Recently Added Videos

Battered by mismanagement, American sanctions and corruption, the Venezuelan economy has been in steep decline since 2014. Millions of people have emigrated, and the roughly 30 million who remain are plagued by hyperinflation and shortages of medicines, food, electricity and jobs.

[Read a guide to how Venezuela’s crisis began, and who is vying for power.]

Mr. Maduro, who has been in office since 2013, won re-election last year in a contest that was widely seen as fraudulent. In January, the National Assembly, controlled by the opposition and led by Mr. Guaidó, declared the election and the government illegitimate, leading Mr. Guaidó to claim to be the rightful, transitional leader.

More than 50 countries, including the United States and most of its close allies, recognized him as Venezuela’s legitimate leader.

The Trump administration expressed immediate support for Mr. Guaidó’s latest move, and said it was closely watching developments in Venezuela.

President Trump tweeted, “The United States stands with the People of Venezuela and their Freedom!” and Vice President Mike Pence tweeted, “We are with you! America will stand with you until freedom & democracy are restored. Vayan con dios!”

Mr. Trump also threatened sanctions and “a full and complete” embargo on Cuba, a major supporter of Mr. Maduro. Cuba, Mr. Trump said, must stop “military and other operations for the purpose of causing death and destruction to the Constitution of Venezuela.”

Outside the White House, John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, met with reporters and addressed Mr. Maduro’s accusation that he was fighting off a coup attempt, adding that it would big a “big mistake” for Mr. Maduro to use any force against protesters.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/world/americas/venezuela-coup-guaido-military.html

As top Democrats meet with President Donald Trump at the White House on Tuesday to discuss possibly forging a bipartisan infrastructure package, the underlying issue that’s derailed big road and bridge bills over the past ten years remains an unsolved political riddle, and that’s how the feds pay for hundreds of billions of dollars in additional highway construction.

“We look forward to hearing your ideas on how to pay for this package to ensure that it is big and bold enough to meet our country’s needs,” top Democrats told the President in a Monday letter.

That letter didn’t mention that Democrats haven’t identified how they would pay for their plan, either – or how big it would be, reportedly somewhere in the range of $1-to-$2 trillion.

At the White House, there has been the same type of mushiness when it comes to funding details.

“The President’s target of $1 trillion in infrastructure investment will be funded through a combination of new Federal funding, incentivized non-Federal funding, and newly prioritized and expedited projects,” officials wrote last year, as the acting White House budget chief said earlier this year that Congress should fill in the blanks.

“It continues to be a major priority of this administration,” acting Office of Management and Budget chief Russ Vought told a House hearing last month.

But Democrats were having none of it.

<!–

–>

“We’ve gone over two years and all we have is the same one page description of the President’s plan that we had this time last year,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX).

A very similar political dance over infrastructure went on during the Obama Administration; in President Obama’s 2012 budget, he proposed spending $328 billion extra over ten years on new roads and bridges – but officials never spelled out for Congress the source of the new funding – and Republicans never acted on the request.

Some veteran transportation officials aren’t sure this effort by President Trump is going to be any different.

“I am one person very skeptical about any major infrastructure program,” said Emil Frankel, a former Connecticut Department of Transportation Commissioner, who was also appointed to serve in the federal Transportation Department under President George W. Bush.

“First of all the atmosphere is such, that it seems to me impossible to imagine any agreement across party lines,” Frankel told a Capitol Hill event last week hosted by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.

National business and transportation industry groups have pushed for years to have Congress spend more money on infrastructure – and they continue to make that point this week.

“This is a great opportunity to get to work on modernizing America’s infrastructure,” the U.S. Chamber of Commerce tweeted on Monday.

But it still all comes down to money – and with the yearly deficit expected to be over $1 trillion in 2019, there’s not a lot of extra cash just sitting on the shelf, waiting to be turned into highway concrete.

And a quick internet sample of headlines from around the country shows right now might not be the best time to increase gas taxes.

“Gas prices rising in Syracuse, across Upstate New York,” read one.

“Tuscon gas prices rising,” one TV station reported in Arizona.

“Gas prices are still rising,” a Florida TV station noted.

“Historically, the gas tax has provided adequate funding, but the increasing number of electric vehicles and hybrids as well as fuel tax evasion makes the gas tax an increasingly inefficient funding mechanism,” argued Baruch Feigenbaum and Austill Stuart of the Reason Foundation earlier this year.

If a gas tax increase is out of the mix, the other options to fund an infrastructure package might include:

+ Shifting money from general revenues into new roads and bridges;

+ Allowing states the option to levy tolls on older interstate highways;

+ A financing route involving the private sector;

+ Or moving to a futuristic system known as “Vehicle Miles Traveled,” where a transponder would track the distance individual vehicles go, and motorists would be charged accordingly.

The federal gasoline tax has not increased since 1993; experts say that means the inflation adjusted value of that revenue has gone down by close to 50 percent in the last 26 years.

Support real journalism. Support local journalism. Subscribe to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution today.
See offers.

Your subscription to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution funds in-depth reporting and investigations that keep you informed. Thank you for supporting real journalism.

About the Author
























Source Article from https://www.ajc.com/blog/jamie-dupree/congress-trump-face-funding-riddle-infrastructure/GulhWYkv3u9CAgqzW0YHJM/

President Trump’s plan to put ally Stephen Moore on the Federal Reserve Board appeared on the edge of failure Tuesday, after one Republican senator said she was “very unlikely” to vote for Moore and several others sharply criticized him.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) became the first senator to go on record as a likely “no” vote.

“Stephen Moore, I am going to make a comment on that,” interrupting a trip to the Senate floor to return to address a reporter after Moore’s name was mentioned. “Very unlikely that I would support that person.”

Ernst, who said she had shared her views with the White House, said she “didn’t think” Moore would be confirmed if Trump follows through on his plan to nominate the former campaign adviser, adding that “several” senators agree with her on Moore.

Her assessment was affirmed by Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who said Moore’s best hope was to barely squeak by.

“I think he’s probably down to the high water mark now of 50 or 51,” said Scott, who declined to say how he would vote and said he wanted to review Moore’s record as a whole.

Beyond Ernst, three other female Republican senators — Susan Collins (Maine), Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) and Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.) — expressed serious concerns about Moore. They cited his comments saying there would be societal problems if men were not the breadwinners in the family, denouncing co-ed sports and saying female athletes do “inferior work” to men.

If four of the 53 Republican senators reject Moore, his nomination would likely fail, as no Democrats are expected to back him. The White House has yet to formally nominate him, raising the possibility that Moore’s nomination could be finished before it ever officially begins.

“It’s hard to look past those [comments],” Moore Capito said.

Blackburn said she has known Moore for a long time but was troubled by what he said as recently as 2014, when he wrote a column questioning whether it would cause societal unrest if women earned more than men.

“Of course his comments are something that are not good and you can guarantee — be guaranteed, absolutely without fail — if I visit with him that would be a topic of discussion,” Blackburn said.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), a close friend of Trump’s, expressed concerns of his own.

“It will be a very problematic nomination,” Graham said Tuesday, although he said he is “still looking” at Moore and hasn’t made up his mind on whether to support him.

Trump keeps saying the economy would be even stronger — with higher growth and a higher stock market — if the Fed had not raised interest rates so many times last year. He has been on a quest in 2019 to fill the remaining two spots on the Fed’s board with people who are loyal to him and believe interest rates should be reduced.

Trump’s other intended nominee — businessman Herman Cain — withdrew from consideration after four GOP senators signaled they would not vote for him.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who said publicly she would not vote for Cain, said Tuesday she had a view on Moore but declined to make it public. “I’m going to share it with the White House,” she said.

Collins, another GOP swing vote, said she wasn’t just concerned about Moore’s comments on women but also whether he would maintain the Fed’s independence from politics.

“Obviously some of his past writings are of concern. I feel strongly about the independence of the Federal Reserve. I would also want to explore that issue with him,” Collins said. “It certainly appears that he has a lot of personal financial issues as well as troubling writings about women and our role in society, in sports, and also how he views the Federal Reserve.”

Moore, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation and longtime conservative commentator, vowed to keep fighting Tuesday in an appearance on CNBC. He apologized over the weekend for his past comments about women, although he didn’t get into specifics.

The White House reiterated its support for Moore even as some Republicans appeared to be wavering on whether it was a good idea to move forward with his nomination.

“The president stands behind him,” said Kellyanne Conway, a senior Trump adviser, on Tuesday. “He’s somebody that gets the economy, and I guess we’ll continue to focus on that.”

Moore did have some support in the Senate, with Rand Paul (R-Ky.) saying Tuesday that he was “for him,” but most Republican senators dodged reporters questions about Moore or sounded on the fence about whether he should be seriously considered for one of the nation’s top economic posts.

“Clearly there have been some developments that have been troubling with regards to the tax history, the child-care history and the comments I’ve made before still hold, which is it’s important for the Fed to be staffed and led by economists and folks that are not primarily partisan,” said Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah).

The Internal Revenue Service put a $75,000 lien on Moore for unpaid taxes, which Moore says he has now paid and were a result of a small mistake on his tax return a few years ago. Moore was also found in contempt of court in 2013 for failing to pay his ex-wife more than $330,000 in child support and alimony.

The White House has stood by Moore as news of his past legal troubles and writings have surfaced and caused a firestorm.

“I know him personally. I know he’s a good person,” Conway said. “I’m a strong, successful woman who’s worked with Stephen Moore for decades, and I know how he feels about women. I know how he treats women in the workplace.”

Erica Werner and Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/04/30/gop-support-stephen-moore-falls-apart-leaving-trumps-fed-pick-with-slim-chance-confirmation/

The man accused of opening fire inside a Southern California synagogue was a college student, athlete and musician whose embrace of white supremacy and anti-Semitism has dumbfounded his family and others who thought they knew him well. John T. Earnest, 19, made the dean’s list both semesters last year as a nursing student at California State University, San Marcos. 

In high school, he had stellar grades, swam on the varsity team and played piano solos at talent shows.

Earnest apparently became radicalized sometime over the last two years and is charged with murder and attempted murder in Saturday’s assault on the Chabad of Poway synagogue, which killed one woman and injured three people, including the rabbi. He is also charged with arson in connection with an attack last month on a mosque in nearby Escondido.

Owen Cruise, 20, saw Earnest every day during senior year at Mt. Carmel High School in San Diego when the two were in calculus and physics together. They were in the school’s amateur radio club together.

Earnest’s piano performances drew audiences to their feet. He did a rendition of “Pirates of the Caribbean” and played Chopin and Beethoven. “Crowds would be cheering his name,” Cruise said Monday. “Everybody loved him.”

His father, John A. Earnest, is a popular physics teacher at Mt. Carmel, where he has worked for 31 years.

“He was very close to his dad,” Cruise said. “He always hung out in his classroom, came to see him at lunch. He always seemed like a nice guy … He didn’t seem like the type of person who would go off the deep end.”

8-year-old injured in Poway synagogue shooting: “It was very, very scary”

Earnest’s father volunteered to help students with exams and homework, said Cruise, who praised his former teacher for having a big impact on his life. On the morning of the shooting, the elder Earnest was hosting a study hour for an Advanced Placement exam and brought cookies, Cruise said.

Cruise, now a sophomore at the University of California, San Diego, said the suspect lived at home and saw his parents every day. “The way John T. acted is not representative at all of the way he was raised,” Cruise said. “They are an outstanding family. Some of the finest people I’ve ever met.”

The suspect’s parents said their son and five siblings were raised in a family that “rejected hate and taught that love must be the motive for everything we do.” “To our great shame, he is now part of the history of evil that has been perpetrated on Jewish people for centuries,” the parents said Monday in their first public comments. “Our son’s actions were informed by people we do not know, and ideas we do not hold.”

The parents, who are cooperating with investigators, do not plan to plan to provide legal representation to their son, whose initial court appearance was scheduled for Tuesday. Family attorney Earll Pott said a public defender will probably be appointed.

Earnest burst into the synagogue on the last day of Passover, a major Jewish holiday that celebrates freedom, and opened fire with an assault-style rifle on the crowd of about 100.

He fled when the rifle jammed, according to authorities and witnesses, avoiding an Army combat veteran and an off-duty Border Patrol agent who pursued him. He called 911 to report the shooting and surrendered a short time later.

Lori Kaye , a founding member of the congregation, was killed. Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein was shot in the hands, while Noya Dahan, 8, and her uncle Almog Peretz suffered shrapnel wounds. Kaye, 60, was remembered for her kindness Monday at a memorial service at the packed synagogue in Poway, a well-to-do suburb north of San Diego.

Noya Dahan told “CBS This Morning” she hid by herself watching the nightmare unfold. “I knew that something was wrong because it wasn’t adding up to me, because I heard loud sounds,” Noya said. “It was very, very scary, and I’m not supposed to go through this stuff.”

A manifesto — written by a person identifying himself as John Earnest and published online shortly before the attack — spewed hatred toward Jews and praised the perpetrators of attacks on mosques in New Zealand that killed 50 people last month and at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue that killed 11 on Oct. 27.

Earnest frequented 8chan, a dark corner of the web where those disaffected by mainstream social media sites often post extremist, racist and violent views.

“I’ve only been lurking here for a year and half, yet what I’ve learned here is priceless. It’s been an honor,” he wrote.

Earnest, who evidently intended to livestream the attack, offered a list of recommended songs for people to listen to while watching, including “Sloop John B” by The Beach Boys and the Pokemon theme song. He said he had planned the attack for four weeks.

“If you told me even 6 months ago that I would do this I would have been surprised,” Earnest wrote.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poway-synagogue-shooting-suspect-john-earnest-was-scholar-athlete-california-state-university-san-marcos-2019-04-30/

President Trump has finally stopped banging his head against “THE WALL” and turned his attention to our absurd asylum law, which has led to the near collapse of our whole immigration system, such that we ever had a “system.”

It’s going to come with a legal fight that the White House may very well lose, but it’s the fight the country needs. Even in defeat, there will be some success in just having elevated the issue so that people can see the wreckage at our southern border created by our immigration law’s gaping asylum hole.

The White House announced Monday that it was directing federal agencies to adjust how they manage asylum claims so that they can be adjudicated quicker and so that migrants flooding the system aren’t simply turned loose upon arrival to enjoy their stay.

The directives put a 180-day deadline on deciding asylum cases (they can currently last up to years); place fees on asylum applications (which are now free to whoever shows up and says the magic word); and withhold work permits from asylum applicants who did not enter the United States through a legal port of entry (i.e. illegal border crossers, which make up the vast majority of asylum claims).

Word got out south of the border a long time ago that anyone who wants to take their chances in America needs only to float 50 feet across the Rio Grande, hit the U.S. bank, and find a border agent to claim asylum. Chances of getting to stay are nearly 100% for those who bring children. So that’s what they do, putting children’s lives at risk in the process.

When I went to the Rio Grande Valley sector of the Texas border earlier this year, I watched what appeared to be a young mother, who was from Guatemala, and seven very young minors in her company. They sat on the side of the road, a few feet from the river that they had crossed, and waited for an agent to find them in order to claim asylum.

On the river bank, I looked to the other side and there were dozens of people, waiting their turn to make the crossing and do the same.

The system functions exactly as the law says it should. It’s broken for us, but it works very well for those gaming it.

The immigration legal backlog is at nearly 1 million cases, a number that will only increase without a policy fix. Trump’s directive is at least a look in the right direction.

Democrats in Congress and the ones running for the 2020 presidential nomination are all too happy to keep things the way they are. But it’s not clear that their voters want the same thing.

A new Washington Post poll found that 35% of Americans now say the border situation is in a “crisis,” an 11-point increase from January. That bump was seen across the board by party, but the biggest jump came from Democrats. In January, just 7% of that party’s voters said there was a crisis at the border. In the new poll, it’s 24%.

The asylum loophole is creating a crisis. The White House is doing the right thing by trying to close it.

[Related: GOP sets sights on asylum regulations]

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-asylum-loophole-is-breaking-the-border-trumps-new-directive-is-a-good-start-at-fixing-it

Defense minister rejects attempt by “subversive movement”

The events appear not to have triggered a broader military revolt. Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino on Twitter rejected what he called an attempt by a “subversive movement” to generate “panic and terror.”

The ruling socialist party chief, Diosdado Cabello, said most of Caracas was calm and called on government supporters to amass at the presidential palace to defend Maduro from what he said was a U.S.-backed coup attempt. About a dozen government supporters, some of them brandishing firearms, gathered at the presidential palace, answered the call.

“It’s time to defend the revolution with arms,” Valentin Santana, head of a militant group, said in a video posted on social media as he brandished an automatic rifle.

Meanwhile, Guaidó said he would release a list of top commanders supporting the uprising in the coming hours.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/venezuela-latest-juan-guaido-military-uprising-called-coup-attempt-by-president-nicolas-maduro/

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said Tuesday that Democratic voters may be “racist and sexist” because the front-runners for the 2020 Democratic nomination are white men.

“What is the problem with the Democratic primary electorate, are they racist and sexist?” Conway told reporters on the White House driveway. “Do they not want all these women who are running, all these people of color? Because apparently you’ve got the two old white straight men career politicians in the lead.”

Conway, Trump’s final 2016 campaign manager, spoke a day after former Vice President Joe Biden entered the Democratic field as the front-runner, trailed in second place by socialist Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

The sharp-tongued Trump surrogate blasted both Biden and Sanders, while saying they are “not necessarily” Trump’s biggest political threats.

[Related: Women of color frustrated with white males in Democratic primary]

Conway accused Biden of lying by saying he had asked former President Barack Obama not to endorse him and said Sanders’s ideas may not be “part of a democracy.”

“I know [Biden] said that, ‘I asked President Obama not to endorse me, I am too busy getting the endorsement of the firefighters’ … Do any of you believe that? You let him get away with his first lie. Why did you do that?”

Conway suggested asking Biden why some Americans do not have health insurance “nine years after Obama-Biden-care passed.”

“I think Bernie Sanders doesn’t care what his party thinks, is connecting directly with people, and is raising money in small amounts, and goes out and has very specific points of view, which is why he’s got a following,” Conway added. “He’s a lot like Donald Trump, except for good ideas, and ideas that are mainstream, and ideas that are part of a democracy and not socialism.”

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/kellyanne-conway-ask-if-dems-racist-and-sexist-for-favoring-biden-sanders

“Charmed” actress Alyssa Milano received a flurry of criticism after she defended former Vice President Joe Biden on Monday and promoted his 2020 candidacy amid allegations he inappropriately touched a number of women.

The backlash came after Milano appeared on MSNBC, where she attributed Biden’s behavior by describing it as “a culture difference.”

“For me, the thing that set this story — the Ms. Flores story — apart from all the other stories: To Joe, this was a culture difference, because culturally he was raised in a family that was super affectionate,” she told MSNBC’s Ali Velshi and Stephanie Ruhle on Monday.

Milano was referring to an allegation by Lucy Flores, a former Nevada assemblywoman, who accused Biden of “plant[ing] a big slow kiss on the back of my head.”

2020 DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES ADDRESS ACCUSATIONS OF MISCONDUCT AGAINST BIDEN

Milano defended Biden, saying that it was important that he wanted to learn from the experience. “For him, this was a realization of, well, everyone sort of grows up in a different household, and maybe my actions make other people uncomfortable, and it was an acknowledgment,” she told Velshi and Ruhle.

She mentioned how, during a private conversation between the two, Biden said he was willing to learn and listen — something she wished more powerful men would say “out loud.”

Her overall defense of Biden prompted backlash on Twitter, with some people taking aim at her appearing to excuse his conduct as the product of cultural differences.

On Twitter, some also indicated Milano was held to a double standard after she admitted that she expressed potentially inappropriate affection to a crewmember.

ALYSSA MILANO SLAMMED FOR PLEDGE TO NOT SPEAK NEGATIVELY ABOUT DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES 

During her interview on Monday, Milano also cautioned against conflating Biden’s conduct with President Donald Trump’s “indiscretions.”

BIDEN PRAISES ANITA HILL ON ‘VIEW,’ CREDITS HER FOR #METOO MOVEMENT

Biden has also shared his regret for the experience that Anita Hill had while testifying about her alleged experiences with Supreme Court Justice nominee Clarence Thomas.

Milano, after referencing Hill, warned not to: “look at [Biden’s] past myopically.”

“We really have to look at the big picture with co-authoring the Violence Against Women Act, starting ‘It’s On Us,’ always being a supporter of the women’s right to choose and women’s rights in general, and fighting for women to be on the Judiciary Committee after Anita Hill,” she said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

She went on to argue that the allegations against Biden shouldn’t prevent him from receiving the Democratic nomination in 2020. For her, the election was about beating Trump rather than pushing progressive policies.

Milano also previously called Biden a “friend” during an episode of the “Sorry Not Sorry” podcast, which she claimed was produced before the allegations surfaced. She hosted him for a discussion on sexual assault and the #MeToo Movement, something he praised.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alyssa-milano-defends-joe-biden

“I believe this is very important, but I see apathy and fear in people,” said one of the protesters, Mary Galaviz, 69. “We should not be afraid. In war there is death, but goals are achieved.”

Miriam Segovia, 52, another protester near the base, said she hoped that the armed forces would “put themselves on the side of the Constitution, so we can escape this misery, this hunger and lack of medication.”

Battered by mismanagement, American sanctions and corruption, the Venezuelan economy has been in steep decline since 2014. Millions of people have emigrated, and the roughly 30 million who remain are plagued by hyperinflation and shortages of medicines, food, electricity and jobs.

Mr. Maduro, who has been office since 2013, won re-election last year in a contest that was widely seen as fraudulent. In January, the National Assembly, controlled by the opposition and led by Mr. Guaidó, declared the election and the government illegitimate, leading Mr. Guaidó to claim to be the rightful, transitional leader.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/world/americas/venezuela-coup-guaido-military.html

The Deutsche Bank headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany. President Trump is suing Deutsche Bank and Capital One, seeking to block the banks from responding to subpoenas from two House panels seeking personal financial documents related to the president, his family and his company.

Michael Probst/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Michael Probst/AP

The Deutsche Bank headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany. President Trump is suing Deutsche Bank and Capital One, seeking to block the banks from responding to subpoenas from two House panels seeking personal financial documents related to the president, his family and his company.

Michael Probst/AP

President Trump has filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to keep two banks from responding to congressional subpoenas, setting up a legal showdown with Democrats eager to investigate his finances.

The president, his three oldest children and his business, the Trump organization, say the investigations by the House Intelligence and Financial Services committees are overbroad and serve no purpose beyond harassment.

The suit, filed Monday, says the subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and Capital One have no purpose but “to rummage through every aspect of [President Trump’s] personal finances, his businesses, and the private information of the President and his family, and to ferret about for any material that might be used to cause him political damage. No grounds exist to establish any purpose other than a political one.”

Since taking control of the House, Democrats have promised to look deeply into the Trump family’s finances, and Deutsche Bank has promised to cooperate with the investigation.

Deutsche Bank was one of the few, if only, major banks to lend to Trump after his casino bankruptcies in the early 1990s.

Trump’s suit says the subpoenas amount to overreach because much of the information sought predates his election “and encompasses reams of account records for entities, individuals, children, and spouses who have never even been implicated in any probe.”

In a joint statement, Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters and Rep. Adam Schiff, chairman of the Intelligence committee, said the suit was “only designed to put off meaningful accountability as long as possible.”

“As a private businessman, Trump routinely used his well-known litigiousness and the threat of lawsuits to intimidate others, but he will find that Congress will not be deterred from carrying out its constitutional responsibilities,” the statement said.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/04/30/718597829/trump-sues-2-banks-to-block-democrats-from-investigating-his-finances

CLOSE

VP Mike Pence said that besides making sure border agents have the resources they need, Congress must “close loopholes” driving asylum families here.
AP

In his latest attempt to slow the flood of Central American migrants pouring across the southern border, President Donald Trump proposed sweeping new rules for asylum-seekers that would make it more difficult, and more expensive, for them to seek refuge in the U.S.

In a presidential memorandum signed Monday, Trump gave the departments of Justice and Homeland Security 90 days to implement the changes in an effort to stem what he described as an asylum “crisis” that has been plagued by “rampant abuse.” 

“This strategic exploitation of our nation’s humanitarian programs undermines our nation’s security and sovereignty,” Trump wrote.

The rules would, for the first time, require asylum-seekers to pay an application fee, deny work permits for asylum-seekers who enter the country illegally and require government officials to fast-track new asylum hearings to complete them within 180 days.

Critics say those changes would unfairly punish the most vulnerable people in the world, those who are fleeing violence, poverty, and food insecurity as Central America is gripped by a widespread, persistent drought. 

Rep. Lucille Roybal Allard, D-Calif., the chairwoman of the Homeland Security subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, opened a Tuesday hearing by decrying Trump’s memo as “another tragic step in the wrong direction.”

Whenever the new rules go into effect, they’re sure to face immediate lawsuits, as have other attempts by the White House to get a handle on the southern border.

In December, a federal judge struck down the Department of Justice’s attempt to cut off asylum for victims of domestic abuse and gang violence. In November, another federal judge struck down Justice’s attempts to cut off asylum for people who crossed into the country illegally, which is allowed under U.S. law. 

On April 8, yet another federal judge blocked Homeland Security’s plan to require asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico while their asylum cases in the U.S. are decided. But four days later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit overturned that decision, allowing the administration to continue sending asylum-seekers back to Mexico while the lawsuit proceeds.

Monday’s memo lays out several changes that could have a big impact on people trying to request asylum.

The memo says the application fee required of asylum-seekers would not exceed the cost of processing applications, but officials did not immediately provide an estimate for what that might be. By comparison, the application fee for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is $495, the fee for green card holders to become U.S. citizens is $725, and the fee to apply for a green card can be as high as $1,225, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Trump wrote that the fee is required to add some integrity to an out-of-control system. But critics say alerting criminals throughout Mexico and Central America that asylum-seekers will have to be carrying large amounts of cash will make them walking targets.

“Asylum seekers are fleeing persecution, and have left their families, communities, homes, jobs, and possessions behind in order to save their lives,” read a statement from the Tahirih Justice Center, a group that has been part of lawsuits challenging Trump’s immigration policies. “Instituting a new fee for asylum applications and work permits will simply drive asylum seekers deeper into poverty and leave them more vulnerable to victimization and predation by unscrupulous representatives, traffickers, and abusers.”

“Like Disneyland”: Trump calls for changes to immigration laws, says the border is ‘like Disneyland’

Trump also wants to bar anyone who has entered or tried to enter the country illegally from receiving a provisional work permit and is calling on officials to immediately revoke work authorizations when people are denied asylum and ordered removed from the country.

That change is very likely to be challenged in court because it closely mirrors another change Trump tried to implement. In November, his administration published new rules that barred migrant who enter the country illegally from requesting asylum. But that ran afoul of both federal and international law and was blocked by the courts.

The 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act states that any foreigner who arrives in the USA, “whether or not at a designated port of arrival,” may apply for asylum. A United Nations treaty signed in 1951 by the United States says “refugees should not be penalized for their illegal entry” because extreme situations sometimes “require refugees to breach immigration rules.”

It’s unclear whether denial of a work permit would be considered an undue punishment against those asylum-seekers, but that will likely be decided in court.

Trump’s memo also calls on Homeland Security to reassign immigration officers and any other staff to speed up asylum applications. But it’s unclear how many officers would be reassigned, and who will do that work. 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers currently conduct interviews of asylum-seekers, since they are trained and experienced at interviewing people in those situations. But the Trump administration has considered granting that power to Border Patrol agents in an effort to speed up the process, a move that has been bashed by immigration advocacy groups since Border Patrol agents are not trained to conduct such sensitive inquiries.

Like what you’re reading? Download the USA TODAY app for more

 

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/30/trump-wants-charge-asylum-seekers-fee-process-applications/3624995002/

April 30 at 5:59 AM

Japan’s popular Emperor Akihito formally abdicated on Tuesday in a short ceremony at the Imperial Palace, giving way to his son after the weight of official duties became too much for the 85-year-old.

Dressed in a morning coat with his wife, Empress Michiko, just behind him, Akihito gave a short televised speech in the Imperial Palace’s Pine Chamber, or throne room, encapsulating the humble and peaceful values that marked his rule.

“Since ascending the throne 30 years ago, I have performed my duties as the emperor with a deep sense of trust in and respect for the people, and I consider myself fortunate to have been able to do so,” he said.

At the start of the ceremony, Akihito had walked into the room slowly with his wife, before the pair stood together in front of two thrones on a raised platform. 

Their steps ringing out on the polished wooden floor, imperial chamberlains then carried in two of Japan’s three sacred treasures — a sword representing valor and a jewel representing benevolence — as well as the Privy Seal and the Great Seal of Japan, the seals of the emperor and the state, respectively.

Enclosed in cases and only ever seen by the emperor and high priests, the sacred treasures were held up to the emperor before being carefully placed on stands made of Japanese cypress. The third treasure, a mirror — representing wisdom — is kept at Ise Grand Shrine, the holiest Shinto site in Japan.

Akihito is a much-loved figure in Japan. With his wife at his side, he humanized the role of the emperor, once viewed here as a living god, by reaching out to vulnerable members of society and victims of natural disasters, and by looking ordinary people in the eye when talking to them.

But he also encouraged Japan to acknowledge its wartime past, and he never pandered to the conservative nationalists who revere the tradition embodied in his role, experts said.

Speaking on behalf of the nation, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expressed his “deep reverence and gratitude” to the emperor and the way he had shared the “joys and sorrows” of the people.

“While keeping in our mind the way Your Majesty has lived, we the people of Japan are determined to work for the creation of a bright future for Japan as a peaceful country full of hope and pride,” he said.

Akihito is the first Japanese emperor to abdicate since the Emperor Koukaku gave way, also to his son, in 1817. His 30-year reign as ceremonial head of state ends at midnight, concluding what is known as the Heisei era.

Crown Prince Naruhito, 59, will accede to the Chrysanthemum Throne in another ceremony at the palace Wednesday morning. His reign will mark the beginning of the Reiwa era, a term taken from ancient Japanese poetry and translated as “beautiful harmony.”

“I sincerely wish together with the empress that the Reiwa era, which begins tomorrow, will be a stable and fruitful one,” Akihito said, “and I pray with all my heart for peace and happiness for all the people in Japan and around the world.”

Akihito’s father, Hirohito, now referred to as Emperor Showa, ruled Japan during a period of frenzied nationalism and militarism that ended in its defeat in World War II.

Under the U.S.-imposed constitution that followed, the emperor was confined to ceremonial duties, and was forced to renounce his divine status as a descendant of the sun goddess Amaterasu.

Akihito has put those principles into practice enthusiastically. Throughout his reign he and Empress Michiko have visited elementary schools, as well as homes for the elderly and the disabled.

Takeshi Hara, who has written many books about Japan’s imperial history, said that in Emperor Showa’s era, the emphasis had been on enhancing the emperor’s authority, with the monarch addressing tens of thousands of people from elevated positions.

“Emperor Akihito changed that style radically,” he said. “He came to speak to people at the same eye level, as was seen in his visits across Japan. It’s a significantly large difference, and a style fitting to Japan’s postwar democracy.”

Akihito is fondly remembered for a moving national address he gave five days after an earthquake and tsunami hit eastern Japan in March 2011, killing nearly 20,000 people. He called on the nation to share the hardships of the suffering, and subsequently visited the region for seven consecutive weeks with Empress Michiko at the height of winter.

A survey conducted for the Asahi Shimbun newspaper this month found that 76 percent of Japanese people felt affinity to the royal family, while just 17 percent did not.

But Akihito’s personable style did not please Japan’s ultraconservatives, who thought he undermined imperial authority, for example by kneeling down to chat to evacuees after a volcano erupted in Nagasaki in 1991.

In recent years, Akihito has also attended memorial ceremonies for several of Japan’s World War II battles, including Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Saipan and Palau, to remember the tragic history of the war.

Ken Ruoff, director of the Center for Japanese Studies at Portland State University, said Akihito periodically reminded his countrymen that Japan had caused great suffering, especially in neighboring countries.

“He’s the chief nationalistic symbol in Japan. And yet Akihito wanted nothing to do with chest-thumping ‘Japan first’ nationalism,” he said. “He would never lend his prestige to even the slightest hint of that.”

His desire to seek reconciliation with Japan’s neighbors made him an “awkward figure” for conservatives, and ironically something of a champion for Japanese liberals who might otherwise not have seen an emperor as compatible with secular democracy, said Jeff Kingston, a professor at Temple University in Tokyo.

Rituals marking the abdication began March 12 when the emperor informed his ancestors of his desire to abdicate at a palace shrine to Amaterasu: Tuesday’s ceremony was the ninth and final event, and the only one to be televised live. A formal and more elaborate enthronement ceremony for Naruhito will take place Oct. 22, and will be attended by royalty and dignitaries from around the world.

Akiko Kashiwagi contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/japan-says-farewell-to-a-popular-emperor-who-humanized-a-godlike-role/2019/04/30/c7cd64ba-6ab9-11e9-bbe7-1c798fb80536_story.html

A U.S. Army veteran is being held without bail, accused of plotting an attack to avenge the killing of Muslims. Mark Domingo, 26, faces terrorism-related charges after his arrest in an FBI sting. Prosecutors say he planned to set off a bomb in Long Beach, California, on Sunday.

Authorities say the infantryman who served a combat stint in Afghanistan recently converted to Islam and was quickly radicalized, reports CBS News correspondent Jonathan Vigliotti.

The investigation began after the FBI saw an apparent online post from Domingo, saying: “America needs another Vegas event” to give “a taste of the terror they gladly spread all over the world” – referring to the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that killed 58 people.

He also allegedly sought “retribution” for last month’s mosque killings in New Zealand.

Federal prosecutors say Domingo claimed Americans should be punished for attacks on Muslims around the world. Investigators believe he worked alone on this apparent terror plot for two months and said he was under constant surveillance leading up to his arrest.

“Sometimes we get asked, what keeps you up at night. This is a case that keeps us up at night,” said Ryan Young, special agent for FBI task force.

Investigators said the arrest of Domingo prevented revenge-fueled bloodshed.

“Law enforcement was able to identify a man consumed with hate and bent on mass murder and stop him,” U.S. attorney Nick Hanna said.

Prosecutors allege Domingo planned to detonate a bomb Sunday at a white nationalist rally in Long Beach, California. But he was arrested Friday after taking possession of what he thought was an IED from an undercover FBI agent, while scoping out a spot in a park to plant the bomb. The explosive was a dummy.

“Mr. Domingo said that he wanted to kill Jews as they walked to synagogue… at other times he said he wanted to kill and target police officers,” Hanna said.

James Domingo said he thought his brother’s religious conversion helped him cope with personal issues. “I am speechless at this,” he said, adding, “I thought maybe my brother finally found some sort of guidance in this world.”

Authorities said Domingo had no prior criminal record. If convicted, he could face up to 15 years in prison.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mark-domingo-arrested-long-beach-terror-plot-foiled-america-needs-another-vegas-event/

Writing to President Trump prior to their meeting at the White House on Tuesday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. offered three principles for infrastructure reform.

One proposal deserves President Trump’s open mind. The other two deserve Trump’s unequivocal rejection.

The letter notes that any major infrastructure bill requires “substantial, new and real revenue.” While that might sound bad to many conservatives, nothing is free. Future generations already face a grave challenge in addressing the massive national debt, but unbridled infrastructure spending would make things worse. Yes, some infrastructure projects will pay for themselves. But the government will also inevitably ensure a lot of money is wasted. To avoid higher interest payments on the debt, Trump should respond to Democrats by suggesting to raise the federal gas tax and increase user fees on highways (tolls) and at airports (ticket fees).

Less impressive is the Pelosi-Schumer demand that any infrastructure bill include “broadband, water, energy, schools, housing and other initiatives.” The two top Democrats in Congress add that “We must also invest in resiliency and risk mitigation of our current infrastructure to deal with climate change.”

While there is some merit in broadband investment, the “water, energy, schools, housing, and other initiatives” read like a wish list of new Democratic pet projects. I’m wholly unconvinced that investing in those areas will spur anything like a justifiable expectation of return on investment. Where that’s not the case, state governments should take the lead.

This isn’t a small concern. Spending the people’s money in a bipartisan fashion, responsibility must be prioritized. Not all investments are born equal. Trump should warn Democrats that this bill cannot become a pork product.

Trump should make the same case even more strongly in response to the Democratic leaders’ third demand. They say that a “big and bold infrastructure plan must have strong Buy America, labor, and women, veteran and minority-owned business protections in any package.”

No. Even if the Buy America caveat makes sense on a marginal cost basis, if foreign competitors can offer cheaper and better materials, they should get the contract. But any infrastructure bill should also change the law to enable more competition in infrastructure-dependent industries. We should want foreign airlines to tender on U.S. routes, and foreign shipping companies to deliver U.S. goods. There’s no risk to net employment here: Foreign businesses interested in these opportunities would have to hire American workers.

That said, Trump’s main gripe with Pelosi-Schumer should be their effort to give a big payoff to unions, and via affirmative action, to play identity politics. Instead, the best businesses should get the contracts at the most cost-effective level. Here, Trump should push for eliminating the Davis-Bacon union payoff act, which increases costs for taxpayers and acts as a indirect payoff to the Democratic Party (via union dues and organizing). Limiting opportunities to those who kneel to the union bosses, Davis-Bacon restricts employment potential and promotes political corruption (bribes for contracts). It has no place in 2019 America.

Democrats have been clear in their letter. Trump should return the favor. Seeking a bipartisan bill that earns his signature, he must not let this bill become a wish list of Democratic waste.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/democrats-have-one-good-and-two-bad-infrastructure-demands

Washington — President Trump has filed suit against Deutsche Bank and Capital One in an attempt to block congressional subpoenas for his business records.

The lawsuit by the president, sons Donald Jr. and Eric and daughter Ivanka, was filed Monday in federal court in Manhattan. The Trump Organization and the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust are among other plaintiffs.

Two House committees subpoenaed Deutsche Bank and several other financial institutions earlier this month as part of investigations into Mr. Trump’s finances.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said at the time that the subpoenas were part of an investigation “into allegations of potential foreign influence on the U.S. political process.” He has said he wants to know whether Russians used laundered money for transactions with the Trump Organization. Mr. Trump’s businesses have benefited from Russian investment over the years.

The Trumps want a federal judge to declare the subpoenas unlawful and enforceable. The suit seeks to block the financial institutions from disclosing information and complying with the subpoenas.

The suit is the latest in a series of efforts by the White House to oppose congressional oversight of matters related to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. 

The suit asserts that the “case involves congressional subpoenas that have no legitimate or lawful purpose. The subpoenas were issued to harass President Donald J. Trump, to rummage through every aspect of his personal finances, his businesses and the private information of the president and his family, and to ferret about for any material that might be used to cause him political damage. No grounds exist to establish any purpose other than a political one.” 

Deutsche Bank, a German asset management firm, has lent Trump’s real estate organization millions of dollars over time. In a statement, it said, “We remain committed to providing appropriate information to all authorized investigations and will abide by a court order regarding such investigations.”

Capital One didn’t have any immediate comment.

Schiff issued a joint statement with Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who chairs the House Financial Services Committee. They said, “The meritless lawsuit filed today by President Trump to block duly authorized subpoenas to non-governmental entities is another demonstration of the depths to which President Trump will go to obstruct Congress’s constitutional oversight authority. As a private businessman, Trump routinely used his well-known litigiousness and the threat of lawsuits to intimidate others, but he will find that Congress will not be deterred from carrying out its constitutional responsibilities. 

“This lawsuit is not designed to succeed; it is only designed to put off meaningful accountability as long as possible. Trump has already said publicly that he is fighting all of the subpoenas from Congress, and that he does not respect Congress’ role as a coequal branch of government. This unprecedented stonewalling will not work, and the American people deserve better.”

When the subpoenas were issued April 15, Eric Trump, executive vice president of The Trump Organization, called the subpoenas “an unprecedented abuse of power and simply the latest attempt by House Democrats to attack the President and our family for political gain.”

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-3-of-his-children-and-his-business-sue-deutsche-bank-and-capital-one-in-bid-to-keep-them-from-giving-financial/

“There’s a reason that we give people work permits while they are waiting for asylum, so that they can support themselves and don’t have to be depending on government assistance during that time,” said Michelle Brané, the director of migrant rights and justice at the Women’s Refugee Commission.

Fewer migrants try to cross the border now than in the early 2000s. But the demographics have shifted: Most are now families from Central America rather than single Mexicans who could be quickly deported. The sheer number of families has overwhelmed the system, and because of rules that prohibit holding children in detention for more than 20 days, some families are released into communities along the border.

More than 103,000 migrants crossed the southwestern border in March without authorization, an increase from the more than 76,000 who crossed in February. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE, is currently housing more than 50,000 migrants, one of the highest numbers on record, and about 5,000 more than the congressionally mandated limit of 45,274.

In 2016, the average daily population of immigrants in detention dipped to 34,376.

After the memo’s release on Monday night, Julián Castro, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and former Obama administration housing secretary, called the orders “truly sickening.”

“Families are fleeing violence and turmoil to seek refuge at our borders and Donald Trump wants to charge them a fee to gain asylum,” he said on Twitter.

This month, the White House took action over the rising number of border crossings when Mr. Trump forced out Ms. Nielsen, who oversaw attempts to tighten the asylum process and the administration’s family separations practice. The next day, the White House pushed out multiple other homeland security officials.

Stephen Miller, the president’s top immigration adviser, has assumed more power over shaping policies and decisions. He was behind the purge of homeland security officials and has advocated aggressive, legally dubious policies, including busing migrants to so-called sanctuary cities to retaliate against Democrats.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/29/us/politics/trump-asylum.html

Boeing Co. on Monday said certain safety alerts on its 737 MAX jets didn’t operate as airlines would have anticipated because of a previously undisclosed error on its part.

Boeing’s statement came a day after The Wall Street Journal reported the company hadn’t told airlines flying 737 MAX jets that certain safety alerts wouldn’t function as expected. The issue of nonfunctioning alerts came to light after the crash of a Lion Air jet in October in Indonesia, but there were no indications since then that it stemmed from a mistake…

Source Article from https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-signals-additional-software-problem-affecting-737-max-airliners-11556592646

Reading former Democratic Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s newly released climate plan on Monday, I was struck by that famous Sherlock Holmes line: “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

The truth, I thus surmise, is that O’Rourke is not a terribly serious politician. Because as with most of his platform (more on that in a moment), O’Rourke’s climate change plan takes a serious problem and answers with absurdity.

For a start, it is distinctly socialist, which is to say it is broadly nonsensical. Take the plan’s $5 trillion price tag. That might not seem like a lot for a nation already $22 trillion in debt. But seeing as how O’Rourke also wants government-provided healthcare, the $5 trillion is just one part of a plan to make government very big again, and perhaps also to invite a debt-driven economic crisis.

But even O’Rourke’s own excuses of how he’ll pay for all this don’t add up. The whippersnapper says $1.5 trillion of the spending in his climate plan will be paid for by “structural changes to the tax code that ensure corporations and the wealthiest among us pay their fair share.”

Four problems follow. First, O’Rourke needs those tax revenues for his other spending programs. Second, math shows that wealthy Americans already pay more than their fair share. Taxing them at a level necessary to generate $1.5 trillion additional revenue would destroy their investment activity and drive many overseas, destroying jobs at home.

Third, today’s U.S. economy suggests that taxing corporations through the roof just isn’t that clever. Corporations, after all, don’t pay taxes — their customers and employees pay them.

There are few issues that Presidents Barack Obama and Trump agreed on, but the need to lower the corporate tax rate is one of them; they differed on just how low to go. And the 2017 GOP corporate tax cuts have produced a strong economy with record-low minority employment rates. To hear the Democrats talk, you would think Democrats would care more about this, but no, they just want to replicate France’s broken economy.

But the improbable idiocy of this plan doesn’t end there. The rest of O’Rourke’s plan reads like a Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., wish list, which is to say, it takes the worst of government programs and doubles down on them.

O’Rourke also calls for huge hikes in federal subsidized farm insurance, which the Cato Institute notes is very wasteful.

He pledges that new federal energy permits must “fully account for climate costs and community impacts.” But considering that the current permitting process is already insane, O’Rourke risks destroying the energy industry here and perhaps even causing blackouts. This is profoundly immoral: Dynamism in America’s energy industry is reducing energy bills, promoting national security, and providing hundreds of thousands of well-paid private sector jobs. Green jobs, in contrast, are a boondoggle that can exist only with significant help from the taxpayer.

Moving on, O’Rourke wants to pick new Solyndra-style losers with his promise to “leverage $500 billion in annual government procurement to decarbonize across all sectors.”

And he lies when he claims he would “increase consumer savings through new, modernized, and ambitious appliance- and building-efficiency standards.” The reality of “ambitious” new “efficiency standards” is that they come with trade-offs. They impose stealth taxes on family budgets and business operations.

Still, what really stands out from this plan is how well it sits with O’Rourke’s broader platform. That platform makes clear that O’Rourke is no longer a candidate of conservative Texas. Instead, he is now a proud member of the Democratic Party’s 2020 let’s-chase-Bernie’s-coattails train. But this isn’t funny for Democrats or for the nation. Enter, for example, O’Rourke’s seven-line national security platform. It will “ensure our security not through walls and militarization.” Okay, that’s great and all, but wow, it doesn’t even once mention China, Russia, or international terrorism.

At least O’Rourke is clear on his newfound socialist ideas. Just ponder this gem: “The unprecedented concentration of wealth, power and privilege in the United States must be broken apart. Opportunity must be fully shared with all.”

Karl Marx would be proud. And President Trump should be happy.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/beto-orourkes-campaign-for-climate-socialism-is-deeply-unserious