Recently Added Videos

The Chinese markets had a surprisingly good day Friday, given that the U.S. just massively jacked up tariffs against Chinese imports, and the trade negotiations between the two countries appear likely to fail.

The Hang Seng Index, having seemed set to plummet around lunchtime, ended up 0.84% up on the day. The Shanghai Composite Index did even better, soaring 3.1% by close. And the positivity may be spreading: the Stoxx Europe 600 Index is up 0.76% at the time of writing.

So, bearing in mind that Chinese companies will be hit hard by the tariff escalation, what gives? There are three possible factors at play.

They’re still talking

President Donald Trump may have sent negotiations into a tailspin several days ago by announcing those massive new tariffs, and China may be threatening as-yet-undefined retaliation now that the tariffs have come into effect, but the negotiations are still on.

Trump said Thursday that Chinese President Xi Jinping had sent him a “beautiful letter,” and the two would likely have a phone call. According to Trump, Xi said in the beautiful letter: “Let’s work together [and] let’s see if we can get something done.”

“The high levels of volatility that we have seen is stemming almost entirely from Trump’s comments and actions over China. Traders continue to swing from tweet to headline to comment to tweet as they try to make sense of the mixed messages,” wrote London Capital Group’s Jasper Lawler in a Friday note.

Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He met Thursday with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, and it was reportedly a short meeting. However, the two sides are still set to continue talking Friday.

“We think it’s clear that there will be no deal at the end of this round of talks,” wrote Lawler. “The best we can hope for at this stage is an agreement for the sides to keep talking. But with tariffs now at 25% both sides will want to see things progress more quickly.”

The tariffs aren’t biting yet

The escalation of the tariffs comes with one important detail: the new tariffs only apply to goods that are loaded onto ships in China as of Friday, and they will only bite once those goods arrive in the U.S. Goods that already on the high seas will only incur the old 10% tariffs.

The fastest cargo ships with the quickest routes take a couple weeks to get from China to the U.S., so that creates an effective buffer or “grace period” of as much as a month.

“Increased tariffs are in place though they only take effect on goods now leaving China so theoretically could be cancelled before anyone has to pay anything,” said Société Générale analyst Kit Juckes, according to the Guardian.

Support from Beijing

Bloomberg is reporting another possible reason why the Chinese markets had a buoyant Friday: they’re being propped up by the government.

The outlet’s sources said state-backed funds stepped in to buy Chinese equities after they started to plummet around lunchtime, local time.

The sharp slump followed a rise in the morning, and then it was over almost as abruptly. State intervention would certainly provide an explanation for this “sharp V,” but for now it remains unconfirmed.

Either way, Friday turned out better than expected on the Chinese markets. Whether that optimism holds after the day plays out in the U.S.—where futures currently point to a pretty flat opening—is another matter.

Source Article from http://fortune.com/2019/05/10/china-stock-market-trump-trade-tariffs/

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/suspected-colorado-stem-shooter-was-bully-made-jokes-about-school-n1004181

President Trump on Friday touted his administration’s controversial move to increase tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods after trade talks between Washington and Beijing failed to come to an agreement, while saying the Obama administration let China “get away with ‘murder.'”

Despite the new tariffs, trade negotiations will continue Friday morning, according to the White House.

“Talks with China continue in a very congenial manner – there is absolutely no need to rush – as Tariffs are NOW being paid to the United States by China of 25% on 250 Billion Dollars worth of goods & products. These massive payments go directly to the Treasury of the U.S….” Trump tweeted early Friday.

US TO SLAP TARIFFS ON $200B IN CHINESE GOODS, WH SAYS, BUT TRADE TALKS TO RESUME FRIDAY

“Tariffs will bring in FAR MORE wealth to our Country than even a phenomenal deal of the traditional kind. Also, much easier & quicker to do. Our Farmers will do better, faster, and starving nations can now be helped. Waivers on some products will be granted, or go to new source!” he continued.

The president added that the U.S. would “continue to negotiate with China in the hopes that they do not again try to redo” the deal.

Moments later, Trump hit back at suggestions the tariffs would hurt the U.S. economy, asserting the opposite while claiming his predecessor — as well as former Vice President Joe Biden, who is running for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination — was too weak on Beijing.

“Tariffs will make our Country MUCH STRONGER, not weaker. Just sit back and watch! In the meantime, China should not renegotiate deals with the U.S. at the last minute. This is not the Obama Administration, or the Administration of Sleepy Joe, who let China get away with ‘murder!'” he tweeted.

Trump’s tweets Friday morning come after the Treasury Department late Thursday moved ahead with increased tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods. The new tariffs raised the import taxes of those goods from 10 percent to 25 percent at 12:01 a.m. Friday.

But the White House said talks between the U.S. and China would continue Friday morning.

“This evening, Ambassador Lightizer and Secretary Mnuchin met with President Trump to discuss the ongoing trade negotiations with China,” White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere said in a statement. “The Ambassador and Secretary then had a working dinner with Vice Premier Liu He, and agreed to continue discussions tomorrow morning at USTR.” USTR refers to the office of U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer.

The president has repeatedly said that tariffs would be a positive for the U.S., even saying at the White House this week that he “happens to think tariffs for our country are very powerful.”

The U.S. and China had been engaging in negotiations over a deal that would open up the Chinese market to American companies, but according to The New York Times,  talks fell apart when China called for changes to the text that served as a blueprint for the pact.

The bulk of goods facing increase tariffs are items such as circuit boards, vehicle parts and machinery, according to the Wall Street Journal. The proposed tariffs on the reminder of Chinese imports – the $200 billion worth of goods – would no doubt affect consumers. Those goods include iPhones, laptops, clothing and other everyday products.

China has already imposed tariffs on nearly all American goods. On Thursday, it said it would defend its interests and respond with “necessary countermeasures” if the increases take effect Friday.

Fox News’ Louis Casiano, Gregg Re and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-touts-tariffs-on-china-as-trade-standoff-heats-up

President Trump on Thursday distanced his Iran position from that of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and national security adviser John Bolton.

As Trump put it, “What [Iran] should be doing is calling me up, sitting down, and we can make a deal. A fair deal. We just don’t want them to have nuclear weapons, it’s not too much to ask. And we would help put them back into great shape. They’re in bad shape right now. I look forward to the day when we can actually help Iran. We’re not looking to hurt Iran. I want them to be strong, and great, and have a great economy.”

Trump is right to take this line. Still, it represents a striking departure from Pompeo and Bolton’s positions. Don’t take my word for it, take Pompeo’s. In a speech last May, Pompeo outlined 12 separate conditions for the removal of U.S. sanctions on Iran. These included not simply Trump’s nuclear deal related concerns of an open-ended deal timeline, ballistic missile restrictions, and warhead development, but of Iran’s abandonment of its current foreign policy. And Bolton isn’t just a hawk on Iran, he’s a dragon.

This distinction matters. Growing Trump administration sanctions on Iran are necessary to force Iran back to the negotiating table, but Pompeo and Bolton have far broader objectives than Trump. And the risk here is that the gap between Trump and Pompeo-Bolton fosters a misunderstanding on the part of the Iranian regime. Namely, that the hardliner bloc under the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps will believe Trump wants the regime to abandon its theological essence, rather than simply its nuclear ambitions. As long as Iran retains its Khomeneist ideology, it will never negotiate in the manner Pompeo demands, because to do so would be to end its existence.

Bolton and Pompeo aren’t wrong to counter Iranian escalation or to restrain Iran’s malevolent foreign policy. But Trump is right to keep the conditions for new nuclear negotiations focused on Iran’s nuclear threat. He should double down on his statement as issued on Thursday. Doing so will advance the diplomatic process.

[Related: Trump praises Bolton amid suggestions he’s frustrated with his hawkish adviser]

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/how-trump-just-separated-himself-from-pompeo-and-bolton-on-iran

North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un has told his military to maintain a “full-combat posture” as tensions continue to rise with the U.S. His order follows the firing of three missiles Thursday, the second missile launch in a week.

North Korea says the test was part of its regular military training. South Korea claims they may be part of a new weapons system. As North Korean missile tests go, CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer says Thursday’s was less a show of force than an attempt to grab attention.

North Korean state media released pictures Friday morning showing a gleeful Kim apparently watching those missile launches — the second such drill he had observed in five days.

North Korea’s state media avoided specifying what the weapons were, but the U.S. military says they were three short-range ballistic missiles.

President Trump said it was not enough to ruin his relationship with Kim Jung Un.

“They were smaller missiles, they’re short range missiles,” President Trump said. “Nobody’s happy about it, but we’re taking a good look and we’ll see, we’ll see. The relationship continues, but we’ll see what happens.”

But the missile launches of the past week have been the first since 2017, and a sure sign that Kim is becoming frustrated after the last summit with President Trump collapsed.

Analyst Thomas Sanderson says the launches won’t be enough of a provocation to derail future talks.

North Korea fires 3 short-range missiles

“They certainly are not going to prevent another summit; it’s not as if it is an intercontinental range missile and it’s not the testing of a nuclear warhead,” Sanderson said. “These are the two elements that Kim Jong Un promised he would put a moratorium on.”

Technically that moratorium still holds, but Kim has already warned the U.S. to change its position, or there will be no third summit with Mr. Trump.

Ratcheting up tensions between the countries even further, the U.S. revealed Thursday that it had seized a huge North Korean cargo ship off the coast of Indonesia.

The 17,000 ton ship, called the “Wise Honest,” was caught carrying North Korean coal for export — in direct defiance of international sanctions. Its seizure shows U.S. resolve to cut off North Korean trade that might fund its nuclear program.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kim-jong-north-korea-military-full-combat-posture-second-missile-launch-in-week/

Good morning.

(Here’s the sign-up, if you don’t already get California Today by email.)

My colleague Tim Arango followed up on the massive cache of guns pulled over the course of hours from a multimillion dollar house in Los Angeles. Here’s his dispatch:

It reads like the plotline from an L.A. noir novel: A sprawling house in Bel-Air, close to the Playboy Mansion. An early morning raid. Stacks of bullets and guns of every sort. And a tantalizing connection to a wealthy and famous family.

In the early morning darkness on Wednesday, Los Angeles police detectives and federal agents, working on an anonymous tip, moved on the mansion in the affluent Bel-Air neighborhood.

“Lo and behold, they found over a thousand guns of all makes, models and calibers,” said Lt. Chris Ramirez, a spokesman for the Los Angeles Police Department, who was at the scene on Wednesday, after officers had spent hours cataloging the cache of weapons. There was seemingly every kind of gun — shotguns, pistols, assault rifles, even Civil War-era weapons — along with over a thousand rounds of ammunition, he said.

“They were found just laid out in various rooms in the house,” he said. “There were piles of ammunition on one side of a room. There were piles of guns on the other side of a room.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/10/us/bel-air-gun-raid-transcontinental-railroad-150.html

If you listen to one side of the media, you might think Georgia is in crisis.

On Tuesday Gov. Brian Kemp signed the LIFE Act, which prohibits aborting a baby after a doctor can detect its heartbeat, which is around six weeks into pregnancy.

Opponents protest that the act is a scary infringement upon women’s rights, and six weeks is before most women know they’re pregnant. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., joined a flurry of national voices condemning the legislation, noting that “‘6 weeks pregnant’ = 2 weeks late on your period.” She’s right, but that doesn’t make hers a good argument against the much-decried HB 481.

Unlike other “heartbeat bills” (such as those considered in Ohio and Iowa), the LIFE Act doesn’t just limit abortion. It changes the definition of a person under the law.

The bill says that “unborn children shall be worthy of recognition as natural persons under the laws of this State.” It establishes that a fetus is a human being for all intents and purposes, including counting state populations and filing income tax forms.

If it the fetus inside the womb is a person, it doesn’t matter whether the woman already knows she’s carrying it. In fact, Roe v. Wade even confirms this point.

“If this suggestion of personhood is established, [Jane Roe’s] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment,” the Supreme Court case reads.

Georgia state Rep. Ed Setzler, an author of the LIFE Act, said changing the definition of a person under the act is consistent with science, and doing so makes the abortion ban consistent with U.S. law.

“Science tells us that a child with a beating heart and a functioning circulatory system is a living, distinct human being that’s worthy of the full, legal protection of any other person,” Setzler said. “Law tells us that, consistent with the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, if the state establishes the personhood of the unborn child, the arguments of the abortion on-demand way of thinking collapse.”

Critics on the Left will continue to say that abortion legislation like HB 481 is turning America into “The Handmaid’s Tale.” But it doesn’t require some theocratic mindset to say a baby with a beating heart deserves constitutional protections, just as the mother deserves her own constitutional rights.

“Georgia has finally established the personhood of the unborn child,” Setzler said, “and as such [the child] will get full, equal protections under our law.”

Georgia’s new “heartbeat” law doesn’t fly in the face of Roe v. Wade. It accepts the case’s own logic and simply defines a human being how it should’ve been defined all along.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/what-the-left-wont-tell-you-about-georgias-heartbeat-abortion-ban

A security guard credited with capturing one of the suspects in this week’s Colorado school shooting fired his weapon inside the school, reports say.

The rampage that left one student dead and eight people injured underscores new questions about the use of private guards in schools versus police.

The STEM School Highlands Ranch outside Denver contracted with a security guard, a former Marine who has not been identified. He had stayed out of the public eye since Tuesday, when two suspects opened fire at the charter school. 

On Thursday, the Associated Press confirmed reports he had fired his weapon, citing a law enforcement official with knowledge of the case. The official did not address whether anyone was hit when the gun fired.

“The actions of the people inside the building are still part of the open investigation,” a spokesperson for the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office said Friday.

A student hero: Kendrick Castillo, killed in Colorado shooting, told his dad he would act if he saw gunman

11 days, 3 mass shootings, 3 heroes: What makes some risk their lives for others?

Contracted security guards, who may be armed or unarmed, differ from school resource officers, who are sworn police officers with tactical training who spend time developing relationships with schools.

Even experts in the field of school security are split on what kind of personnel leads to a “safer” school. 

School resource officers are “carefully selected and specifically trained,” said Mo Canady, the executive director of the trade association for those officers.  The group trains thousands of police officers in how to develop relationships with youth.

“We want the gun to be in the right hands,” Canady added.

Most schools don’t have a school resource officer

In reality, most public schools don’t have a school resource officer. Only about 40% employ one, said Jeff Allison, a special advisor for the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators. 

Other options for schools include hiring a retired law enforcement officer, creating an in-house school police department, contracting with off-duty police and paying them overtime to work during school hours, or asking school parents who are sworn officers to lend a hand.

Ken Trump, a longtime school security expert, believes the best option is to have a trained, professional law enforcement officer in a school.

“Police officers are trained to factor in that there’s a much greater civilian population around them in a public setting where armed conflict might occur,” said Trump, who is not related to the president.  

Both police and armed guards would have the authority to fire their guns in school during a life-threatening situation. But whether they should, Trump said, depends on the situation.

“Armed officers, whether they are security or police, are required to follow use-of-force (guidance), where the force used by the officer is in proportion to the force being used by the assailant,” Trump said.

“Obviously, in the context of an active shooter in a school, deadly force may be necessary when the assailants are causing death or serious bodily injury.”

But Trump also acknowledged that even the best training cannot predict how people will respond in a life-threatening situation.

For example, last year, the armed school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, failed to charge into the school and apprehend the shooter that killed 17 students.

“You don’t know what their emotional response is going to be under stress,” Trump said.

‘Are you going to shoot that person?’

At least three students have been hailed as heroes for disarming one of the suspects during Tuesday’s shooting. One of them, Kendrick Castillo, was shot and killed during the struggle. A second, Joshua Jones, is recovering at home after being shot twice.

Colorado school shooting: A 12-year-old grabbed a bat and ‘was gonna go down fighting’

The armed security guard at the school was employed by Boss High Level Protection, which was started by a SWAT team leader who responded to the 1999 Columbine High School shooting.

The company’s owner, Grant Whitus, told The Associated Press the guard ran to the area of the shootings and confronted one of the armed students in a hallway.

“He doesn’t even realize how many lives he saved by stopping a school shooting,” Whitus said Wednesday.

An attorney for the guard, Robert Burk, said his client acted in the best interests of protecting the children at the school and helped resolve the situation without further bloodshed.

Contracted private security firms work just fine for many schools, especially because they are cheaper and schools have more flexibility around scheduling their hours, said Sheldon Greenberg, a professor of public safety leadership at the Johns Hopkins University School of Education.

“People tend to think of contracted security as an ill-prepared rent-a-cop,” he said. “Even if they are contracted security officers … they can be pretty well-oriented. They may or may not be armed. There’s a whole spectrum of examples.” 

And, he said, there’s a big misconception that any security person will stop a shooter.

“In the best circumstances a police officer shoots accurately 27% of the time,” said Greenberg, who is a former police officer. “Are you going to shoot that person with kids running around? It’s not as simple as you think.”

Trevor Hughes contributed reporting from Highlands Ranch, Colorado. The Associated Press also contributed to this report.

Education coverage at USA TODAY is made possible in part by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The Gates Foundation does not provide editorial input.

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2019/05/10/school-shooting-colorado-shooter-hero-stem-school-highlands-ranch-denver/1152604001/

<!– –>

‘Cling to hope’

“Investors seemingly continue to try to cling to hope that policymakers on both sides opt to deescalate,” Deutsche Bank’s research strategist Jim Reid said in a note Friday.

Reid noted that President Donald Trump told reporters Thursday that a “deal is still possible,” and that he had received a “beautiful letter” from Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Global stock markets have seen heavy selling this week as the tension between Washington and Beijing escalated. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen more than 650 points this week, while the S&P 500 has lost about 2.5%. Global equities have seen outflows of $20.5 billion in the past week, according to new research by Bank of America Merrill Lynch said on Friday.

Already priced in?

The recovery could also be due to markets already pricing in the tariff hike. The announcement on the increase initially came from Trump on Sunday, giving investors plenty of time to position assets in their portfolios. In addition to that, a number of analysts have also pointed out that the increase in tariffs from 10% to 25% will only really take effect in a few weeks and hence markets are anticipating a deal will come before that.

Goldman Sachs told clients in a note that there is still some wiggle room in the negotiations, which are still set to continue on Friday.

“We note that details in the notice implementing the tariff hike indicate that exports that have already left Chinese ports before May 10 will not be subject to the increase,” said Goldman economist Jan Hatzius.

“This creates an unofficial window, potentially lasting a couple of weeks, in which negotiations can continue and generates a ‘soft’ deadline to reach a deal … This also leaves an opportunity for the two sides to reach an agreement in the next couple of weeks, though challenges remain,” he added.

‘Amicable conclusion’

Russ Mould, an investment director at London-based stockbroker AJ Bell, said the market moves could be down to investors now having real facts with the formal tariff hike, which would dispel any speculation earlier in the week.

He also explained that a China retaliation will hurt U.S. businesses and consumers and have a negative impact on the economy. He added that the finger of blame would then point to Trump for being “too aggressive,” noting that he cannot afford to let this happen ahead of elections next year.

“Investors could be betting that China’s retaliation could force Trump to back down and come to an amicable conclusion,” Mould said in his note.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/10/stock-markets-why-equities-arent-sinking-despite-the-us-tariff-hike.html

President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump rips Comey after CNN town hall: ‘He brought the FBI down’ White House says US, China trade talks to continue Friday Giuliani traveling to Ukraine to push for probes that could be ‘very helpful’ to Trump MORE tore into James ComeyJames Brien ComeyTrump rips Comey after CNN town hall: ‘He brought the FBI down’ Comey slams Sarah Sanders’s ‘slip of the tongue’ about his firing Comey: US not in a ‘constitutional crisis,’ but system is being tested MORE on Thursday night, hours after the former FBI director suggested in a wide-ranging CNN town hall that he be prosecuted.

Trump knocked Comey in a tweet as “a disgrace to the FBI” while predicting that he “will go down as the worst Director in its long and once proud history.”

“He brought the FBI down, almost all Republicans & Democrats thought he should be FIRED, but the FBI will regain greatness because of the great men & women who work there!” he added. 

Trump took to Twitter to blast Comey on Thursday after the former FBI chief appeared on CNN and ripped into the president, saying it appeared there was enough evidence to prosecute him for obstruction of justice based on the details laid out in special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerSasse: US should applaud choice of Mueller to lead Russia probe MORE‘s report.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/443060-trump-rips-comey-after-cnn-town-hall-he-brought-the-fbi-down

Sorry, Mr. President, special counsel Robert Mueller’s report destroyed the Logan Act’s continuing legal viability. It cannot be used to prosecute John Kerry.

The context here is President Trump’s suggestion on Thursday that former Secretary of State John Kerry be charged with violating the Logan Act. The act restricts private individuals from conducting foreign policy “without the authority” of the U.S. government. But Trump is upset over Kerry’s discussions with Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif in relation to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. Kerry supports that nuclear deal, but Trump strongly opposes it and has imposed significant sanctions on Iran in pursuit of a new deal.

But as I say, Kerry can’t be prosecuted under the Logan Act. Because Mueller’s report showed prima facie evidence of breaches of the Logan Act by former national security adviser Michael Flynn, and potentially also Jared Kushner and Trump himself. As I’ve noted, Flynn’s conduct during the 2016 presidential transition period evidences “successful, unauthorized effort to affect a foreign government’s foreign policy.”

Flynn was not authorized by the Obama administration to carry on that activity, and it was fundamentally counter to President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. So if Flynn wasn’t charged for his actions, Kerry cannot be charged over his.

In short, the Logan Act is dead. That is rightly so: the act is almost certainly unconstitutional in its infringement of the individual right to free speech.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/sorry-president-trump-mueller-saved-john-kerry-from-the-logan-act

A handful of red states are placing bets on abortion bans in the hopes of having the Supreme Court reconsider Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide for up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy.

States are quickly passing laws banning abortion when a doctor can detect a fetal heartbeat, at about six weeks into a pregnancy and before many women know they’re pregnant. Such “heartbeat bills” have passed this year in Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Ohio, and in previous years in Iowa and North Dakota.

Because the laws violate Roe‘s 24-week standard, they’ve been quickly struck down or put on hold everywhere they have been challenged, and abortion remains legal across the U.S. Still, advocates who push them hope they may eventually offer the opportunity to reverse Roe given that the Supreme Court’s makeup has changed with President Trump’s appointments of Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch. If that were to happen, the decision over the legalization of abortion would fall to the states.

“Certainly the intent of these laws is to ask the court to revisit whether there is any constitutional right for abortion whatsoever,” said Jennifer Dalven, director the Reproductive Freedom Project at the ACLU, which has brought challenges against the bans. “Whether the Supreme Court decides to take up one of these, we’ll wait and see.”

Having a six-week ban appealed to the Supreme Court would take years, and is unlikely. Still, it would be possible if lower court decisions are appealed or if circuit judges were to rule differently from one another. This would be unexpected: No federal court has upheld bans on abortion that are earlier in a pregnancy, and judges are likely to strike down six-week bans because lower court judges are compelled to apply Supreme Court precedence in their rulings.

“I think that scenario is the longest of longshots,” Clarke Forsythe, senior counsel at Americans United for Life, said of lower courts upholding a six-week ban on abortion.

But other anti-abortion advocates and lawmakers who back the six-week bans believe that it’s time for the Supreme Court to reexamine its 1973 ruling that abortion is allowed nationwide up until the point at which a baby would be able to be born early and still survive outside the womb, which is generally understood to be at about 24 weeks into a pregnancy. Opponents of this standard think that the question of viability has changed thanks to medical technology that helps premature babies survive and that allows pregnant women to see fetal development.

“The clear vitality of life that is developing is becoming more and more apparent to our eyes and our ears, and that for many people is what is inspiring these bills,” said Andrea Picciotti-Bayer, an attorney for the Catholic Association.

But Forsythe thinks it’s unlikely the bans would reach the Supreme Court, noting that the justices had already declined to hear cases on other abortion bans in recent years, causing them to be struck down. The judge who is hearing the Mississippi ban on May 21 already struck down a 15-week ban in the state, signaling he’s likely to rule similarly on an even more restrictive ban. Still, the Supreme Court has a different makeup than it used to.

“It may be that anti-choice politicians hope they get a different result this time,” said Hillary Schneller, staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “But the Supreme Court has always come out the same way on this very core issue as to whether a person has the right to make this very core decision.”

How abortion cases are challenged, whether in federal or state court, will also factor into the significance of a ruling. The Supreme Court could narrowly uphold state laws without touching on Roe, or it could rule in a way that opens the door to states chipping away at abortion rights.

Both sides know the Supreme Court doesn’t have to hear an abortion ban to overturn Roe. Other bills that limit abortion access can have a similar effect. For the Supreme Court, there are a multitude of potential outcomes in between outright upholding or fully overturning Roe that would allow for more restrictions on abortion.

Schneller called such a strategy “death by a thousand cuts to eliminate abortion in a more stealth way” and a “more subtle but very dangerous way of eliminating access to abortion without actually having to overturn Roe.”

The Supreme Court is already considering abortion challenges, including over a law in Indiana that would ban abortion on the basis of race, sex, or disability status.

In another case, the Center for Reproductive Rights has asked the Supreme Court to strike down a Louisiana law that obligates doctors have admitting privileges to local hospitals, which is a similar law to one the high court ruled unconstitutional in Texas almost three years ago. If allowed to proceed, the law would reduce the number of doctors who provide abortions in the state to just one.

“The right to abortion on paper doesn’t mean anything in practice unless you’re able to have a clinic in your state where you’re able to access abortion without an undue burden,” Schneller said.

Many national advocacy groups who seek to end abortion favor the more gradual approach, including the Susan B. Anthony List, which is influential with the Trump administration. Americans United For Life backs abortion laws that ban the procedure at 20 weeks as well as laws that require all women to undergo an ultrasound before having an abortion.

“Any of those could be the vehicle for re-examining Roe, although the court is not going to do so in the short term,” Forsythe said.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/could-a-heartbeat-bill-take-down-roe-v-wade

Girard Saenz, 57, was arrested on suspicion of violating California’s law regarding assault weapons and .50-caliber Browning machine guns. The law prohibits the manufacture, distribution, transportation, importation and sale of such firearms, except in specific circumstances. He was released from jail Thursday morning after posting $50,000 bond, according to jail records.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-bel-air-mansion-guns-getty-girard-saenz-20190509-story.html

In the lead-up to the February summit between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, North Korean officials reportedly requested “famous basketball players” be sent to North Korea to help mend relations between the two countries.

The appeal was made in writing, ABC News reports, and at one point North Korea urged that the request be included in the joint statement on denuclearization. The bid was made as part of the cultural exchange, which also included a request for the two countries to exchange orchestras.

Kim is a huge fan of American basketball. Former NBA star Dennis Rodman has met with Kim in North Korea on a number of occasions, including for his birthday.

Despite much buildup over the summit, no agreement on denuclearization came out the meeting between the two leaders. Trump walked out of the summit after Kim demanded all sanctions be lifted in exchange for only partial denuclearization.

Since the meeting, Kim has escalated tensions in the region. Last week, a number of short-range projectiles were fired into the sea of North Korea’s eastern coast, and on Thursday, the U.S. announced that it had seized North Korea’s second-largest cargo vessel.

The Washington Examiner reached out for the State Department for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/kim-jong-un-eyed-famous-basketball-players-to-help-smooth-denuclearization-deal

California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an updated state budget that calls for $27 million to go toward combating gun violence, triple the amount he originally suggested in January.

Newsom’s new budget would allocate the $27 million to the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Program, which allocates grants to cities and community-based groups that focus on eliminating violence. Last year, Newsom designated $9 million for the program and proposed the same amount when he first unveiled his budget.

Newsom’s revised budget attracted support from a California chapter of a gun reform group, Moms Demand Action. The groups claimed the grant program uses a “localized approach” to target gun violence in rough California neighborhoods.

“Gov. Newsom demonstrated today that he knows just how important community-based violence intervention programs are to saving lives in our communities,” Krystal Lopilato, a volunteer with Moms Demand Action in California, said in a statement. “This increased funding … will mean increased safety in the communities hardest hit by gun violence.”

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gavin-newsom-triples-funding-to-combat-gun-violence-in-updated-calif-budget

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

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/business/china-us-tariffs-trade/index.html

McKinney is pictured above.

Lawyers for the second suspect in the Colorado school shooting, Maya McKinney, who is listed in court records as a female, asked the court to use the pronoun “he.”

The 16-year-old McKinney is transgender and was transitioning from female to male at the time of Tuesday’s shooting at the STEM School Highlands Ranch in Highlands Ranch, Colo., that left one student dead and eight others wounded. McKinney reportedly identifies as a male and goes by the name Alec.

[ Read more: One of the two suspects in the Colorado school shooting is female, reportedly transgender]

He appeared in court Wednesday, shackled at the wrists and ankles. Arapahoe County District Attorney George Brauchler said that he still has not decided whether to charge McKinney as an adult. In Colorado, 16 is the youngest age that prosecutors can file adult charges.

McKinney is being held for murder and attempted murder, along with 18-year-old Devon Erickson. The two were arrested after students fought back on attempts to shoot up the school. The student who died, Kendrick Castillo, is being hailed as a hero after he was killed attempting to lunge at the gunman.

McKinney is due back in court on Friday.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/lawyers-for-transgender-student-arrested-in-colorado-school-shooting-asks-court-to-use-male-pronouns

Former FBI Director James Comey defended President Barack Obama‘s handling of Russian interference during the 2016 election, placing more blame on Republican lawmakers for not wanting to disclose Russia’s involvement to the public sooner.

During a televised town hall, CNN anchor Anderson Cooper asked Comey about President Trump‘s repeated criticism of his predecessor for not taking more action against Russia on his watch.

“What should have been done more? Could more have been done? You were at the FBI at that point,” Cooper said.

“That’s a hard question. President Obama faced a very difficult choice. The No. 1 goal for the Russians is to damage our democracy and undermine faith in our electoral process,” Comey responded. “If he makes an announcement that the Russians are coming for the election, has he just accomplished their goal for them and has he given Donald Trump an excuse to say, ‘Obama fixed the election’? So I get why he struggled with it.”

Comey credited Obama for doing a “sensible thing” by trying to get top lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to go public about Russia’s meddling.

“He tried getting the bipartisan leaders of Congress to jointly tell the American people this is going on,” Comey continued. “And, in my view, to their everlasting shame, the Republicans refused.”

The former FBI director also mentioned that he offered to write an op-ed during the election to inform the country about Russia, but was shut down by the Obama administration.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“I get why President Obama hesitated and I agreed with his concern about not accomplishing Russia’s goal for them,” Comey told Cooper.

In a wide-ranging town hall about the Russia investigation, Comey was asked about the reported undercover investigator who was sent to meet former Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos. He dismissed the notion that it was “spying” and called it “reasonable” and a “totally normal step” based on the investigation.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/comey-defends-obamas-handling-of-russian-interference-knocks-republicans

<!– –>

U.S. equity futures were little changed Thursday as traders awaited a midnight deadline for tariffs to increase.

Stock futures opened slightly lower, with S&P futures contracts down 0.1%. Dow and Nasdaq futures both fell 0.12%.

China’s Vice Premier Liu He is meeting with top U.S. trade officials Thursday evening in Washington, just hours before the new tariffs are set to go into effect. President Donald Trump set a 12:01 ET deadline to slap higher tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods. Trump later suggested that the White House could reverse that decision, based on progress in negotiations.

Hours before the meeting Thursday, the president said tariffs are an “excellent” alternative to a trade deal with China.

Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer of Bleakley Advisory Group, said the market reaction will be extreme in either direction, depending on the outcome of Thursday night’s dinner.

“[Friday] is very binary. If you get a deal we’re going to rally — if you don’t, we’re going to take a really nice hit to the downside,” Boockvar said.

Boockvar is predicting an extension of talks and a delay by the White House.

“I understand what they’re trying to do by putting China’s feet to the fire. But I have to believe that they’ll extend the talks and they’ll delay the tariffs,” Boockvar said. “The president will talk tough, and we’ll get a relief rally tomorrow.”

Stocks extended this week’s extreme sell-off on Thursday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen more than 650 points this week, while the S&P 500 has lost about 2.5% following the president’s Sunday tweet threatening tariff hikes.

On Monday, stocks shook off the president’s weekend tweet as a mere negotiation tactic. But tougher rhetoric by top U.S. trade representative Robert Lighthizer weighed on major indexes. The White House set a Friday deadline to strike a deal before existing tariffs increase from 10% to 25%.

Markets again seesawed after the president said it was possible to get a trade deal with China this week. The Dow fell nearly 450 points at its intraday low on Thursday before cutting losses and ending the day just 138 points down.

Dave Lafferty, chief market strategist at Natixis Investment Managers, said any positive market reaction is still likely to be underwhelming.

“This is the new normal for U.S.-China trade relations — it’s almost become trade policy by tariff threat,” Lafferty said. “What concerns me the most is, even if we do get a trade deal — which I think we will — the market’s positive reaction will be fleeting.”

Still, traders are in a wait-and-see mode.

“The markets are ruled by the news headlines, and at this time, no one can guess which way the president or China is going to go,” said Chris Rupkey, chief financial economist at MUFG Union Bank. Rupkey said investors are “underestimating” U.S. economic damage if tariffs increase permanently.

“Markets have discounted a lot of bad news, but they haven’t discounted a recession as a result of the trade war escalation with China,” he said.

The Cboe Volatility Index, a measure of the 30-day implied volatility of the S&P 500 that’s commonly known as Wall Street’s “fear gauge,” hit its highest level since Jan. 4 on Thursday.

Goldman Sachs assured its clients that even if the tariff hike is implemented at the deadline, there’s room for some sort of deal.

“We note that details in the notice implementing the tariff hike indicate that exports that have already left Chinese ports before May 10 will not be subject to the increase,” Goldman economist Jan Hatzius said. “This creates an unofficial window, potentially lasting a couple of weeks, in which negotiations can continue and generates a ‘soft’ deadline to reach a deal.”

Others are less hopeful. In a note to clients, Cowen Managing Director and Washington strategist Chris Krueger highlighted Trump’s rally Wednesday night in Florida, his tweets over the week, and a comment Thursday that there was an “alternative” to a deal. Krueger said it’s “hard to not be more pessimistic on the U.S.-China narrative, i.e. The Return of Tariff Man.”

“Many are still optimistic tariffs can be avoided one minute past midnight (we are not),” Krueger said.

— CNBC’s Fred Imbert, Yun Li and Michael Bloom contributed reporting.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/09/stock-market-on-edge-as-traders-wait-to-see-if-trump-hikes-tariffs.html