America’s busiest airport has warned passengers to set aside three hours to clear security, as the government shutdown takes a deepening toll on everyday life in the US.
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport tweeted on Monday evening that it was experiencing “longer than usual wait times during peak travel” and advised passengers to “give yourself 3 hours to clear security.”
Transportation Security Administration agents, who provide security at airports, are expected to work unpaid during the partial government shutdown, and many are not coming to work.
An airport spokesman told Business Insider on Tuesday morning that the airport’s advice was still to allow three hours for security.
Earlier Monday, the CNN reporter Omar Jimenez shared video footage of a security line at the airport, which he said was the “longest security line I have ever seen.”
The sped-up footage shows a long line of passengers snaking through the airport. “One passenger told me he’d been waiting over an hour and still had about 30 minutes to go,” Jimenez said.
As of 9.30 a.m. on Tuesday morning, the wait times were about 15 minutes, which is not unusual, according to the airport’s website.
But a photo from a journalist on the ground, shared on Twitter just after 7 a.m., showed screens at the airport alerting passengers to wait times of 15-30 minutes.
The airport said the three-hour warning stood despite the quiet start.
Passengers have been showing up hours before their flights to ensure they can take off.
Atlanta’s WSB-TV 2 said one woman had showed up at 2 a.m. to make sure she got a 7 a.m. flight.
Unusually high numbers of TSA agents across the US have been calling in sick.
On Monday morning, 7.6% of TSA agents had unscheduled absences, compared with 3.2% on the same day last year, the TSA spokesman Michael Bilello said. He said “security standards remain uncompromised at our nation’s airports.”
One federal air traffic controller in Atlanta told The Daily Beast on Monday: “Everything is a mess here. No one knows who is open, who is working, or what terminals are functioning.
“It’s a total s—show that won’t be solved until the shutdown is over.”
The Atlanta airport representative told Business Insider that passengers should check the airport’s website and app for estimates on security wait times.
The shutdown is now the longest in US history, leaving 800,000 government employees unsure when their next paycheck is coming. Even though those working unpaid are eligible to receive back pay once the shutdown is over, many live paycheck to paycheck.
The shutdown started December 22 after Democrats refused President Donald Trump’s demand that a spending bill to keep the government open includes billions of dollars in funding for a wall along the southern US border.
Bilello, the TSA spokesman, said agency directors were meeting with airport authorities and airlines across the US to “ensure resources are optimized, efforts to consolidate operations are actively managed, and that the screening and security of the traveling public are never compromised.”
He said Hartsfield-Jackson, as well as George Bush Intercontinental Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport, were “exercising their contingency plans to uphold aviation security standards.”
He also said the TSA would reallocate officers across the country “to meet staffing shortages that cannot be addressed locally.”
Some airports have been sharing their short security lines in response. Washington Dulles shared a photo of short lines and said it had “minimal wait times.”
But other airports have warned that conditions could worsen if the shutdown continues.
Josh Waggener, the president of Denver’s National Air Traffic Controllers Association, said on Monday that Denver International Airport could face longer lines and fewer flights, according to the local Reporter Herald.
A lack of air traffic controllers, who are also being unpaid during the shutdown, could also hold up flights.
“We were already at a 30-year low for air traffic controllers before the shutdown,” Waggener said.
Shutdown writing is tedious because it tends to follow a pattern: Nothing has happened for weeks and nothing is likely to happen for the next couple weeks. Updates to follow.
The wall isn’t even really the point anymore, as if $5 billion could ever do more than pay for a few hundred steel slats along the southern border anyway. Aside from the overflowing toilets at national parks and the army of inconvenienced furloughed federal employees then, the only question that actually matters is who the public will hold responsible when the government reopens.
Of course, President Trump blames Democrats for the shutdown he at first took credit for. (“I would be proud to shut down the government.”) For the last three weeks though, he has been inviting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to make a deal.
This strategy isn’t working, and this shutdown won’t stop anytime soon. Recent polling shows why.
The Washington Post and ABC News found that 53 percent of respondents blamed Trump and Republicans in Congress for the shutdown, 29 percent blamed Democrats, and 13 percent blamed both sides.
After first glancing at these numbers, one would assume the White House would realize they were losing the messaging war. But a closer look shows why the shutdown will continue: Trump is getting good scores on this shutdown with Republicans.
Trump promised his base a wall, and the GOP is increasingly getting on board even when construction seems impossible. As the Washington Post reports, support for the wall jumped 16 percent in the last year from 71 to 87 percent.
And this is why the shutdown won’t end anytime soon. Trump continues to get what he wants, namely giving the impression to his supporters that he still fights. He does this by not doing anything. Until something changes drastically, nothing will change at all.
Media captionTheresa May: “Give this deal a second look”
MPs are preparing to vote on whether to back Theresa May’s deal for leaving the European Union.
The so-called “meaningful vote” will take place later as five days of debate on Brexit come to an end.
Mrs May has called for politicians to back her deal or risk “letting the British people down”.
But with many of her own MPs expected to join opposition parties to vote against the deal, it is widely expected to be defeated.
Attorney General Geoffrey Cox will open the last day of debate at about 12:50 GMT, with Mrs May due to close the debate with a speech from about 18:30 GMT.
The prime minister is addressing her cabinet on Tuesday morning, after she attempted on Monday evening to win Tory MPs’ support for her deal – which includes both the withdrawal agreement on the terms on which the UK leaves the EU and a political declaration for the future relationship.
In the Commons, she said: “It is not perfect but when the history books are written, people will look at the decision of this House and ask, ‘Did we deliver on the country’s vote to leave the EU, did we safeguard our economy, security or union, or did we let the British people down?'”
Mrs May also tried to reassure MPs over the controversial Northern Irish “backstop” – the fallback plan to avoid any return to physical border checks between the country and Ireland.
She pointed to new written assurances from the EU that the contingency customs arrangement being proposed would be temporary and, if triggered, would last for “the shortest possible period”.
Media captionBrexit plan: Political declaration and withdrawal agreement
Environment Secretary Michael Gove told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that rejecting Mrs May’s deal would lead to a no-deal Brexit with short term economic damage “or worse, no Brexit at all”.
He said with this deal “we’ve picked a whole bowl of glistening cherries”, despite the fact the EU had said at the beginning of negotiations that there would be no “cherry picking”.
“If we don’t vote for this agreement then we risk playing into the hands of those who do not want Brexit to go ahead,” he said.
But many Tory MPs and the Democratic Unionists remain adamantly opposed to the deal.
About 100 Conservative MPs – and the Democratic Unionist Party’s 10 MPs – could join Labour and the other opposition parties to vote it down.
Former Brexit secretary Dominic Raab said that Brexiteers like him could back a deal if aspects such as the backstop were dealt with.
He told the Today programme the EU had played “a smart game of hard ball” and said it was time for the UK to do the same.
Media captionDUP’s Sammy Wilson: “The deal would remove us from the rest of the United Kingdom”
Democratic Unionist leader Arlene Foster called the backstop “toxic” and said her party’s 10 MPs would be voting against the deal.
“It’s time for a sensible deal which governs our exit from the EU and supports all parts of the UK,” she said on Twitter.
The deal suffered a heavy defeat in the House of Lords on Monday night, as peers backed a Labour motion by 321 votes to 152.
While the vote carries no real weight, as peers accepted MPs should have the final say, the motion – which also rejected a “no deal” scenario – expressed “regret” that Mrs May’s deal would “damage the future economic prosperity, internal security and global influence” of the UK.
However, five Conservative Brexiteer MPs who have been critics of the withdrawal agreement have now said they will support the government, along with three Labour backbenchers and independent Frank Field.
Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay said it showed there had been “progress” but admitted to the BBC’s Politics Live that gaining support was “challenging”.
A number of amendments to Mrs May’s deal have been put forward by MPs to try to make changes to it in Parliament.
Labour MP Hilary Benn had planned an amendment to reject the deal and prevent no deal – but has since told BBC assistant political editor Norman Smith that he has withdrawn his proposal.
Mr Benn told the Today programme that he wanted there to be a “clear, single vote” on Mrs May’s deal, so that there was “clarity” on why it was being rejected.
When asked what the margin of defeat could be for Mrs May, former Downing Street director of legislative affairs Nikki da Costa told Today she expected it to be within the “50 to 80 mark”.
The Commons Speaker, John Bercow, will decide which amendments can go forward to be voted on just before the vote on the deal itself.
Please upgrade your browser
Your guide to Brexit jargon
Speaking to his own backbenchers last night, Mr Corbyn again condemned the deal and reiterated his call for a general election if it is voted down by Parliament. He also promised Labour would call a no-confidence vote in the government “soon”.
He said: “Theresa May has attempted to blackmail Labour MPs to vote for her botched deal by threatening the country with the chaos of no deal. I know from conversations with colleagues that this has failed. The Labour party will not be held to ransom.”
Towards the end of seven hours of Commons debate, shadow chancellor John McDonnell said if Labour could not force a change of government, ministers must cede power to allow MPs across Parliament to work together “to secure the best compromise to protect our country”.
Chancellor Philip Hammond wound up the fourth day of debate just after 02:00 GMT on Tuesday, by warning that no-one would get “exactly the Brexit they want”.
Leaving the EU without a deal would be “every bit as much a betrayal as no Brexit at all”, he argued, saying it would not deliver on the promise of greater prosperity.
What happens next?
If the deal is rejected by MPs, Mrs May has three sitting days to return to Parliament with a “Plan B”.
Some have suggested she would head to Brussels on Wednesday to try to get further concessions from the EU, before returning to the Commons to give a statement about her new proposal by Monday. This could then be put to a vote by MPs.
If this also fails, there is a proposal put forward by senior Conservative backbenchers Nick Boles, Sir Oliver Letwin and Nicky Morgan for a “European Union Withdrawal Number 2 Bill”. This would give ministers another three weeks to come up with another plan and get it through Parliament.
If this doesn’t work either, they propose giving the responsibility of coming up with a compromise deal to the Liaison Committee – which is made up of the chairmen and chairwomen of all the Commons select committees, drawn from opposition parties as well as the Conservatives.
This proposal in turn would have to be voted through by MPs.
In another development, a cross-party group of anti-Brexit politicians has published proposed legislation to bring about another referendum to ask the public whether they want to remain in the EU or leave under the prime minister’s deal.
Media captionLib Dems’ Layla Moran: “Brexit is a complete cluster shambles”
The MPs behind the draft legislation point out that Article 50 – the two-year process by which an EU member can leave the bloc – would have to be extended in order for another referendum to take place, meaning the UK would remain a member beyond 29 March.
But, unless new legislation is introduced, the default position will be that the UK leaves the EU on that date with no deal.
WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s attorney general nominee William Barr will pledge at his confirmation hearing to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into whether Trump’s 2016 election campaign coordinated with Russia, according to prepared testimony released on Monday.
“On my watch, Bob will be allowed to complete his work,” Barr said in the prepared remarks ahead of two days of confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee starting on Tuesday morning.
Barr, a former attorney general under President George H.W. Bush, also will address his prior criticism of Mueller’s probe, telling members of the committee that a memo he sent last year that called the investigation “fatally misconceived” only outlined his concerns that Mueller might be misinterpreting one aspect of the law.
“The memo did not address – or in any way question – the Special Counsel’s core investigation,” Barr will tell the panel.
Mueller is investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, possible collusion between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign and potential obstruction of justice.
Related: Robert Mueller:
Up Next
See Gallery
Russia has denied U.S. intelligence agencies’ findings that it meddled in the election, running an interference operation to spread disinformation and hacking political party emails. Trump has denied any collusion with Moscow and called Mueller’s probe a “witch hunt.”
Barr has broad support from Republicans who control the Senate, but some Democrats have questioned whether he is the best choice to serve as the top law enforcement officer in the United States at a time when Trump is battling multiple legal investigations.
Barr will emphasize his independence, telling lawmakers that he did not seek out the job and has not given Trump any assurances of loyalty.
“As Attorney General, my allegiance will be to the rule of law, the Constitution, and the American people,” he will say.
Barr said he has known Mueller professionally for 30 years and has confidence in his abilities.
“If confirmed, I will not permit partisan politics, personal interests, or any other improper consideration to interfere with this or any other investigation,” Barr said in his written remarks.
Democrats have worried that Trump may try to quash Mueller’s findings when he concludes his work. Barr will tell lawmakers that he believes it is important that Congress and the public are informed of his results. “My goal will be to provide as much transparency as I can consistent with the law,” he said.
Mueller’s investigation and other inquiries have clouded Trump’s two years in office. Mueller has secured more than 30 indictments and guilty pleas and has spawned at least four federal investigations.
Government ethics forms released publicly on Monday show that if confirmed, Barr will within 90 days divest his financial interests in multiple bonds, private funds and stocks including AT&T Inc, Bristol Myers Squib Co, Dominion Energy Inc, J.P. Morgan Co, Bank of America Corp, Altria Group Inc, Merck & Co Inc, and Pfizer Inc , among others.
(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; editing by Grant McCool)
CORNELL, Wis. (KARE) Robert Naiberg’s home is decorated with photographs highlighting his special relationship with his granddaughter Jayme Closs.
Jayme Closs age 13, went missing after her parents were found dead at their Wisconsin home. She ran from her captor and is now back with family. Photo Date: Undated / Photo: FBI Milwaukee / (MGN)
“Just a miracle that she got away from him,” Naiberg said.
Robert was there to greet Jayme when she returned home.
“I was the first one to give her a hug,” he said.
She returned home to a new bedroom in her aunt’s house, put together for her in a matter of hours after her family learned she was alive.
“You know what they told me, it’s the first time they’ve seen a smile on my face in three months,” Naiberg said.
It was an 88-day ordeal that was extremely painful for Robert and his family, and unimaginable for the 13-year-old girl who endured it.
“I imagine she’s going to have problems, but she’ll be helped,” Naiberg said.
Robert said Jayme couldn’t be in better hands. His daughter Jennifer is stepping in to raise Jayme after the death of his daughter and son-in-law, Denise and Jim Closs.
“The way he brutally murdered my son-in-law and daughter and took her, just senseless,” Naiberg said. “Senseless killing.”
Robert says the family didn’t want to exhaust Jayme, so the homecoming party didn’t last long. And they didn’t ask questions about three months the sheriff says she likely spent imprisoned in a Wisconsin cabin 70 miles away.
“That’s what I understand, that’s where she was the whole time. And if anyone came there, he had her hid. Probably had her scared to death, you know?” Naiberg said.
But Robert is so happy that Jayme, who’s known to be shy, found the strength to escape.
“I’m really proud of her for that, very proud of her,” Naiberg said. “She just went the right direction at the right time. I’ll forever be thankful of the lady and her dog, and the people she took her to.”
He never gave up his mission to “bring Jayme home.”
Jake Patterson, the suspect in the case, is scheduled to make his first appearance in court Monday at 3:30 p.m.
More than 30,000 L.A. Unified School District teachers went on strike Monday, but schools remained open and class was in session. Substitute teachers and volunteers were in campus buildings conducting lessons and showing movies.
A Chinese court in northeastern Liaoning province announced Monday that it had sentenced Robert Lloyd Schellenberg to death, reversing an earlier 2016 ruling that sentenced him to 15 years in prison.(CCTV via AP)
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau strongly condemned the sentence handed down to Robert Lloyd Schellenberg and suggested that China was using its judicial system to pressure Canada to release Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of the Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.
In his strongest comments yet, Trudeau said “all countries around the world” should be concerned that Beijing is acting arbitrarily with its justice system.
“It is of extreme concern to us as a government, as it should be to all our international friends and allies, that China has chosen to begin to arbitrarily apply a death penalty,” Trudeau said.
Schellenberg was detained more than four years ago and initially sentenced to 15 years in prison in 2016. But within weeks of Meng’s Dec. 1 arrest, an appeals court suddenly reversed that decision, saying the sentence was too lenient, and scheduled Monday’s retrial with just four days’ notice.
Schellenberg’s lawyer, Zhang Dongshuo, said prosecutors had not introduced new evidence to justify a heavier sentence during the one-day trial, during which Schellenberg again maintained his innocence. He said his client now has 10 days to appeal.
“This is a very unique case,” Zhang told The Associated Press. He said the swiftness of the proceedings was unusual but declined to comment on whether it was related to Meng’s arrest.
The court said it found that Schellenberg was involved in an international drug-smuggling operation and was recruited to help smuggle more than 485 pounds of methamphetamine from a warehouse in the Chinese city of Dalian to Australia. A Chinese man convicted of involvement in the same operation was earlier given a suspended death sentence.
Fifty people, including Canadian diplomats and foreign and domestic media, attended Monday’s trial, the court, in northeastern Liaoning province, said in an online statement.
The court gave no indication that the death penalty could be commuted, but observers said Schellenberg’s fate is likely to be drawn into diplomatic negotiations over China’s demand for the release of Meng.
Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, accused Beijing of playing “hostage politics,” tweeting that the revised sentence was “a fairly transparent attempt to pressure Canada to free the Huawei CFO.”
The Chinese media began publicizing Schellenberg’s case after Canadian authorities detained Meng, the daughter of Huawei’s founder, at the request of the United States, which wants her extradited to face charges that she committed fraud by misleading banks about the company’s business dealings in Iran.
After Trudeau’s statement, Canada updated its travel advisory for China, urging its citizens to “exercise a high degree of caution due to the risk of arbitrary enforcement of local laws.”
Further escalating the diplomatic rift between the two countries, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman that Michael Kovrig, a former Canadian diplomat taken into custody in apparent retaliation for Meng’s arrest, was not eligible for diplomatic immunity as Trudeau has maintained.
Kovrig, a Northeast Asia analyst for the International Crisis Group think tank, was on a leave of absence from the Canadian government at the time of his arrest last month. Hua Chunying told reporters that Kovrig is no longer a diplomat and entered China on an ordinary passport and business visa.
“According to the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations and international law, he is not entitled to diplomatic immunity,” Hua said at a daily Foreign Ministry briefing. “I suggest that the relevant Canadian person carefully study the Vienna Convention … before commenting on the cases, or they would only expose themselves to ridicule with such specious remarks.”
A senior Canadian government official said Chinese officials have been questioning Kovrig about his diplomatic work in China, which is a major reason why Trudeau is asserting diplomatic immunity. The official, who was not authorized to comment publicly about the case, spoke on condition of anonymity.
A former Canadian ambassador to China, Guy Saint-Jacques, said interrogating Kovrig about his time as a diplomat in China would violate Vienna Convention protections of residual diplomatic immunity that mean a country is not allowed to question someone on the work they did when they were a diplomat.
“It’s difficult not to see a link” between the case and Canada’s arrest of Meng, Saint-Jacques said.
Hua said the allegation that China arbitrarily detained Canadian citizens is “totally groundless.”
Days after Meng’s arrest, Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor were detained on vague national security allegations. Meng is out on bail in Canada awaiting extradition proceedings that begin next month.
Canada has embarked on a campaign with allies to win the release of Kovrig and Spavor. The United States, Britain, European Union and Australia have issued statements in support. Trudeau called President Trump about their case last week and the White House called the arrests “unlawful.”
Last week, Poland arrested a Huawei director and one of its own former cybersecurity experts and charged them with spying for China. The move came amid a U.S. campaign to exert pressure on its allies not to use Huawei, the world’s biggest maker of telecommunications network equipment, over data security concerns.
The arrests raised concerns over the safety of Poland’s nationals in China, although Hua brushed off such worries, emphasizing China’s desire for the “sound and steady” development of relations with Poland.
“As long as the foreign citizens in China abide by Chinese laws and regulations, they are welcomed and their safety and freedom are guaranteed,” Hua said.
At the time, Mr. Trump’s national security team, including Jim Mattis, then the defense secretary, and John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, scrambled to keep American strategy on track without mention of a withdrawal that would drastically reduce Washington’s influence in Europe and could embolden Russia for decades.
Now, the president’s repeatedly stated desire to withdraw from NATO is raising new worries among national security officials amid growing concern about Mr. Trump’s efforts to keep his meetings with Mr. Putin secret from even his own aides, and an F.B.I. investigation into the administration’s Russia ties.
A move to withdraw from the alliance, in place since 1949, “would be one of the most damaging things that any president could do to U.S. interests,” said Michèle A. Flournoy, an under secretary of defense under President Barack Obama.
“It would destroy 70-plus years of painstaking work across multiple administrations, Republican and Democratic, to create perhaps the most powerful and advantageous alliance in history,” Ms. Flournoy said in an interview. “And it would be the wildest success that Vladimir Putin could dream of.”
Retired Adm. James G. Stavridis, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, said an American withdrawal from the alliance would be “a geopolitical mistake of epic proportion.”
“The N.R.C.C. does not get involved in primaries and isn’t going to comment on a hypothetical general election two years away,” said Chris Pack, a spokesman for the House campaign arm.
Democrats are moving to censure or reprimand the Iowa congressman, a stinging penalty. Among them were Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest ranking African-American in Congress, who introduced a measure Monday night in the form of a resolution of disapproval of Mr. King’s comments and white nationalism.
Democratic leaders in the House have yet to say what they will do with the competing censure resolutions, but are inclined to allow a vote of some sort related to Mr. King’s remarks, according to one senior Democratic aide.
In the interview with The Times, Mr. King also reflected on the record number of minorities and women in the new Democratic-controlled House. “You could look over there and think the Democratic Party is no country for white men,” he said.
Mr. King’s hard-line immigration policies and demeaning comments about Hispanics foreshadowed Mr. Trump’s nativist rhetoric in his 2016 campaign, in his two years in the White House and during the government shutdown over a border wall. The president once boasted to Mr. King that he raised more money for him than anyone else, Mr. King recalled in the Times article, which traced how the Iowa congressman helped write the playbook for white identity politics that dominate the Republican Party under Mr. Trump.
He has already drawn one serious primary opponent, state senator Randy Feenstra, for the 2020 campaign and some high-profile Republicans have indicated they will not embrace his re-election.
“It does open the door for other individuals to take a look,” Gov. Kim Reynolds of Iowa said in a television interview last week of Mr. King’s closer-than-expected victory last year.
BARRON, Wis. (AP) – The Latest on the case of a kidnapped Wisconsin girl whose parents were fatally shot and the man accused of committing the crimes (all times local):
1:05 p.m. A criminal complaint says a Wisconsin man accused of kidnapping 13-year-old Jayme Closs spotted her getting on a school bus one day and made up his mind to take her.
Jake Thomas Patterson was charged Monday with kidnapping and with killing Jayme’s parents. The criminal complaint says Patterson told investigators he was driving to his job at a cheese factory one day near Almena, Wisconsin, when he stopped behind a school bus and watched Jayme get on.
The complaint quotes Patterson as saying when he saw Jayme, “He knew that was the girl he was going to take.”
The complaint says Patterson went to the Closs home twice with the intent of taking Jayme but was unable to do so because too many people were around before he was able to kidnap her. ___ 12:45 p.m. A Wisconsin man has been charged with kidnapping, two counts of first-degree intentional homicide and armed burglary in the abduction of 13-year-old Jayme Closs and the slaying of her parents.
Jake Thomas Patterson was arrested Thursday after Jayme apparently escaped from a remote northwestern Wisconsin cabin where she says she was held.
Patterson was charged on Monday.
Investigators say the 21-year-old man broke into James and Denise Closs’ home near Barron, Wisconsin on Oct. 15 by blowing the front door open with a shotgun. Jayme’s parents were shot to death and the teenager vanished the same day.
Investigators believe Patterson planned to abduct Jayme but say they don’t know what led him to target her. ___ 11:15 a.m. A Wisconsin sheriff says 13-year-old Jayme Closs had a smile on her face when he saw her Sunday, just days after she fled the remote cabin where she says she was held for three months.
Barron County Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said it was the first time he had met Jayme since she apparently escaped from her captor on Thursday.
Fitzgerald called it “awesome” and a moment he’ll never forget. He says Jayme showed him the room where she is staying with an aunt in Barron, Wisconsin.
Jake Thomas Patterson, the man suspected of abducting Jayme and killing her parents, James and Denise Closs, was expected to be charged later Monday with kidnapping and homicide. ___ 10:30 a.m. Photos of the Wisconsin cabin where a man suspected of kidnapping Jayme Closs allegedly held the teenager show an unfinished ceiling, a three-car garage and an empty box of adult female diapers in the trash.
Investigators believe Jake Thomas Patterson broke into Jayme’s home in October, killed her parents and abducted her. She was missing for almost three months before a woman walking her dog near Gordon, Wisconsin, found her on the road. Jayme said she had escaped from Patterson’s cabin nearby.
Photos published by the New York Post show the cabin’s living area, complete with a refrigerator, white kitchen cabinets and an old television. The ceiling is not finished.
Exterior shots show a lean-to covering firewood, a three-car garage and an empty box of adult female diapers in a trash can. A sign over the front door reads “Pattersons Retreat.” ___ 9 a.m. Relatives of a 13-year-old Wisconsin girl who was kidnapped after her parents were fatally shot say they aren’t asking the girl to tell them what happened while she was held captive for three months. Her aunts say they’re surrounding Jayme Closs with love and attention.
Lynn Closs and Sue Allard told “CBS This Morning” that they’re telling their niece they’re proud of her for surviving and escaping. Lynn Closs says her niece’s strength is incredible and that she took the power away from her captor.
The suspect, Jake Patterson, is scheduled to make his first court appearance Monday.
Investigators believe Patterson broke into James and Denise Closs’ home near Barron on Oct. 15, killed the couple and abducted their daughter.
Jayme was missing for nearly three months before she escaped from a cabin in Gordon late last week. She told investigators Patterson had been holding her against her will. ___ 5:50 a.m. Defense lawyers for the man suspected of fatally shooting a Wisconsin couple and kidnapping their daughter say they believe he can get a fair trial, but they’re not sure where.
Jake Patterson is scheduled to make his first court appearance Monday.
Investigators believe he broke into James and Denise Closs’ home near Barron on Oct. 15, killed the couple and abducted their 13-year-old daughter, Jayme Closs. Jayme was missing for nearly three months before she escaped from a cabin in Gordon late last week. She told investigators Patterson had been holding her against her will.
Public defenders Charles Glynn and Richard Jones say it’s been an emotional time for the community of Barron, and they understand the pain the case has generated.
It’s unclear how Patterson became aware of Jayme, and authorities have found no evidence of any interactions between them. Charging documents released Monday could shed more light on the case. ___ 12 a.m. A man suspected of kidnapping a Wisconsin teenager and killing her parents is due to make his first court appearance.
Twenty-one-year-old Jake Thomas Patterson is expected to appear in Barron County Circuit Court on Monday afternoon, after prosecutors formally charge him with intentional homicide and kidnapping.
Investigators believe Patterson broke into James and Denise Closs’ home near Barron on Oct. 15, gunned the couple down and abducted 13-year-old Jayme Closs. She was missing for nearly three months before she escaped from the cabin in Gordon where she said Patterson had been holding her.
Charging documents could shed more light on the case. It’s unclear how Patterson became aware of Jayme, and authorities have found no evidence of any interactions between them. Her family says they don’t know Patterson.
Get your weather forecast from people that actually live in your community. We update with short, easy-to-use video forecasts you can watch on your phone every day. Download the iOS or Android app here.
Shutdown writing is tedious because it tends to follow a pattern: Nothing has happened for weeks and nothing is likely to happen for the next couple weeks. Updates to follow.
The wall isn’t even really the point anymore, as if $5 billion could ever do more than pay for a few hundred steel slats along the southern border anyway. Aside from the overflowing toilets at national parks and the army of inconvenienced furloughed federal employees then, the only question that actually matters is who the public will hold responsible when the government reopens.
Of course, President Trump blames Democrats for the shutdown he at first took credit for. (“I would be proud to shut down the government.”) For the last three weeks though, he has been inviting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to make a deal.
This strategy isn’t working, and this shutdown won’t stop anytime soon. Recent polling shows why.
The Washington Post and ABC News found that 53 percent of respondents blamed Trump and Republicans in Congress for the shutdown, 29 percent blamed Democrats, and 13 percent blamed both sides.
After first glancing at these numbers, one would assume the White House would realize they were losing the messaging war. But a closer look shows why the shutdown will continue: Trump is getting good scores on this shutdown with Republicans.
Trump promised his base a wall, and the GOP is increasingly getting on board even when construction seems impossible. As the Washington Post reports, support for the wall jumped 16 percent in the last year from 71 to 87 percent.
And this is why the shutdown won’t end anytime soon. Trump continues to get what he wants, namely giving the impression to his supporters that he still fights. He does this by not doing anything. Until something changes drastically, nothing will change at all.
WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s attorney general nominee William Barr will pledge at his confirmation hearing to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into whether Trump’s 2016 election campaign coordinated with Russia, according to prepared testimony released on Monday.
“On my watch, Bob will be allowed to complete his work,” Barr said in the prepared remarks ahead of two days of confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee starting on Tuesday morning.
Barr, a former attorney general under President George H.W. Bush, also will address his prior criticism of Mueller’s probe, telling members of the committee that a memo he sent last year that called the investigation “fatally misconceived” only outlined his concerns that Mueller might be misinterpreting one aspect of the law.
“The memo did not address – or in any way question – the Special Counsel’s core investigation,” Barr will tell the panel.
Mueller is investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, possible collusion between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign and potential obstruction of justice.
Related: Robert Mueller:
Up Next
See Gallery
Russia has denied U.S. intelligence agencies’ findings that it meddled in the election, running an interference operation to spread disinformation and hacking political party emails. Trump has denied any collusion with Moscow and called Mueller’s probe a “witch hunt.”
Barr has broad support from Republicans who control the Senate, but some Democrats have questioned whether he is the best choice to serve as the top law enforcement officer in the United States at a time when Trump is battling multiple legal investigations.
Barr will emphasize his independence, telling lawmakers that he did not seek out the job and has not given Trump any assurances of loyalty.
“As Attorney General, my allegiance will be to the rule of law, the Constitution, and the American people,” he will say.
Barr said he has known Mueller professionally for 30 years and has confidence in his abilities.
“If confirmed, I will not permit partisan politics, personal interests, or any other improper consideration to interfere with this or any other investigation,” Barr said in his written remarks.
Democrats have worried that Trump may try to quash Mueller’s findings when he concludes his work. Barr will tell lawmakers that he believes it is important that Congress and the public are informed of his results. “My goal will be to provide as much transparency as I can consistent with the law,” he said.
Mueller’s investigation and other inquiries have clouded Trump’s two years in office. Mueller has secured more than 30 indictments and guilty pleas and has spawned at least four federal investigations.
Government ethics forms released publicly on Monday show that if confirmed, Barr will within 90 days divest his financial interests in multiple bonds, private funds and stocks including AT&T Inc, Bristol Myers Squib Co, Dominion Energy Inc, J.P. Morgan Co, Bank of America Corp, Altria Group Inc, Merck & Co Inc, and Pfizer Inc , among others.
(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; editing by Grant McCool)
“And it’s pretty clear you won’t admit that the Russians have engaged in cyberattacks against the United States of America,” she continued. “That you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him because he has a very clear favorite in this race.”
More than 30,000 L.A. Unified School District teachers went on strike Monday, but schools remained open and class was in session. Substitute teachers and volunteers were in campus buildings conducting lessons and showing movies.
Unauthorized immigrants leave a court in shackles in McAllen, Texas. More than 40,000 immigration court hearings have been canceled since the government shut down.
John Moore/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
John Moore/Getty Images
Unauthorized immigrants leave a court in shackles in McAllen, Texas. More than 40,000 immigration court hearings have been canceled since the government shut down.
John Moore/Getty Images
Almost 43,000 immigration court hearings have been canceled as a result of the partial government shutdown, freezing an already heavily backlogged system, according to a report by researchers tracking immigration data. Another 20,000 hearings will be canceled for every additional week the government is not operating.
The report by the Transactional Records Access Clearing House at Syracuse University concludes that as many as 100,000 individuals will have had their hearings postponed if the shutdown continues through the end of January.
Between Dec. 24 and Jan. 11, 42,726 scheduled cases were not heard.
“Individuals impacted by these cancellations may have already being waiting two, three, or even four years for their day in court,” the report says.
As NPR’s John Burnett reports, immigrants who have had their hearings postponed or canceled may have to wait until 2022 for a rescheduled hearing.
“The White House has asked Congress to fund 75 new immigration judges to help clear overcrowded dockets that have ballooned in the past five years with more asylum claims,” Burnett added.
Even if Congress approved the hiring of new judges — and that is a big if, considering the current stalemate over immigration policy — the case backlog is massive.
“Since few cases are being resolved during the shutdown, each week the shutdown continues the practical effect is to add thousands of cases back onto the active case backlog which had already topped eight-hundred thousand (809,041) as of the end of last November,” the report adds. The case backlog has risen almost 50 percent since President Trump took office.
NPR’s Laura Benshoff reported earlier this month that the rescheduling of immigration hearings can be devastating for some, or a blessing in disguise for others.
“For example, pushing back a hearing could mean an immigrant who qualifies for status now may not in the future if immigration policies are restricted. Or, if an immigrant doesn’t have a strong claim for status, a delay means more time in the U.S. and maybe even qualifying for another form of immigration status in the interim.”
The 10 states experiencing the most immigration hearing cancellations are California, New York, Texas, Florida, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Virginia, Maryland, Illinois and Pennsylvania.
The Justice Department office that oversees the immigration courts, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, did not respond to requests for comment. A recorded message said that the press office is closed due to the government shutdown.
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, was stripped of his committee assignments by his fellow House Republicans Monday evening following bipartisan condemnation of King’s recent remarks on white supremacy and white nationalism.
“We will not tolerate this type of language in the Republican Party … or in the Democratic Party as well,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters. “I watched what Steve King said and we took action.”
In a formal statement, McCarthy said King’s comments were “beneath the dignity of the Party of Lincoln and the United States of America. His comments call into question whether he will treat all Americans equally, without regard for race and ethnicity. House Republicans are clear: We are all in this together, as fellow citizens equal before God and the law. As Congressman King’s fellow citizens, let us hope and pray earnestly that this action will lead to greater reflection and ultimately change on his part.”
In a statement of his own, King insisted that his comments had been “completely mischaracterized” and blasted McCarthy for what King called “a political decision that ignores the truth.” According to his website, King was previously a member of House committees on the judiciary, agriculture and small business.
King, 69, was already under fire from both parties over a series of racially charged remarks when he made the head-turning comments in a New York Times interview published last week.
“White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” King asked the paper. “Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?”
In his statement Monday, King insisted his use of “that language” was referring “ONLY to Western Civilization and NOT to any previously stated evil ideology ALL of which I have denounced.
“My record as a vocal advocate for Western Civilization is nearly as full as my record in defense of Freedom of Speech,” King concluded. ” … I will continue to point out the truth and work with all the vigor that I have to represent 4th District Iowans for at least the next two years.”
The loss of King’s committee assignments may not be the end of his trouble. Earlier Monday, Reps. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., and Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, introduced separate censure resolutions against the Republican. Censure is one of three formal modes of punishment in the House. It is more severe than a reprimand, but not as severe as expulsion. The House has only censured 23 members in history, most recently, former Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., in December 2010.
“Anything less [than censure] would be a slap on the wrist,” Rush told reporters. “Steve King’s continual, serial, expression of hard, rabid racism must come to a screeching halt. This Congress must rise up and express its sentiment.”
Senate Republicans also expressed their disgust with King, with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., saying that if King “doesn’t understand why ‘white supremacy’ is offensive, he should find another line of work.”
“There is no place in the Republican Party, the Congress or the country for an ideology of racial supremacy of any kind,” McConnell said. “I have no tolerance for such positions and those who espouse these views are not supporters of American ideals and freedoms. Rep. King’s statements are unwelcome and unworthy of his elected position.”
Sen. Mitt Romey, R-Utah, said King’s remarks “are his own and his exclusively and what he said was reprehensible and ought to lead to his resignation from Congress.”
“I think it’s very clear that the party leadership is unified that Steve King is out of bounds and that he should no longer be serving in Congress,” Romney said.
Last year, King tweeted “culture and demographics are our destiny” and said we “can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.”
In 2013, he commented that while he has some sympathy for some illegal immigrants, “they aren’t all valedictorians, they weren’t all brought in by their parents — for everyone who’s a valedictorian, there’s another 100 out there who weigh 130 pounds and they’ve got calves the size of cantaloupes because they’re hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.”
Shortly before the 2018 midterm elections, in which King was running, Rep. Steve Stivers, R-Ohio, then the head of the GOP campaign committee, issued an extraordinary public denunciation of him.
King has already drawn a primary challenger for the 2020 election: Randy Feenstra, a GOP state senator.
Fox News’ Gregg Re, Jason Donner and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Shutdown writing is tedious because it tends to follow a pattern: Nothing has happened for weeks and nothing is likely to happen for the next couple weeks. Updates to follow.
The wall isn’t even really the point anymore, as if $5 billion could ever do more than pay for a few hundred steel slats along the southern border anyway. Aside from the overflowing toilets at national parks and the army of inconvenienced furloughed federal employees then, the only question that actually matters is who the public will hold responsible when the government reopens.
Of course, President Trump blames Democrats for the shutdown he at first took credit for. (“I would be proud to shut down the government.”) For the last three weeks though, he has been inviting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to make a deal.
This strategy isn’t working, and this shutdown won’t stop anytime soon. Recent polling shows why.
The Washington Post and ABC News found that 53 percent of respondents blamed Trump and Republicans in Congress for the shutdown, 29 percent blamed Democrats, and 13 percent blamed both sides.
After first glancing at these numbers, one would assume the White House would realize they were losing the messaging war. But a closer look shows why the shutdown will continue: Trump is getting good scores on this shutdown with Republicans.
Trump promised his base a wall, and the GOP is increasingly getting on board even when construction seems impossible. As the Washington Post reports, support for the wall jumped 16 percent in the last year from 71 to 87 percent.
And this is why the shutdown won’t end anytime soon. Trump continues to get what he wants, namely giving the impression to his supporters that he still fights. He does this by not doing anything. Until something changes drastically, nothing will change at all.
Over 30,000 teachers went on strike in Los Angeles County today. The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) serves 640,000 students and is the second biggest school district in the country. The last time Los Angeles teachers went on strike was 1989.
The protest follows a string of successful teacher strikes across the country. Teachers in states like West Virginia and Oklahoma — who are among the lowest paid educators in the country — have organized and participated in strikes in order to advocate for higher wages and improved conditions for students.
Prior to negotiations, the average annual mean wage for a teacher was $45,240 in West Virginia and $42,460 in Oklahoma. After going on strike, teachers in both of these states received pay increases.
“What you’re seeing with unions is real enthusiasm and a belief that you can actually be successful,” Robert Bruno, professor of labor and employment relations at the University of Illinois tells the Associated Press. “The educational sector is rife with deep grievance and frustration, but there’s now a sense that you can actually win.”
The annual mean wage for teachers in California is $74,940 and $75,000 in the LAUSD, and while teacher pay is a significant issue for protesting educators, the current teachers strike in Los Angeles is also about class size.
The strike has gained attention and support from progressive politicians.
“Very proud of L.A. public school teachers today for taking a stand. Teachers are the unsung heroes of American democracy. Today they’re putting everything on the line so our nation’s children can have a better shot,” tweeted New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
“Los Angeles teachers work day in and day out to inspire and educate the next generation of leaders. I’m standing in solidarity with them as they strike for improved student conditions, such as smaller class sizes and more counselors and librarians,” tweeted California Senator Kamala Harris.
“The eyes of the nation are watching, and educators … all over the country have the backs of the educators in L.A.,” Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said at the protest on Monday, according to the Los Angeles Times. “We need the conditions to ensure that every child … gets the opportunity he or she or they deserve.”
Twice in just a few hours Saturday, President Trump and his representatives offered textbook examples of the fog-making rhetorical response known as the non-denial denial.
Asked during a Fox News interview whether he was a Russian agent (as the FBI suspected, according to a blockbuster New York Times story), Trump harrumphed, “I think it’s the most insulting thing I’ve ever been asked. I think it’s the most insulting article I’ve ever had written, and if you read the article you’ll see that they found absolutely nothing.” (Trump gave a more direct denial on Monday.)
A few hours earlier, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders had this reply to a Washington Post article that found that Trump had concealed notes of his meetings with Russian president Vladimir Putin from even his closest advisers: “The Washington Post story is so outrageously inaccurate it doesn’t even warrant a response. The liberal media has wasted two years trying to manufacture a fake collusion scandal instead of reporting the fact that unlike President Obama, who let Russia and other foreign adversaries push America around, President Trump has actually been tough on Russia.”
Like all non-denial denials, both responses were forceful, even emotional in tone. But neither really answered the question.
That’s exactly how a non-denial denial (or NDD, if you will) is supposed to work. It suggests the speaker is responding forthrightly, without really confirming or rejecting the claim.
NDDs aren’t technically lies, but they are evasive and obfuscating. By seeming to dispute a statement without actually doing so, an NDD can raise doubts about the veracity of a damning statement. They have the added benefit of letting the non-denial denier off the hook if and when more facts emerge that confirm the original report. The denier, after all, never actually said the initial report was wrong, so he or she can’t be called on a blatant lie later.
Sarah Sanders, above, in December, issued a “non-denial denial” in response to a Washington Post inquiry over the weekend. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
In addition to their many inaccurate, misleading and baseless statements, Trump and his representatives have been frequent practitioners of the NDD:
●When The Post reported that Trump had told lawmakers in a private meeting last January that he opposed admitting more immigrants from “shithole countries,” White House spokesman Raj Shah issued a statement that neither denied nor confirmed the comment. “Like other nations that have merit-based immigration, President Trump is fighting for permanent solutions that make our country stronger by welcoming those who can contribute to our society, grow our economy and assimilate into our great nation,” Shah said.
●Following news reports that Trump intended to replace national security adviser H.R. McMaster with John Bolton in March, Sanders tweeted, “Just spoke to Potus and Gen. H.R. McMaster. Contrary to reports, they have a good working relationship. There are no changes at the NSC.” There weren’t then; Bolton replaced McMaster four days later.
●McMaster himself provided non-denial cover for the White House after The Post reported last year that Trump had leaked details of a classified operation against the Islamic State during an Oval Office meeting with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak and foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. “The story that came out tonight, as reported, is false,” he said, adding, “At no time were intelligence sources or methods discussed. And the president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known.” But the story never said Trump disclosed nonpublic military operations or discussed “intelligence sources or methods.” McMaster’s statement never cited anything specific in the story that was false.
The “non-denial denial” phrase itself appears to have entered the lexicon during the Watergate era of the mid-1970s.
Several sources credit the late Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee with coining it in reaction to statements made by President Nixon and his spokesman about The Post’s reporting.
“As best as I can recall, Bradlee was the first to use the ‘non-denial denial’ language,” said Bob Woodward, who along with Carl Bernstein reported those stories.
At one point, Woodward said, the White House said The Post’s sources were a “fountain of misinformation,” but did not specifically challenge the reported facts. “I recall when I first heard [the phrase], I thought, ‘Ah, Bradlee was giving language to precisely what was happening.’ ”
Woodward said the most artful NDDs are issued with “such force, language and outrage that it sounds like a real denial.” What’s more, as with Trump, the Nixon White House mixed non-denials with outright denials, creating the impression that his administration was actually denying everything.
The Trump White House pushed back on Woodward’s most recent book, “Fear,” with its own nonspecific NDD regarding the book’s many anecdotes about infighting and chaos among Trump’s top officials. In a statement upon the book’s release in September, Sanders said, “This book is nothing more than fabricated stories, many by former disgruntled employees, told to make the President look bad.” (Trump and former White House chief of staff John F. Kelly did, however, issue more specific denials).
As a rhetorical device, NDDs are an updated version of the “red herring” fallacy, the notion that an irrelevant topic is introduced in an argument to divert attention from the original issue, said Edward Schiappa, a professor of comparative media studies at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In other words, he said, “it’s just another in a long line of strategies of evasion.”
Trump isn’t unique in this, said Dana L. Cloud, a communication and rhetorical studies professor at Syracuse University. “One need only think of Bill Clinton’s reductionist use of a definitional argument when claiming that he did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky,” she said. “It is not a set of tactics unique to Trump or any particular political party.”
But Trump’s NDD’s tend to fit a pattern, said Jennifer Mercieca, a professor at Texas A&M who specializes in American political discourse. His strategy typically involves a combination of denying knowledge of an accusation; denying associating with the people allegedly involved; asking what the victim did to deserve his or her fate; and accusing his accusers, “which is an appeal to hypocrisy.”
As such, Trump’s non-denial denials are different in kind and manner than earlier presidents, according to Rosa A. Eberly, a rhetoric professor at Penn State, because they assert “de facto negative evaluations” of most democratic institutions. “I don’t see [rhetoric of this kind] as an effective strategy for the long game of democracy,” she said.
Trump, Woodward said, “has taken the old Nixon strategy of making the issue the conduct of the press, not the conduct of the president, to new strategic heights. And some of it is working.”
Hillary Clinton is poking fun at the latest news surrounding President Trump and Russia. Veuer’s Nick Cardona has that story. Buzz60
President Donald Trump’s vanquished 2016 Democratic opponent appears to be relishing his recent difficulties with news reports about his relationship with Russia.
“Like I said: A puppet,” Hillary Clinton tweeted Monday, referencing a famous exchange between her and Trump during their third and final presidential debate.
On Oct. 19, 2016, Trump said Russian President Vladimir Putin did not respect the former secretary of state.
“Well, that’s because he’d rather have a puppet as president of the United States,” Clinton replied.
“No puppet,” Trump said, talking over her. “You’re the puppet. No, you’re the puppet.”
“It’s pretty clear you won’t admit the Russians have engaged in cyber attacks against the United States of America, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do and that you continue to get help from him because he has a very clear favorite in this race,” Clinton continued.
Clinton’s tweet reiterating her claim that Trump is a Russian puppet comes after news reports over the weekend that added fuel to the debate over Trump’s Russia ties.
The New York Times reported Friday that the FBI investigated whether Trump was working on Putin’s behalf after he fired director James Comey. And on Sunday, The Washington Post reported that Trump went to “extraordinary lengths” to conceal details from his conversations with Putin.
“I never worked for Russia,” Trump told reporters Monday. He said the very question was a “disgrace” and repeated his belief that the investigation into his potential ties Russian election meddling was “a whole big fat hoax.”
This is a widget area - If you go to "Appearance" in your WP-Admin you can change the content of this box in "Widgets", or you can remove this box completely under "Theme Options"
