE DETAILS: COMEY ROUND-ONE TRANSCRIPT RELEASED

The former FBI director went on to say that anything related to Mueller’s investigation, to his understanding, would be “off limits” as it is an ongoing investigation.

Comey was also fuzzy on the eventual Democratic funding of the research that went into the controversial and unverified anti-Trump dossier.

Asked when he learned that the firm behind the dossier, Fusion GPS, was hired by law firm Perkins Coie – and when he learned that law firm was hired by the Democratic National Committee – Comey said, “I never learned that” while director.

Comey also claimed not to know key details surrounding the involvement of Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the dossier.

Asked when Steele was “terminated” as an FBI source, Comey said he didn’t know.

Asked about Steele’s subsequent contact with Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, Comey said, “I don’t know anything about that.”

Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo and Fox News’ Judson Berger contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/comey-issues-moral-rebuke-of-trump-for-criticizing-cohen-raid-shame-on-republicans

WASHINGTON — Almost a third of likely Democratic caucus goers in Iowa preferred former Vice President Joe Biden in the Des Moines Register/CNN/Mediacom Iowa Poll that showed U.S. Sen. Cory Booker with some distance to make up.

Biden polled 32 percent, followed by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., with 19 percent and Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, with 11 percent.

Booker, D-N.J., was sixth with 4 percent, behind also U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. (8 percent) and Kamala Harris, D-Calif. (5 percent).

U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Michael Bloomberg, the former Republican mayor of New York City who returned to the Democratic Party, each had 3 percent.

Booker told NJ Advance Media that he would “consider running for president” in 2020 and would “take some time during this holiday season to sit with family and close friends and advisers to give it a really good consideration.”

The Iowa caucuses, the first contest of the 2020 presidential primary season, are set for Feb. 3, 14 months from now.

Booker has plenty of time to improve his standing, however. Almost 4 in 10 likely caucus goers couldn’t express an opinion about him. Among who did, he was viewed favorably by 49 percent and unfavorably by just 12 percent.

He visited Iowa jn October, when he spoke at the state Democratic Party’s annual gala and then participated in a get-out-the-vote drive across the state.

Booker also has made two trips to New Hampshire, site of the first Democratic primary.

The poll of 455 likely Democratic caucus goers was conducted Dec. 10-13 and had a margin of error of 4.6 percentage points.

Jonathan D. Salant may be reached at jsalant@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @JDSalant or on Facebook. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook.

Source Article from https://www.nj.com/politics/2018/12/the-iowa-caucuses-are-just-two-years-away-heres-where-cory-booker-stands.html

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

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/16/world/greta-thunberg-cop24/index.html

Federal prosecutors in New York are reportedly probing whether President TrumpDonald John TrumpBiden, Sanders lead field in Iowa poll The Memo: Cohen fans flames around Trump Memo Comey used to brief Trump on dossier released: report MORE’s inaugural committee misspent donated funds from the record $107 million it received for the 2017 event.

In addition to examining possible financial wrongdoing, investigators are scrutinizing donors who may have written sizable checks in exchange for access to the Trump administration, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

The probe’s findings could affect other matters involving Trump, namely special counsel Robert MuellerRobert Swan MuellerSasse: US should applaud choice of Mueller to lead Russia probe MORE’s Russia investigation.

Here are five things to know about the Trump inauguration probe.

Wide range of potential crimes under examination

Legal experts say there could be several crimes at play, including violations of bribery statutes as well as tax and wire laws.

“Anytime someone donates to an inaugural committee, there is obviously some sort of generalized expectation of access,” Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor, told The Hill. “But if you can show that something goes beyond a generalized unspoken expectation, then you may have a bribery case.”

Honig said there may be violations of tax statutes if members of the committee exploited the tax-exempt status granted to nonprofit organizations. If an individual diverts the nonprofit’s funds for their personal benefit, that could be viewed as a potential scheme to defraud people who donated to the inaugural committee.

“If they were spending nonprofit money on expenditures that are not allowed for a nonprofit, it is a way to get around taxes, then it is a tax liability,” Honig added.

Seth Waxman, a former federal prosecutor, said bribery could be a 15-year offense, while a scheme to defraud donors could lead to 20 years in prison. Campaign finance violations, on the other hand, typically result in five-year sentences or less, he said.

The probe also reportedly folds into the Russia investigation, as Mueller seeks to determine whether foreign individuals and groups illegally pumped money into the president’s inaugural fund in an attempt to influence U.S. policy.

Under federal law, foreigners are not permitted to contribute to federal campaigns, political action committees (PACs) or inaugural funds.

Trump may have legal exposure

A key question, experts said, is what kind of legal exposure Trump might have in this kind of investigation.

Waxman, who now works for Dickinson Wright PLLC in Washington, said Trump wouldn’t be held criminally responsible if those working on his inaugural committee misused funds. But if he was involved, Waxman said, it’s a whole other ballgame.

“If he knew this was going on and he took some active steps to help it come about…then it could subject him,” Waxman said.

The Journal reported that key members of Trump’s campaign joined the inaugural committee, which increases the odds of someone in Trump’s orbit getting caught up in this probe.

“Prosecutors from SDNY are particularly savvy when it comes to investigating and prosecuting white collar crimes,” said former federal prosecutor Joseph Moreno, referring to the Southern District of New York. “They are known for financial crimes by their prosecutions. If this is reporting is accurate, this is serious. It is likely not a fishing expedition.”

There is also crossover between this investigation and Mueller’s probe, which is examining possible ties between the Trump campaign and Moscow. Details that arise in the inaugural fund review could affect Mueller’s probe, particularly since there is overlap with some of the witnesses who are cooperating in both investigations.

The White House has denied any wrongdoing.

“That doesn’t have anything to do with the president or the first lady,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters on Thursday. “The biggest thing the president did, his engagement in the inauguration, was to come here and raise his hand and take the oath of office. The president was focused on the transition during that time and not on any of the planning for the inauguration.”

Cohen played a key role

Michael Cohen, who transformed from one of the president’s most loyal defenders into a prominent political and legal foe, is a key player in the inauguration probe.

Earlier this year, federal investigators seized materials from Cohen’s office and room when they began investigating his business dealings. Those records reportedly contributed to the SDNY investigation.

Cohen, who was sentenced to three years in prison on Wednesday, agreed as part of his plea deal to work with investigators across a series of probes, including Mueller’s. That agreement allows prosecutors to review the documents they seized when his office and room were raided, as well as follow-up on any key questions that may arise from inauguration documents.

“Cohen could be very important,” Honig said. “Investigators got a lot of materials and documents during a search warrant that they executed on his office and home.”

The FBI reportedly obtained a recording in which Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former adviser to first lady Melania TrumpMelania TrumpThe Hill’s 12:30 Report – Cohen says Trump knew payments were wrong | GOP in turmoil over Trump shutdown threat | Kyl to resign from Senate at year’s end Michelle Obama jokes Barack’s message of hope began with being late for dinner The Hill’s Morning Report — Trump maintains his innocence amid mounting controversies MORE, told Cohen she was concerned about spending by the inaugural committee. It’s unclear when that discussion took place.

Prosecutors are also said to be examining a $1 million donation made to the inaugural fund by Tennessee developer Franklin Haney. Cohen represented Hanley when he sought to obtain a $5 billion loan from the Department of Energy. Prosecutors are now reportedly seeking to interview Hanley about his donation.

There are other cooperators

Cohen is not the only person cooperating with investigators.

Samuel Patten, a Washington, D.C.-based consultant, pleaded guilty in August for arranging for a U.S. citizen to act as a “straw donor.” The unidentified donor gave $50,000 in exchange for tickets to the inauguration celebration, and those tickets which were then handed off to a prominent Ukrainian oligarch. Foreigners are barred from contributing to inaugural funds.

Patten, who pleaded guilty to failing to register as a foreign lobbyist, has agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, including Mueller, as part of his plea deal. That puts him in a position to offer information on whether other foreigners tried to contribute to the inauguration.

And then there’s Richard Gates, the longtime business partner of former Trump campaign chairman Paul ManafortPaul John ManafortMueller probe has cost more than M so far Prosecutors investigating Trump inaugural fund, pro-Trump super PAC for possible illegal foreign donations: NY Times Swalwell says Butina guilty plea shows ‘influx of Russians’ into US ‘political bloodstream’ MORE. Gates began cooperating with the special counsel earlier this year.

“There is another cooperator here and it is Rick Gates,” Honig said. “Rick Gates was the deputy chairperson of the inauguration, so he is cooperating by all accounts.”

Investigation is in early stage

It’s unclear how many transactions are under scrutiny by investigators. 

Tom Barrack, who served as the chairman of Trump’s inaugural committee, has declined to publicly release the findings of an external audit that examined the inauguration panel’s finances.

But investigators have a strong foothold with their multiple cooperators.

“One good cooperator can at least give you some good lay of the land, and two can give you even more,” Honig said. “And to the extent these two cooperators, who should not be in contact with each other, tell you the same thing, then that starts to get pretty reliable.”

The inaugural committee’s events initially captured the attention of federal investigators, particularly because of the number of prominent foreign business leaders, many from Russia, who attended. Federal prosecutors will now be examining whether other foreign nations sought to gain access to the Trump administration to influence U.S. policy.

“We knew of potential Russian involvement and outreach to the Trump campaign. The fact now that you have other countries like Saudi and United Arab Emirates with these potential donations is a continuation of a disturbing trend,” said Moreno, who now works at Cadwalader, Wickersham and Taft LLP. “We have these laws in place to prevent foreign interference in a foreign election and now we have more than one potential outside actor which appears to be making outreach to potential American politics.”

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/421512-five-things-to-know-about-the-trump-inauguration-investigation

We’ve detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you’re not a robot.

Source Article from https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-15/obamacare-court-setback-won-t-kill-law

Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani told “Fox News Sunday” that President Trump will sit down one-on-one with Special Counsel Robert Mueller “over my dead body” amid bombshell new revelations in the false statements case against ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, whom Giuliani said was “railroaded” and “framed.”

In a spirited back-and-forth with host Chris Wallace, Giuliani also reiterated his claim that Trump initially “didn’t know about” the hush-money payments made to two women by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen that prosecutors have alleged constituted campaign finance violations.

Giuliani said Trump eventually found out about the payments and reimbursed Cohen, adding that Cohen is a “complete, pathological liar” who defied basic principles of ethics by secretly tape-recording his own client for several hours.

“Yes, this man is lying — is that a surprise to you, that Michael Cohen is lying?” Giuliani asked. “The man got up in front of a judge and said, ‘I was fiercely loyal to Donald Trump.’ Nonsense. He wasn’t fiercely loyal to him, he taped him. He sat there with [CNN anchor] Chris Cuomo, told him he wasn’t being taped, showed him a drawer and he lied to him and taped him for two hours.”

FBI MISSES DEADLINE TO PROVIDE DOCS ON MYSTERIOUS WHISTLEBLOWER RAID

In April, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he didn’t know about Cohen’s $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels, or how he got the money. But in a September 2016 tape recorded by Cohen, Trump apparently tells Cohen he was aware of a hush-money payment to buy the silence of another woman, Karen McDougal.

Playboy model Karen McDougal, left, sued to be released from a 2016 agreement requiring her to keep quiet about an alleged tryst she claims she had with Donald Trump, as Stormy Daniels said she passed a 2011 polygraph test.

“There was an intervening conversation” after the payment took place and before the Air Force One comments, Giuliani said, that led to Trump reimbursing Cohen’s payment. The reimbursement could be legally significant because, while third parties like Cohen are limited in the amount they can contribute to a presidential candidate, candidates themselves have no such spending limit.

Top Democrats, including incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., have said any campaign finance violation by Trump “certainly” could be impeachable. But they have so far cautioned against pursuing impeachment based on campaign finance concerns alone, as top legal experts and a former Federal Election Commission chairman have said that obtaining a criminal conviction for such alleged violations is often extremely difficult.

While Cohen has pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws “at the direction of” Trump, he also pleaded guilty to a smattering of unrelated fraud and false statemens charges — and Trump has suggested his former attorney was simply seeking a lenient sentence. Last week, a tearful Cohen who lamented covering up what he characterized as Trump’s “dirty deeds” was sentenced to 36 months in prison.

MUELLER RELEASES FLYNN DOCS SHOWING FBI CONCERNS ABOUT BREAKING PROTOCOL TO  INTERVIEW HIM

Giuliani also suggested to Wallace that Trump had difficulty remembering the 2016 conversation while aboard Air Force One.

“That was a conversation he was asked, middle of the campaign — he’s working 18 hours a day. I wouldn’t be able to remember a lot of things that happened in September of 2016. … When he sat down with his lawyer, and went through it in great detail, and saw things that could refresh his recollection, we immediately corrected it. Nobody pushed us.”

“Over my dead body. But, you know, I could be dead.”

— Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, on a Mueller interview 

Trump tweeted Sunday morning that Cohen “only became a ‘Rat'” after the FBI raided his office in April. “Why didn’t they break into the DNC to get the Server, or Crooked’s office?” Trump asked, in an apparent reference to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Asked whether Trump — who has already provided written responses to inquiries from the special counsel — would meet with Mueller, Giuliani responded, “Yeah, good luck, good luck — after what they did to Flynn, the way they trapped him into perjury, and no sentence for him.” (Mueller has recommended Flynn receive no jail time, and Flynn is set to be sentenced Dec. 18.)

He added: “Over my dead body. But, you know, I could be dead.”

Flynn pleaded guilty this year to making false statements to FBI agents who broke the agency’s usual protocol by interviewing him at the White House without involving the White House Counsel’s office.

COMEY ADMITS SENDING AGENTS DIRECT TO INTERVIEW FLYNN WAS SOMETHING FBI ‘GOT AWAY WITH’

Flynn has since said in a bombshell court filing that top FBI brass pressured him not to bring a lawyer to the interview, which prompted the federal judge overseeing the case to demand all relevant documents from Mueller’s team for review. It remains technically possible for the judge to overturn Flynn’s guilty plea if he finds that it was coerced, or would represent a miscarriage of justice.

The agents who interviewed Flynn at the White House in January 2017 — including Strzok — said they did not initially think Flynn was lying.

The documents released by the Mueller team on Friday in response to the judge’s order reveal that the decision to interview Flynn about his contacts with the Russian ambassador was controversial within the Justice Department. One FBI document said then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates “was not happy” when then-FBI Director James Comey informed her that the FBI planned to talk to Flynn.

The report also said several unnamed people back at FBI headquarters “later argued about the FBI’s decision to interview Flynn.” On Jan. 23, 2017 — just one day before the Flynn interview — The Washington Post, citing FBI sources, reported that the FBI had wiretapped Flynn’s conversations with Russian officials and cleared him of any wrongdoing.

While many sections of Mueller’s Friday filing are redacted, prosecutors apparently did not provide a so-called “302” witness report that FBI policy dictates should have been written contemporaneously with the Flynn interview. Instead, they provided a 302 report of an interview with Strzok months later on unrelated matters, in which Strzok also discussed his interview with Flynn and said he appeared to be telling the truth.

Strzok was removed from the Mueller probe for anti-Trump bias in late July 2017, after text messages surfaced in which he bashed the president and apparently coordinated media leaks detrimental to the White House.

Giuliani told Wallace that “the president doesn’t know that [Flynn] lied” to FBI agents, pointing out that there is no public evidence — other than Flynn’s guilty plea — that he committed the crime. Flynn, under significant financial pressure as a result of the prosecution, sold his home in Virginia this year.

On Sunday, GOP Rep. Devin Nunes told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” that Flynn had likely only pleaded guilty because of that overwhelming financial pressure and because “he was just out of money.”

While Trump did tweet early last year that Flynn had lied to the FBI, Giuliani said the president was simply using publicly available information to come to that conclusion. “He knows what he reads,” Giuliani said, referring to Trump.

“What they did to General Flynn should result in discipline,” Giuliani continued. “They’re the ones who are violating the law. They’re looking at a non-crime: collusion. The other guys are looking at a non-crime: campaign violation, which are not violations, and they are the ones who are violating the law, the rules, the ethics, nobody wants to look at them. They destroyed Strzok and Page’s 19,000 texts. If he destroyed texts, they would put him in jail, even though they can’t because he’s the president.”

Giuliani acknowledged that Flynn had misled Vice President Pence regarding his conversations with the then-Russian ambassador, admitting “that was a lie, but that’s not a crime.”

Giuliani, the former U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York, derided Mueller’s efforts in another false statements prosecution in the Russia probe.  George Papadopoulos, recently released from prison after pleading guilty to making false statements to FBI agents, said Friday he plans to run for a seat in the House of Representatives.

“Fourteen days for [former Trump aide George] Papadopoulos — I did better on traffic violations than they did with Papadopoulos,” Giuliani said.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IG BLAMES FBI-WIDE SOFTWARE GLITCH FOR MISSING TEXTS, ADMITS STRZOK, PAGE PHONES WIPED

He then pointed to a report by the Department of Justice’s internal watchdog last week, which blamed a technical glitch for a swath of missing text messages between anti-Trump ex-FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — and revealed that government phones issued by Mueller’s office to Strzok and Page had been wiped clean after Strzok was fired from the Russia probe.

Giuliani linked the Cohen prosecutions for campaign finance violations to the Mueller probe, saying Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — a frequent target of several conservatives in Congress, who sought to impeach him this summer — is overseeing both probes.

Mueller referred the Cohen campaign finance case to Southern District of New  York prosecutors because it fell outside the ambit of his mandate to probe Russian collusion. Cohen has also pleaded guilty in a separate case brought by Mueller’s team on a charge that Cohen lied to Congress by claiming that work on a since-abandoned plan to build a Trump Tower in Moscow had stopped in early mid-2016, when it really continued for months afterwards.

“The person in charge of this investigation is Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general,” Giuliani said. “He is the boss of Mueller, and he is the boss of the Southern District of New York. He’s the one that determined, ‘let’s move it over here’ — he put it there, in the Southern District of New York. They’re working for the same Rod Rosenstein.”

Michael Cohen, right, President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, arrives at federal court for his sentencing for dodging taxes, lying to Congress and violating campaign finance laws in New York on Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2018. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)

Multiple reports and indications suggest that the Mueller probe is winding down. Speaking to ABC’s “This Week,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said the end result should be as transparent as possible.

“When Mueller’s investigation is complete, whenever that may be, it should be disclosed to the American public,” Durbin said. “They ought to see it in detail, understand everything that has transpired.”

Responding to Giuliani’s claims that hush-money payments would not be criminal, Durbin effectively told all parties to wait and see.

“I think the responsibility of Congress is very clear: park yourselves on the sidelines and let Mueller complete this investigation,” Durbin said.

Meanwhile, former FBI Director James Comey acknowledged last week that when the agency initiated its counterintelligence probe into possible collusion between Trump campaign officials and the Russian government in July 2016, investigators “didn’t know whether we had anything” and that “in fact, when I was fired as director [in May 2017], I still didn’t know whether there was anything to it.”

His remarks square with testimony this summer from Page, the former FBI lawyer whose anti-Trump texts became a focus of House GOP oversight efforts. Page told Congress in a closed-door deposition that “even as far as May 2017” — more than nine months after the counterintelligence probe commenced — “we still couldn’t answer the question” as to whether Trump staff had improperly colluded with Russia.

Fox News’ Alex Pappas contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/giuliani-on-whether-trump-will-sit-down-with-mueller-good-luck-over-my-dead-body

President Donald Trump‘s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani blasted the president’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen as “pathetic” and a “serial liar” when questioned about Cohen’s claim that as a candidate Trump directed him to arrange hush payments to women who claimed to have past affairs with Trump.

“The man is pathetic. That’s a lawyer you were interviewing,” Giuliani told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday after watching a clip of Cohen’s exclusive interview with Stephanopolous last week. “He’s the guy you depend on to determine whether or not you should do it this way or that way.”

In his first interview since being sentenced to three years in prison, Cohen told ABC News that during the campaign Trump did direct him to pay off women with claims of past affairs and that the president knew what he was doing was wrong.

“Nothing at the Trump organization was ever done unless it was run through Mr. Trump. He directed me, as I said in my allocution and I said as well in the plea, he directed me to make the payments, he directed me to become involved in these matters,” Cohen told Stephanopolous in the exclusive interview.

Alex Wong/Getty Images, FILE
Rudy Giuliani, former New York City mayor and current lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump, speaks to members of the media at the White House, May 30, 2018 in Washington.

Giuliani said the president maintains that he did not direct Cohen to make the hush payments, which Giuliani said were initiated by Cohen.

“Well, the president said that’s false,” Giuliani said on “This Week” when questioned about Cohen’s claim that Trump directed his actions.

“And he said it was false under oath,” Giuliani continued, referring to Cohen. “He said it was false in his tape recorded conversation with Chris Cuomo. He said it was false on five other tape recorded conversations. He said on those tape recorded conversations that he did it on his own to start and then he brought it to the president and then the president reimbursed him.”

In addition to maintaining that the president was uninvolved in the payments initially, Giuliani went further in asserting that the hush payments to former Playboy model Karen McDougal and porn star Stormy Daniels, whose actual name is Stephanie Clifford, were not illegal in the first place.

“It’s not a crime, it’s not a crime, George, paying $130,000 to Stormy whatever, and paying $100,000 to the other one, it’s not a crime,” Giuliani said, pointing to the legal case involving John Edwards, a former U.S. senator and former presidential contender.

Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former personal attorney exits federal court after his sentencing hearing, Dec. 12, 2018, in New York.

When Stephanopoulos challenged that there are major differences with the Edwards case, Giuliani argued there were grounds for comparison and said that because the payments were not solely for the purpose of influencing the election, but also to protect the president’s family from embarrassing media coverage, the payments do not meet the legal standard for illegal campaign contributions.

“I can produce an enormous number of witnesses that say the president was very concerned about how this was going to affect his children, his marriage, not just this one but similar — all those women came forward at that point in time, that — that tape with Billy Bush and all of that. It’s all part of the same thing. And I know what he was concerned about and I can produce 20 witnesses to tell you what he was concerned about,” Giuliani said.

Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former personal attorney exits federal court after his sentencing hearing, Dec. 12, 2018, in New York.

Giuliani went on to characterize the seriousness of the charge of a campaign finance violation.

“Oh right, a campaign finance violation, give me a break,” Giuliani said, and sought to draw a comparison to a reporting violation by the 2008 Obama campaign. In that case, the Obama campaign was fined for not properly filing on information regarding a collection of donations in the final days of the campaign.

Though Trump and his team say Cohen is lying, Cohen says it’s the president who is not telling the truth.

“He knows the truth, I know the truth, others know the truth, and here is the truth: The people of the United States of America, people of the world, don’t believe what he is saying. The man doesn’t tell the truth. And it is sad that I should take responsibility for his dirty deeds.

Trump has maintained that he never directed Cohen to break the law, and if Cohen did, he says he is without fault.

“I never directed Michael Cohen to break the law. He was a lawyer and he is supposed to know the law. It is called ‘advice of counsel,’ and a lawyer has great liability if a mistake is made,” Trump said in a tweet Thursday.

Source Article from https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-donald-trumps-lawyer-blasts-cohen-pathetic/story?id=59838323

We’ve detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you’re not a robot.

Source Article from https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-15/obamacare-court-setback-won-t-kill-law

U.S. Border Patrol next to the the border wall dividing Nogales, Ariz., and Nogales Mexico.

Susan Schulman/Barcroft Media via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Susan Schulman/Barcroft Media via Getty Images

U.S. Border Patrol next to the the border wall dividing Nogales, Ariz., and Nogales Mexico.

Susan Schulman/Barcroft Media via Getty Images

I do not doubt that U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents did all they could to try to save the life of Jakelin Caal Maquin, a 7-year-old girl from Guatemala, who died in the custody of the United States.

The little girl and her father were among a group of more than 100 migrants who turned themselves over to Border Patrol agents last Thursday night, Dec. 6, after they had crossed the U.S.-Mexican border and trudged through a rugged, isolated area of the New Mexican desert.

The girl and her father were placed on a bus. She was reportedly not breathing by the time she arrived at a Border Patrol station, about eight hours after she had been placed in custody. Emergency medical personnel found the little girl had not had food or water for days. She had a temperature of 105.7 degrees. She was flown to Providence Children’s Hospital in El Paso, Texas and less than a day later, Jakelin Caal Maquin died.

Border Patrol Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said, “The agents involved are deeply affected and empathize with the father over the loss of his daughter. … We cannot stress enough the dangers posed by traveling long distances, in crowded transportation, or in the natural elements through remote desert areas without food, water and other supplies.”

I’ve reported stories on Border Patrol agents. I know many of them are fathers and mothers from families with their own migration stories. Many agents talk about the times they have had to rescue people stranded in deserts or forests after they’ve crossed the border or saved people who have been savaged by criminal gangs and smugglers.

There are thousands of children now in the custody of U.S. government. Even if you hold the family of the 7-year-old girl responsible for putting her life in danger to cross into the United States, you may wonder: Was a 7-year-old girl who had been taken in from the desert not given water or food for the eight hours she was in U.S. custody? And how can the president, who often contends the U.S. has never been better, stronger or richer, be astonished when thousands of families in countries that are roiled by crime, drugs and poverty decide to set out for the U.S. — whatever the risks — because they see it as what Lincoln called “the last best hope” of Earth?

Jakelin Caal Maquin’s father is now with a charity group in El Paso and told the Guatemalan consul that he has no complaints about the way his daughter was treated by the Border Patrol or medical staff. The Inspector General’s Office of the Department of Homeland Security will investigate how Jakelin Caal Maquin died.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2018/12/15/676894328/opinion-what-the-death-of-a-7-year-old-migrant-says-about-this-country

We’ve detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you’re not a robot.

Source Article from https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-15/obamacare-court-setback-won-t-kill-law

The family of a 7-year-old Guatemalan girl who died in U.S. Border Patrol custody is disputing an account from U.S. officials who said she had not been given food or water for days.

In a statement released by lawyers, the parents of Jakelin Caal said the girl had been given food and water and appeared to be in good health as she traveled through Mexico with her father, 29-year-old Nery Gilberto Caal Cuz. The family added that Jakelin had not been traveling through the desert for days before she was taken into custody.

Tekandi Paniagua, the Guatemalan consul in Del Rio, Texas, told The Associated Press that he spoke with the Jakelin’s father. The consul said Nery Caal told him the group they were traveling with was dropped off in Mexico about a 90-minute walk from the border.

Border Patrol officials did not immediately respond to the family’s comments.

The family’s statement was released Saturday during a news conference in El Paso, Texas, at an immigrant shelter where Jakelin’s father is staying. Her family did not attend and has asked for privacy.

Jakelin and her father were seeking asylum in the U.S. and were among a large group of migrants arrested Dec. 6 near a remote border crossing in New Mexico. Hours later they were placed on a bus to the nearest Border Patrol station, but Jakelin began vomiting and eventually stopped breathing. She later died at a Texas hospital.

Border Patrol officials on Friday said agents did everything they could to save the girl but that she had not had food or water for days. They added that an initial screening showed no evidence of health problems, and that her father had signed a form indicating she was in good health.

But the family took issue with that form, which was in English, a language her father doesn’t speak or read. He communicated with border agents in Spanish but he primarily speaks the Mayan Q’eqchi’ language.

“It is unacceptable for any government agency to have persons in custody sign documents in a language that they clearly do not understand,” the statement said.

Jakelin’s family is urging authorities to conduct an “objective and thorough” investigation into the death and to determine whether officials met standards for the arrest and custody of children.

A cause of death has not yet been released. A private prayer service was held in Texas on Friday so her father could see Jakelin’s body before it is taken to Guatemala, said Ruben Garcia, director of the Annunciation House shelter where her father is staying.

“All of us were moved by the depth of his faith and his trust that God’s hand is in all of this,” Garcia said.

Family members in Guatemala said Caal decided to migrate with his favorite child to earn money he could send back home. Jakelin’s mother and three siblings remained in San Antonio Secortez, a village of about 420 inhabitants.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/us/migrant-girls-relatives-dispute-official-story-on-her-death

“I don’t see why we wouldn’t,” Rudolph W. Giuliani, one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, said about whether they would go public with a subpoena.

Mr. Mueller is investigating two chief issues: Did the Trump campaign collude with the Russians, and has the president obstructed justice by interfering in the Russia investigation?

Investigators have interviewed nearly all the White House and Justice Department officials who were directly involved in the episodes under scrutiny in the obstruction inquiry. But Mr. Mueller is still seeking to speak with several witnesses about ties between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia.

In particular, Mr. Mueller wants to learn what the campaign knew about WikiLeaks’s plans to release Democratic emails hacked by the Russians in the months before the election. As part of that inquiry, Mr. Mueller is closely examining whether one of Mr. Trump’s longtime associates, Roger J. Stone Jr., was a conduit between WikiLeaks and the campaign. Mr. Mueller is fighting a legal battle with an associate of Mr. Stone’s who is refusing to testify before a grand jury and hand over documents.

Maybe. The person is most likely not barred from speaking publicly about the case, but because the proceeding has been sealed, the lawyers involved cannot discuss it. If the witness ultimately loses and the court orders jail time, then it would most likely become public.

Similar disputes often arise in cases in which prosecutors are trying to identify government officials who have leaked classified information to reporters. In those instances, reporters often refuse to answer investigators’ questions, forcing judges to decide whether to jail them.

In high-profile investigations that involve celebrity defendants or organized crime figures, witnesses who are loyal to the person under investigation occasionally refuse to cooperate with investigators. A decade ago, federal prosecutors asked a judge to jail the trainer of the baseball slugger Barry Bonds, who was under investigation for using performance-enhancing drugs. The trainer spent a year in jail as he refused to testify about whether he had given drugs to Mr. Bonds, significantly hurting the government’s case.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/15/us/politics/special-counsel-subpoena.html

SAN ANTONIO SECORTEZ, Guatemala (AP) — Jakelin Amei Rosmery Caal Maquin received her first pair of shoes several weeks ago, when her father said they would set out together for the United States, thousands of miles from this small indigenous community in Guatemala where she spent her days plodding through mud and surrounded by coconut trees.

The 7-year-old was excited about the possibility of a new life in another country, relatives said Saturday. Maybe she would get her first toy, or learn to read and write.

Instead she died in a Texas hospital two days after being taken into custody by US Border Patrol agents in a remote stretch of New Mexico desert.

The death has drawn attention to the increasingly perilous routes that Central American migrants traverse to reach the US, where some plan to apply for asylum, and to the way migrants are treated once in custody. Jakelin’s family says her father paid a human smuggler to sneak them across the border; asylum wasn’t the plan.

Sadness hangs in the air outside the tiny wooden house with a straw roof, dirt floors, a few bedsheets and a fire pit for cooking where Jakelin used to sleep with her parents and three siblings. The brothers are barefoot, their feet caked with mud and their clothes in tatters. A heart constructed out of wood and wrapped in plastic announces Jakelin’s death.

Members of the Caal Maquin family and neighbors stand in front of Claudia Maquin’s house in Raxruha, Guatemala, on Saturday, Dec. 15, 2018.
Associated Press/Oliver de Ros

Grandfather Domingo Caal said the family got by on $5 a day earned harvesting corn and beans. But it wasn’t enough. Jakelin’s father Nery Caal decided to migrate with his favorite child to earn money he could send back home. Nery often took his daughter to fish at a nearby river. The long journey north would be an even greater adventure.

The girl leapt with joy when she was told about the trip, Domingo Caal said in Spanish.

The people of San Antonio Secortez, a lush mountain hamlet with 420 inhabitants within the municipality of Raxruha, speak the Mayan Q’eqchi’ language, though most of the men also know Spanish.

Domingo Caal translated for Claudia Maquin as she attempted to describe her daughter’s life while holding back tears. Jakelin liked to climb trees, Claudia said, but she gives few details.

“Every time they ask me what happened to the girl, it hurts me again,” Maquin said.

Read more: The 7-year-old migrant girl who died in Border Patrol custody received medical care 90 minutes after first showing symptoms

Claudia Maquin, 27, shows a photo of her daughter, Jakelin Amei Rosmery Caal Maquin in Raxruha, Guatemala, on Saturday, Dec. 15, 2018.
Associated Press/Oliver de Ros

Members of 13 families from San Antonio Secortez have established homes in the US, and community members set off firecrackers to celebrate each time word arrived that one of the townsfolk had made it. The Caals said they believed that Jakelin and Nery would make it, too.

“He was desperate,” Domingo Caal said, explaining that his son borrowed money — using his plot of land as guarantee — to pay for the voyage.

Tekandi Paniagua, the Guatemalan consul in Del Rio, Texas, told The Associated Press that Nery Caal and his daughter took about a week to reach the US border. Paniagua said Caal, 29, told him on Friday that they had been dropped off near the border and walked just an hour and a half to reach it.

They were detained soon afterward along with a large group of other migrants near the Antelope Wells border crossing at about 9:15 p.m. on Dec. 6 in a dry, rugged area flecked with ghost towns and abandoned buildings.

The consul said Caal told him the girl never lacked food or water either before or after they were detained, and said he had no complaints about how they were treated.

Read more:After a 7-year-old migrant girl died in Border Patrol custody, Kirstjen Nielsen said ‘this family chose to cross illegally’, and critics are outraged she’s blaming the death on the family

A heart-shaped sign displays the name of Jakelin Amei Rosmey Caal in Raxruha, Guatemala, on Saturday, Dec. 15, 2018.
Associated Press/Oliver de Ros

US Customs and Border Protection said Friday that the girl initially appeared healthy and that an interview raised no signs of distress. Authorities said her father spoke in Spanish to border agents and signed a form indicating she was in good health.

Jakelin’s death drew immediate questions from members of Congress and others about whether more could have been done. There were only four agents working with a group of 163 migrants, including 50 unaccompanied children, and only one bus to take them to the nearest station 94 miles away. The Homeland Security Department’s inspector general has opened an investigation.

That single bus set out on a several-hour trip to the Border Patrol station filled with unaccompanied minors — following protocol — while the daughter and her father waited for it to return. They left about eight hours after being detained.

Caal told the consul that while they were on the bus, his daughter began to feel warm and uncomfortable and began to vomit, and Caal told the driver that his daughter was ill.

Elvira Choc, 59, Jakelin Amei Rosmery Caal’s grandmother, rests her head on her hand in front of her house in Raxruha, Guatemala, on Saturday, Dec. 15, 2018.
Associated Press/Oliver de Ros

Officials said agents radioed ahead to have emergency medical technicians available in Lordsburg. When they arrived, 90 minutes later, she had stopped breathing. Emergency crews revived her, and she was airlifted to an El Paso, Texas, hospital, to which the father was driven.

The girl died at about 12:30 a.m. Dec. 8, roughly 19 hours after she began throwing up on the bus and 27 hours after being apprehended. Officials said she had swelling on her brain and liver failure. An autopsy was scheduled to determine the cause of death. The results could take weeks.

Paniagua said the father, whom he described as a devout evangelical Christian, now appeared to be “more serene, more stable.”

Source Article from https://www.businessinsider.com/jakelin-caal-maquin-fled-guatemala-village-poverty-2018-12

Source Article from https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/421542-zinke-blames-false-attacks-in-resignation

December 15 at 7:09 PM

Republicans are facing a moment of reckoning on health care after a federal judge struck down the Affordable Care Act, imperiling the landmark law the GOP has struggled against for eight years.

During the midterm campaign, President Trump and Republican candidates vowed repeatedly to protect millions of Americans with preexisting medical conditions, as the law does, even as the administration embraced a legal challenge by 20 GOP-led states to the law commonly known as Obamacare.

That lawsuit led to Friday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, who concluded the law is unconstitutional because of a change to the nation’s tax laws that Republicans made last year. The White House has said the law will stay in place, pending the appeals process.

Nevertheless, Republicans are under greater pressure to produce an alternative to the law they have ardently opposed since its passage and a means to ensuring affordable health care coverage to some 52 million people with conditions such as diabetes, asthma and cancer. But they are still riven by the divisions that thwarted previous efforts to overhaul the law.

“There are a lot of flaws in the ACA, but there are a lot of very good provisions as well, and tossing it out the window altogether is not the way to go,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who disagreed with Friday’s ruling. “We can’t have our position be to just repeal and not replace the ACA.”

Agreeing on a replacement has been an elusive goal for the GOP, which tried and failed to pass a plan in the Senate last year. Collins notably voted against that plan. With Democrats about to take control of the House, their window for getting an Obamacare alternative to Trump’s desk has effectively closed for the next two years.

However, there is still a political imperative for Republicans to rally around a plan of their own, especially ahead of 2020 elections for president and Congress. Democrats are seizing on Friday’s ruling to highlight the repeated GOP efforts to dismantle the ACA.

“In the midterms, the threat to health-care was theoretical, and now it’s a clear and present danger,” said Jesse Ferguson, a former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee official.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) vowed her chamber would “formally intervene in the appeals process” when her party takes power in January. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he will force votes next year that would show Republicans have been dishonest on health care, votes certain to be used in campaign ads. A liberal group is planning to pressure GOP senators up for reelection to oppose the ruling.

“They are trapped by their white-hot hatred of President Obama and everything he did,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), speaking of Republicans. “And if they stay in that place it will be their undoing as a party.”

While many congressional Democrats spoke out in the hours after the judge’s ruling, Republicans on Capitol Hill were much quieter Saturday. The dynamic resembled this year’s midterm elections, in which Democrats were eager to run on health care and Republicans sought to direct voters’ focus to other topics.

The politics of health care have shifted in recent years. Repealing and replacing the ACA was a rallying cry for Republicans during the President Barack Obama’s terms and a cause for concern for many Democrats. But over time, the law gained popularity, millions of Americans were insured and Obama left office.

Thirty-seven states have expanded Medicaid under the law, with three Republican-leaning states — Idaho, Nebraska and Utah — approving ballot measures last month to expand the health-care program for the poor and disabled.

In the midterms, Democrats made health care their signature issue, positioning themselves as staunch defenders of the law’s well-regarded provisions, most notably its protections for people with preexisting conditions. They cast Republicans as hostile to those provisions, noting their failed 2017 repeal-and-replace effort.

They also highlighted the lawsuit, which was joined by Republican governors and state attorneys general from 20 states. Among them was Josh Hawley, who was elected to the Senate in Missouri despite facing attacks over his decision to join the legal fight.

Hawley was among the Republicans who campaigned on pursuing protections for people with preexisting conditions outside of Obamacare. He advocated a federal insurance guarantee as a potential alternative for ensuring protections.

“Now it’s time for both parties to work together to lower healthcare costs, improve access to quality care for all, and protect those with preexisting conditions,” Hawley wrote Friday on Twitter, responding to the ruling.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, the Democrat that Hawley defeated, had a different take. “@HawleyMO has won the victory he sought in his lawsuit,” she tweeted Friday. “Obamacare has been gutted by a Texas Court due to his lawsuit. Rs promised repeal and replace. They didn’t. Now @HawleyMo has done repeal thru courts. But there’s no replace. Scary stuff for millions.”

House Republican leaders praised Friday’s ruling and pointed to the legislation they passed in their chamber last year to overhaul the health-care law.

“President Trump has made clear he wants a solution and I am committed to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make sure America’s health-care system works for all Americans,” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a statement.

What that solution would entail was not clear. A spokesman did not immediately respond to a request seeking more clarity.

Trump on Saturday commented on the ruling against the ACA, telling reporters that he wanted to work with Democrats to pass a new law — without offering specifics or saying how he would do it.

“We’ll get great health care for our people, that’s a repeal and replace, handled a little bit differently, but it was a big, big victory by a highly respected judge, highly, highly respected in Texas,” Trump said.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) did not weigh in on the ruling publicly. A spokesman did not provide any information on his thinking. The day after the midterms, McConnell expressed no interest in a new effort to rip up the ACA in the next Congress.

“I think it’s pretty obvious, the Democratic House is not going to be interested in that,” said McConnell, who suggested instead that lawmakers address the law’s flaws “on a bipartisan basis.”

Republicans expanded to a 53-to-47 Senate majority in the midterms. Still, Schumer promised Saturday to raise the issue of health care in the next session of Congress.

“The GOP spent all last year pretending to support people with preexisting conditions while quietly trying to remove that support in the courts,” he tweeted. “Next year, we will force votes to expose their lies. They will no longer be able to get away with lying to the American people.”

Republican senators will also face pressure from outside the Capitol.

“We’re going to ask every Republican senator, for example, up in 2020, to publicly say they oppose this lawsuit and it should be overturned,” said Leslie Dach, campaign chair of Protect Our Care, an alliance of liberal groups.

One of the Republican senators facing a potentially competitive reelection campaign is Joni Ernst of Iowa. Ernst issued a statement Saturday saying that it was “important that we protect people with preexisting conditions, as we repeal and replace Obamacare.”

She highlighted legislation she has co-sponsored on that front. It has yet to receive a vote.

Josh Dawsey contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/health-care-law-ruling-puts-republicans-on-the-defensive-after-campaign-promises/2018/12/15/28592816-007d-11e9-ad40-cdfd0e0dd65a_story.html