Most Viewed Videos

Para comentar las noticias debes iniciar sesión con el usuario y contraseña elegidos al momento de registrarte.

Si no estas registrado todavia, puedes hacerlo ingresando a
Registro de Usuarios

No recuerdas tu contraseña? puedes acceder a Registro de Usuarios y solicitar que te la enviemos a tu email como recordatorio.

Source Article from http://www.elpais.com.uy/informacion/pronostico-departamentos-advertencia-vientos-fuertes.html

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts broke with his colleagues on the court, filing a solo dissent for the first time in his nearly 16 years on the bench.

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts broke with his colleagues on the court, filing a solo dissent for the first time in his nearly 16 years on the bench.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Updated at 2:30 p.m. ET

For the first time in his nearly 16 years on the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts has filed a solo dissent. In it, he bluntly accused his colleagues of a “radical expansion” of the court’s jurisdiction.

At issue was a case brought by two college students at Georgia Gwinnett College who were repeatedly blocked from making religious speeches and distributing religious literature on campus. They sued the college, claiming a violation of their First Amendment free speech rights.

The college soon caved, agreeing to abandon the challenged policies and pay the students’ legal fees. But when the students sought to continue their case, on the grounds that they had asked for nominal damages, the lower courts dismissed the case as moot.

The dismissal meant that while the students ultimately got everything they asked for, the case did not stand as a precedent; it was not a marker in the law that would hold other colleges similarly accountable.

Now, however, the Supreme Court has ruled otherwise. In an 8-1 vote, it declared that because the students had also asked for nominal damages of $1, the case was not moot and they could go back to court seeking a formal judicial ruling in their favor.

“Nominal damages are not a consolation prize,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court majority. “Despite being small, nominal damages are certainly concrete. … a person who is awarded nominal damages receives ‘relief on the merits of his claim.’ “

In his dissent, Roberts noted that there “are just a few problems” with the students’ desire to continue their lawsuit.

“The challenged restrictions no longer exist,” he said. “And [the students] have not alleged actual damages.”

The case, he added, is therefore moot because there is no live pending legal question.

If nominal damages, “no matter how trivial,” can preserve a case as live in the courts after all the significant issues have been disposed of — and when, as here, the award of that nominal amount “does not change [the students’] status or condition” — all that has changed is that the award “represents a judicial determination” that the students were right.

And that, Roberts said, would turn U.S. courts into something the founders specially rejected — a body rendering “advisory opinions.”

“The Court sees no problem with turning judges into advice columnists,” Roberts wrote.

Roberts rejected the basic premise of Thomas’ majority opinion, which rests in large part on 18th-century English common law. Roberts replied that English common law is “in many respects irreconcilable with ‘the role assigned to the judiciary’ ” in the U.S. Constitution.

“A major expansion”

Roberts noted that while English common law was derived from the crown and permitted advisory opinions, the framers of the Constitution “specifically rejected [that premise] by separating the Executive from the Judiciary and limiting the courts to deciding actual cases and controversies.”

“Today’s decision risks a major expansion of the judicial role. Until now, we have said that federal courts can review the legality of policies and actions only as necessary incident to resolving real disputes. Going forward, the Judiciary will be required to perform this function whenever a plaintiff asks for a dollar.”

Thursday’s ruling is “a big deal,” said Stanford Law School professor Michael McConnell, who as a federal judge wrote on this subject.

“Now every lawyer worth his salt will add a claim of nominal damages” to every lawsuit, McConnell said.

The purpose will be to force courts to make decisions about cases where the merits have been resolved by the opposing sides voluntarily but the nominal claim for damages remains.

The results of Thursday’s decision are simply unclear, University of Virginia law professor Ann Woolhandler said. The decision is out of keeping with other recent Supreme Court decisions, she observed.

$1 and a dream

What would happen if the defendant just paid the $1?

The court majority seemed to suggest that this might end the case. Whenever a plaintiff asks for only $1, the defendant should be able to end the case by giving the plaintiff $1, without the court needing to pass on the merits of the plaintiff’s claim, Thomas said in his majority opinion.

Roberts called that a “welcome caveat” that could save the federal courts from issuing “reams” of advisory opinions. But, he added, “For over two centuries, the Correspondence of the Justices has stood as a reminder that federal courts cannot give answers simply because someone asks.”

Thursday’s opinion turns that constitutional limitation on its head, he said; it instead encourages litigants to “fight over farthings.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/03/08/974800755/roberts-accuses-supreme-court-justices-of-turning-judges-into-advice-columnists

In an early decision involving abortion, newly confirmed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with liberals in declining to hear a case that could have allowed states to defund Planned Parenthood in state Medicaid programs.

My colleague Kimberly Leonard has more background and details of the cases, but the basic gist is that lower court rulings prevented Louisiana and Kansas from blocking abortion provider Planned Parenthood from participating in Medicaid. The Supreme Court has now decided to pass on the cases.

Only four justices are needed to agree to grant a hearing on any case. So to stop it from reaching the high court, it took Kavanaugh siding with Chief Justice John Roberts and liberal justices.

Three conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch — all voted to hear the case.

Supreme Court watchers are hanging on every sign from Kavanaugh and Roberts as to how they may rule on abortion given the new makeup of the bench. While it’s difficult to assess what implications this particular decision says about their thinking on the issue, the decision not to hear these cases is at least noteworthy, as it suggests a certain level of caution on taking on contentious cases involving abortion in any way.

In a dissent, Thomas complained that the court wanted to shy away from the case because it involves Planned Parenthood, even though it doesn’t have any direct implications on abortion rights.

“So what explains the Court’s refusal to do its job here?” Thomas wrote. “I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood.’ That makes the Court’s decision particularly troubling, as the question presented has nothing to do with abortion. It is true that these particular cases arose after several States alleged that Planned Parenthood affiliates had, among other things, engaged in ‘the illegal sale of fetal organs’ and ‘fraudulent billing practices,’ and thus removed Planned Parenthood as a state Medicaid provider … But these cases are not about abortion rights. They are about private rights of action under the Medicaid Act. Resolving the question presented here would not even affect Planned Parenthood’s ability to challenge the States’ decisions; it concerns only the rights of individual Medicaid patients to bring their own suits.”

This certainly does not sound like a majority that is chomping at the bit to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Update: One Supreme Court watcher writes: “As I recall the history of this case, the first vote for cert [i.e. certiorari — granting a hearing] would have taken place before Kavanaugh’s appointment — and Roberts would have had to refuse to vote for cert then as it only takes four votes to accept the case. I assume Kavanaugh did not want to be the late-arriving fourth vote for cert, and that’s a reasonable call for a brand-new justice to make. Less defensible is Roberts apparent concern about the atmospherics of taking a case with ‘Planned Parenthood’ in the title.”

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/brett-kavanaugh-sides-with-liberal-justices-in-declining-to-hear-planned-parenthood-defunding-case

Media captionKurdish TV showed the SDF raising a yellow flag on top of buildings seized from IS in Baghuz

US President Donald Trump welcomed the fall of the Islamic State group’s five-year “caliphate”, but warned that the terror group remained a threat.

Mr Trump’s remarks came after Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) raised victory flags in the Syrian town of Baghuz, IS’s last stronghold.

He said the US would “remain vigilant until [IS] is finally defeated”.

Despite losing territory in Syria and Iraq, IS remains active in countries from Nigeria to the Philippines.

At its height, the group controlled 88,000 sq km (34,000 sq miles) across Syria and Iraq.

After five years of fierce battle, though, local forces backed by world powers left IS with all but a few hundred square metres near Syria’s border with Iraq.

On Saturday, the long-awaited announcement came from the SDF that it had seized that last IS territory. Western leaders hailed the announcement but emphasised that IS was still a danger.

“We will remain vigilant… until it is finally defeated wherever it operates,” Mr Trump said in a statement.

French President Emmanuel Macron said “the threat remains and the fight against terrorist groups must continue”.

UK Prime Minister Theresa May welcomed the “historic milestone” but said her government remained “committed to eradicating [IS’s] poisonous ideology”.

Media captionBBC Arabic’s Feras Kilani says that losing their last stronghold is unlikely to be the end of Islamic State.

Trump statement

In a statement released by the White House on Saturday, Mr Trump said the US would “continue to work with our partners and allies… to fight [IS] until it is finally defeated.”

“The United States will defend American interests whenever and wherever necessary,” the statement read.

Mr Trump described IS’s loss of territory as “evidence of its false narrative”, adding: “They have lost all prestige and power.”

He also appealed to “all of the young people on the internet believing in [IS] propaganda”, saying: “Think instead about having a great life.”

Media captionIS ‘remains a threat’, US envoy warns

How did the final battle unfold?

The SDF alliance began its final assault on IS at the start of March, with the remaining militants holed up in the village of Baghuz in eastern Syria.

The alliance was forced to slow its offensive after it emerged that a large number of civilians were also there, sheltering in buildings, tents and tunnels.

Thousands of women and children, foreign nationals among them, fled the fighting and severe shortages to make their way to SDF-run camps for displaced persons.

Many IS fighters have also abandoned Baghuz, but those who stayed put up fierce resistance, deploying suicide bombers and car bombs.

Why are there still concerns about IS?

IS grew out of al-Qaeda in Iraq in the aftermath of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

It joined the rebellion against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in 2011. By 2014 it had seized swathes of land in both countries and proclaimed a “caliphate”.

IS once imposed its rule on almost eight million people, and generated billions of dollars from oil, extortion, robbery and kidnapping, using its territory as a platform to launch foreign attacks.

The fall of Baghuz is a major moment in the campaign against IS. The Iraqi government declared victory against the militants in 2017.

But the group is far from defeated. US officials believe IS may have 15,000 to 20,000 armed adherents active in the region, many of them in sleeper cells, and that it will return to its insurgent roots while attempting to rebuild.

Even as its defeat in Baghuz was imminent, IS released a defiant audio recording purportedly from its spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir, asserting that the caliphate was not finished.

The location of the group’s overall leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is not known. But he has avoided being captured or killed, despite having fewer places to hide.

Please upgrade your browser to view this content.




Source Article from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-47682160

“He says, ‘That’s OK with me,'” O’Rourke said of Trump’s response to his supporter’s violent remark. “He’s not the source of racism in this country. This country has been racist as long as it’s been a country, but he’s certainly fanning the flames. He’s certainly making violence like this more possible and more real.”

Other Democratic presidential candidates have also denounced Trump in recent days, but none have gone so far as to directly describe the White House occupant as a white supremacist.

Former Vice Joe Biden argued Wednesday that Trump had “fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation.”

“Trump readily, eagerly attacks Islamic terrorism but can barely bring himself to use the words ‘white supremacy,'” Biden said at a campaign stop in Iowa. “And even when he says it, he doesn’t appear to believe it. He seems more concerned about losing their votes than beating back this hateful ideology.”

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., also blamed Trump for inciting violence. During a visit Wednesday to South Carolina’s Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, where a white supremacist shooter killed nine black worshipers in 2015, Booker said this weekend’s violence was “sowed by those who spoke the same words the El Paso murderer did, warning of an ‘invasion.'”

Trump, for his part, has denied responsibility for emboldening violence by racists in the past, and he publicly condemned white supremacy Monday during a televised address to the nation.

“In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy,” he said. “These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America.  Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart and devours the soul.”

But just two days later, Trump refused to point out the role ideology played in the El Paso massacre, arguing that he is concerned about “the rise of any group of hate.”

He also accused his opponents of “looking for political gain” by linking his comments to the El Paso shooting. He claimed he would like to “stay out of the political fray,” even though he attempted to tie the Dayton shooter to Democrats.

“That was a person that supported, I guess you could say Bernie Sanders, I understood. Antifa, I understood. Elizabeth Warren, I understood. It had nothing to do with President Trump,” he said. “I don’t blame Elizabeth Warren. I don’t blame Bernie Sanders. These are sick people.”

Trump claimed his rhetoric “brings people together,” although he then called illegal immigration a “terrible thing for our country” and claimed he has “toned down” his rhetoric.

Source Article from https://www.salon.com/2019/08/08/beto-orourke-and-elizabeth-warren-call-president-trump-a-white-supremacist/

TRIPOLI/BENGHAZI, Libya (Reuters) – Eastern Libyan troops commanded by Khalifa Haftar said on Friday they had advanced into the southern outskirts of the capital Tripoli in a dangerous thrust against the internationally recognized government.

Fighting was going on near the former international airport, which Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA) force controlled by nightfall, an LNA spokesman and residents said.

The move by the LNA, which is allied to a parallel administration based in the east, escalated a power struggle that has splintered the nation since the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.

It came as U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres departed after meeting Haftar to try to avert civil war.

“I leave Libya with a heavy heart and deeply concerned. I still hope it is possible to avoid a bloody confrontation in and around Tripoli,” he said on Twitter.

The U.N. Security Council was briefed behind closed doors on the latest developments on Friday and expressed deep concern in a statement read after the meeting by German U.N. Ambassador Christoph Heusgen, president of the council for April.

“They (the council) called on LNA forces to halt all military movements. They also called on all forces to de-escalate and halt military activity. There can be no military solution to the conflict,” Heusgen said.

Haftar, 75, who casts himself as an opponent of Islamist extremism but is viewed by opponents as a new Gaddafi, was quoted by Al-Arabiya TV as telling Guterres the operation would continue until terrorism was defeated.

The coastal capital Tripoli is the ultimate prize for Haftar’s eastern parallel government.

In 2014, he assembled former Gaddafi soldiers and in a three-year battle seized the main eastern city of Benghazi.

This year, he took the south with its oilfields.

As well as visiting Haftar in Benghazi, Guterres had been in Tripoli this week to help organize a national reconciliation conference planned for later this month.

But that plan looked in jeopardy on Thursday as LNA forces took Gharyan, about 80 km (50 miles) south of the capital after skirmishes with forces allied to Tripoli-based, U.N.-backed Prime Minister Fayez al-Serraj.

From there, Haftar’s forces moved north, first taking the village of Suq al-Khamis, about 40 km (25 miles) from Tripoli, after some fighting, a resident and an eastern military source said.

Then on Friday, the LNA said it took the areas of Qasr ben Ghashir and Wadi al-Rabie on the southern outskirts of the capital, seizing the former Tripoli International Airport, which has been abandoned since a 2014 battle.

SETBACK TO MEDIATION PLAN

The LNA was in control of the former airport, LNA spokesman Ahmed Mismari said, rejecting a claim by the Tripoli interior minister, Fathi Bashagha, that his forces had retaken it.

The LNA said it had lost five soldiers since Thursday.

While the advance has looked fast, so far Haftar’s force has mainly crossed sparsely populated areas after taking Gharyan, the last town in the mountains before the road descends to a coastal plain.

In 2014 battles for Tripoli, it took advancing fighters weeks to reach the city center from the old airport as snipers bogged them down.

Forces from Misrata, a city east of Tripoli, sent more reinforcements to defend Serraj, residents said.

Major ministries are still 20 km away.

Despite their gains, Haftar’s forces failed to take a checkpoint about 30 km west of the capital in a bid to close the coastal road to Tunisia. An LNA-allied armed group withdrew overnight from so-called Gate 27, leaving it abandoned in the morning, a Reuters reporter said.

And in another setback, forces allied to Tripoli took 145 LNA fighters prisoner in Zawiya, west of the capital, a western commander, Mohamed Alhudair, told Reuters.

An LNA source confirmed 128 had been captured.

Armed groups allied to the Tripoli government have moved more machinegun-mounted pickup trucks from the coastal city of Misrata to Tripoli to defend it against Haftar’s forces.

The offensive is a setback for the United Nations and Western nations trying to mediate between Serraj, 59, who comes from a wealthy business family, and military veteran Haftar.

They met in Abu Dhabi last month to discuss power-sharing.

The United Nations wants to find agreement on a road map for elections to resolve the prolonged instability in Libya, an oil producer and transit point for refugees and migrants trekking across the Sahara with the aim of reaching Europe.

Haftar enjoys the backing of Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, which see him as a bulwark against Islamists and have supported him militarily, according to U.N. reports.

The UAE, however, joined Western countries in expressing its deep concern about the fighting.

Slideshow (4 Images)

Russia said it was not helping Haftar’s forces and it supported a negotiated political settlement that ruled out any new bloodshed.

Tunisia has tightened control on its border with Libya in response to the renewed conflict, the defense ministry said.

Former colonial power Italy, which lies across the Mediterranean and has been a destination for migrants, was very worried, Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini said.

“We need to throw water on the fire, not petrol on the fire. I hope that people, acting out of economic or business self-interest, are not looking for a military solution, which would be devastating,” Salvini said.

Additional reporting by Hesham Hajali in Cairo and Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Writing by Ulf Laessing; Editing by Andrew Cawthorne, Daniel Wallis and James Dalgleish

Source Article from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-security/east-libyan-troops-close-on-tripoli-clashes-near-former-airport-idUSKCN1RH0TB

Top White House advisers notified President Trump earlier this month that some internal forecasts showed that the economy could slow markedly over the next year, stopping short of a recession but complicating his path to reelection in 2020.

The private forecast, one of several delivered to Trump and described by three people familiar with the briefing, contrasts sharply with the triumphant rhetoric the president and his surrogates have repeatedly used to describe the economy.

Even as his aides warn of a business climate at risk of faltering, the president has been portraying the economy to the public as “phenomenal” and “incredible.” He has told aides that he thinks he can convince Americans that the economy is vibrant and unrattled through a public messaging campaign. But the internal and external warnings that the economy could slip have contributed to a muddled and often contradictory message.

Administration officials have scrambled this week to assemble a menu of actions Trump could take to avert an economic downturn. Few aides have a firm sense of what steps he would seriously consider, in part because he keeps changing his mind.

Ideas that have been discussed include imposing a currency transaction tax that could weaken the dollar and make U.S. exports more competitive; creating a rotation among the Federal Reserve governors that would make it easier to check the power of Chair Jerome H. Powell, whom Trump has blamed for not doing all he can to increase growth; and pushing to lower the corporate tax rate to 15 percent in an effort to spur more investment. Some, if not all, of these steps would require congressional approval.

“Everyone is nervous — everyone,” said a Republican with close ties to the White House and congressional GOP leaders. “It’s not a panic, but they are nervous.”

This article is based on interviews with more than 25 current and former administration officials, lawmakers, and external advisers who have been in contact with Trump and his team throughout August. Some spoke on the condition of anonymity because the White House has been requesting that allies and aides keep its economic message intact.

Compounding Trump’s situation, some of the economy’s strains appear to be of his own making, as uncertainty surrounding his trade war with China has frozen much investment nationwide.

“The China trade war is causing most of this,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who is close to Trump. “It’s just the world economy is affected when China has a problem.”

Trump has publicly gloated about economic problems in China and Europe — even declaring last Sunday that “the world is in a recession right now” — but those strains appear to be holding back U.S. growth as well.

The economic message emanating from the White House is a product of tensions and debates about how to handle that bracing reality — and Trump’s own stubbornness on trade strategy and his anger about news coverage of the economy.

.grid-item{overflow:hidden}.ai2html.ai2html-box-v5{margin:0 auto}]]>

That has led to a month of tense economic policymaking and markets. On Aug. 1, Trump announced new tariffs against Chinese imports. On Aug. 13, he delayed most of them, worried about the impact on the U.S. economy. On Aug. 20, he said he was considering new tax cuts. The next day, he said he had changed his mind.

Amid it all, stocks proved highly volatile and the U.S. and global bond markets rang numerous alarm bells, a far cry from the era of synchronized global growth that had marked Trump’s first two years in office. Other economic soft spots also have emerged, particularly in U.S. manufacturing, a sector Trump had promised to revive.

Although Trump sold himself to voters in 2016 as a master businessman who knew just what to do to rev up the economy, his stewardship could now have major implications for his reelection chances, especially if the more pessimistic forecasts prove prescient.

But beyond the political impact, Trump’s handling of the economic slowdown has opened up the White House to scathing criticism from members of past economic teams, who have contended that the flailing process and lack of traditionally credentialed economists at the helm could exacerbate a downturn.

“The irony here is that Trump’s erratic, chaotic approach to the economy is probably the most significant economic risk factor in the world right now,” said Gene Sperling, who served in top economic roles during the Clinton and Obama administrations. “Their response is just to show even more erratic behavior. It’s economic narcissism. It’s economic policy by whim, pride, ego and tantrum.”

White House spokesman Judd Deere defended the administration’s approach and said officials remain very optimistic about the economy’s performance.

“The White House does not think we are imminently headed for” a downturn, he said. “The fundamentals of the economy are strong because of this president’s pro-growth policies.”

Trump has lauded the economy as the best in U.S. history, while some of his Democratic rivals have said it is barreling toward a recession.

Neither of those descriptions is quite accurate, most economists say. Parts of the economy, particularly consumer spending and the labor market, remain robust. Retail sales are strong, and wages are rising. But business investment, the ballooning federal deficit and trade concerns are creating pressure that White House officials have struggled to explain away. And some of these problems are worsening.

“This administration has not done itself a whole lot of favors in talking about the economy,” said Tony Fratto, who served in senior roles during the George W. Bush administration at the White House and the Treasury Department. “They have done a lot of communicating that is verifiably false on the economy.”

Trump has a lean and increasingly combative economic team, whose members often are at odds with one another on trade and tax policy. Almost all are deferential to the president, but they habitually jostle to advance their causes with him, sometimes maneuvering behind one another’s backs.

White House National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin have fought for months over Kudlow’s push to index capital gains taxes to inflation, for example, with Trump caught in the middle. The proposal would reduce taxes on investment income, primarily benefiting people with higher incomes, but most economists think that would do little to spur immediate economic growth.

White House economic team meetings are less structured than when Trump’s aides collectively pushed a giant corporate and individual income tax cut into law two years ago. Sometimes aides walk out unsure of what was agreed on. Sometimes nothing was agreed on.

But that format drew little scrutiny when advisers were used to primarily boast about the economy’s strength to the news media in the past year. Now, these aides have come under extreme pressure this month as Trump has gyrated in his economic approach and vented his frustration inside the West Wing.

Mnuchin has privately disagreed with key aspects of Trump’s approach to the economy, according to people familiar with the matter. But he has largely disappeared from public view during the turbulent month. Kevin Hassett, a former Council of Economic Advisers chairman and a frequent media commentator, has left the administration.

Stepping into their void is Kudlow, a Reagan administration official and longtime television commentator; senior trade adviser Peter Navarro, an academic with a long history of anti-China positions; and Trump himself, who often undercuts or contradicts his aides, only to reverse himself the next day.

Republicans on Capitol Hill have sensed the White House’s stress and said the goal is to beat back negative public opinion.

“It’s not economic data that’s driving the concern as much as headlines and the stock market having a big drop,” said Rep. Mark Meadows (N.C.), a close Trump ally. “It becomes a headline, then it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy that is not based on any underlying economic fundamentals. There’s a real proactive effort by the White House to try and make sure the economy continues in a robust manner.”

The current economic drama began on the first day of this month, when over the objection of some senior advisers, Trump announced that he would impose tariffs on $300 billion worth of Chinese imports. Just days earlier, the president had signaled that he was ready to back down from his fight with the Chinese, speculating that Beijing wanted to wait until after the 2020 election to negotiate a trade deal.

But a fruitless visit Mnuchin and U.S. Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer made to Shanghai infuriated Trump, several people briefed on his reaction said, and he announced the tariffs in a Twitter post shortly after they returned. At the time, Navarro was the only aide who supported the move.

That announcement began a chaotic chain of economic and political events that White House aides have struggled to control ever since.

The following weekend, China’s currency weakened, a move that would make its exports more competitive, and Chinese officials signaled that they would not be increasing purchases of U.S. farm products, as Trump had demanded.

So on Monday, amid fears that the trade war would spiral out of control, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 767 points. Trump strongly urged Mnuchin to label China a currency manipulator, a symbolic yet harmless shaming that the secretary had resisted because the Treasury Department’s indicators didn’t show that China qualified for such a label. But under pressure, the treasury chief did so shortly after the stock market closed.

Meanwhile, U.S. business executives panicked about the scope of Trump’s new tariffs, and White House officials were bombarded with complaints. So Trump began drawing up plans to delay the tariffs on products such as laptop computers, shoes and clothing. This posed a problem, though.

Trump had insisted for more than a year, without evidence, that China was paying all of the tariffs. This was false, because tariffs are paid by U.S. importers and collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. For the first time in months, Trump’s economic message showed signs of cracking. He would soon admit that his economic approach could harm consumers.

On Aug. 13, Lighthizer’s office issued a news release with little fanfare announcing that tariffs on nearly $160 billion in Chinese imports had been delayed until Dec. 15. Trump would later tell reporters that the intent was to ensure that Americans didn’t pay higher costs during the holidays, one of the first times he had acknowledged that the tariffs raised costs.

“What we’ve done is we’ve delayed it so they won’t be relevant in the Christmas shopping season,” he said at the time.

The stock market rallied amid a sense that Trump was preparing to back down, but economic fears grew deeper the next day.

On Aug. 14, key parts of the U.S. bond market tipped over, creating an “inverted yield curve,” an unusual condition in which investors are rushing to buy ultrasafe long-term assets and that often precedes a recession. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 800 points.

In the middle of the day, Trump tried to spin the inversion as a positive thing, saying it was a reflection of how attractive U.S. debt was to consumers. But after the stock market closed, his Twitter feed took on a more furious tone.

He cited the “CRAZY INVERTED YIELD CURVE” and blamed a “clueless” Powell from the Fed.

.grid-item{overflow:hidden}.ai2html.ai2html-box-v5{margin:0 auto}]]>

Through the week, White House officials became increasingly agitated that the public sentiment about the economy seemed to be tipping. Trump, aides said, is obsessed with media coverage of the economy, and thinks Americans will believe negative news and stop spending money. This exasperation began several months earlier.

“In the last couple of weeks, when the market dipped down, it did strike an amount of fear within the White House,” a White House official said. “There’s been a sense going into 2020 that we can bounce back from virtually everything if the economy stays strong.”

The day after the yield curve inverted, Kudlow said in an interview with The Washington Post that the economy was much stronger and more resilient than people were making it out to be.

“What I see is a pretty good second half coming up,” he said.

Trump, however, kept talking with advisers inside and outside the White House and was getting a mixed picture. Still, White House officials complained that news outlets were elevating negative economic news in a way that discounted the progress the White House had made.

Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, said the media coverage of any economic downturn is “way overblown.”

“If it’s not Russia, it’s racism. If it’s not racism, it’s a recession,” she said.

Kudlow took a lead role in the White House’s pushback on Aug. 18, appearing on two television programs to try to quell fears of a recession.

“I don’t see a recession at all,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.” On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he urged Americans, “Let’s not be afraid of optimism.”

A few hours later, though, Trump stepped on that message. Speaking to reporters in New Jersey before returning to Washington, he said, “The world is in a recession right now,” attempting to draw a contrast with the United States, which is not.

.grid-item{overflow:hidden}.ai2html.ai2html-box-v5{margin:0 auto}]]>

By the time Kudlow and Trump made their comments, a freewheeling policy process had taken hold. Some White House officials had begun discussing whether to slash payroll tax rates, although a number of senior officials were never told this was under consideration. Americans pay 6.2 percent of their paychecks to fund Social Security, but in the past Congress has temporarily reduced this payment as a way to spur more spending and help the economy in a downturn.

When The Post reported that the idea was being discussed on Monday afternoon, the White House issued an anonymous statement saying the idea wasn’t “under consideration at this time.” The reason for trying to shoot down the news, two people briefed on the planning said, was a sense that the public would think the White House was panicking if it was revealed that it was contemplating what could be a $100 billion tax cut.

Bad economic news continued. On Monday night, news outlets reported that U.S. Steel could be temporarily laying off up to 200 workers at a Michigan facility. Trump had claimed that his trade policies had revived U.S. Steel around the country, but the company was confronted with lower steel prices and weaker demand than expected.

By Tuesday, Trump was under growing pressure to explain how he was preparing for a possible slowdown.

He said that he was considering a payroll tax cut, as well as the capital gains change for which Kudlow had long advocated. His comments stunned some aides but others shrugged them off, aware that it is nearly impossible to be up to speed on what Trump is thinking at any given moment, even on particular issues such as tax policy.

.grid-item{overflow:hidden}.ai2html.ai2html-box-v5{margin:0 auto}]]>

When Trump made the comments, his economic team was scattered. Mnuchin was on vacation, and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney was 2,000 miles away at a donor event in Jackson, Wyo.

Mulvaney struck an upbeat but realistic tone about the economy, according to one attendee who was not authorized to speak publicly.

He noted that there were signs of an economic slowdown but argued at length that the fundamentals of the economy are strong. He said if there was a recession, it would be “moderate and short,” according to an attendee who wasn’t authorized to disclose the comments.

When aides presented Trump with the news that the economy could weaken in the next year, it was just one scenario.

White House officials stressed that they still expect the economy to perform very strongly this year, with the gross domestic product growing 3 percent from 2018. Few others are as optimistic. The Fed estimates that GDP will grow just 2.1 percent.

By Wednesday, Trump had reversed himself again. He told reporters before boarding a helicopter that he had decided to rule out any new tax cuts after all.

“We don’t need it,” he said. “We have a strong economy.”

Illustrations by Aaron Steckelberg. Design and development by Lucio Villa.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/22/trump-economy-month-chaotic-response/

Neil Cavuto returned to the anchor chair on his Fox Business Network show “Cavuto Coast to Coast” on Monday for the first time since January 10, saying he had been battling Covid pneumonia which put him in intensive care. It was previously unknown why he had been away.

“I did get Covid again…but a far, far more serious strand…what doctors call Covid pneumonia,” Covuto told his viewers today about his second bout with coronavirus. “It landed me in intensive care for quite a while and it really was touch-and-go.”

He continued, “No, the vaccine didn’t cause that. That grassy knoll theory has come up a lot. My very compromised immune system did. Because I’ve had cancer and right now I have Multiple Sclerosis, I’m among the vulnerable three percenters or so of the population that cannot sustain the full benefits of a vaccine. In other words, it simply doesn’t last.

“But let me be clear, doctors say had I not been vaccinated at all, I wouldn’t be here. It provided some defense, but that is still better than no defense. Maybe not great comfort for some of you. And frankly, not great comfort for me either!

“This was scary. How scary? I’m talking, ‘Ponderosa suddenly out of the prime rib in the middle of the buffet line scary!’ That’s how scary.”

See the video below.

Cavuto thanked Fox News for “honoring my wishes, out of respect for my privacy” by not revealing why he had not been working. “I wasn’t really hiding anything. I just felt I wasn’t the story,” he said. “The stories on this show were and are the story. It’s about you, it’s not about me. Just like this show. My opinions don’t matter. You matter. The news matters.”

“So, now you know the story,” he said. “Time to get back to far more important matters. And now…I will.”

David Asman, Jackie DeAngelis and Ashley Webster had been taking turns hosting the FBN program for more than a month, while Sandra Smith, Charles Payne and Edward Lawrence were doing the same on Cavuto’s Fox News duties.

Source Article from https://deadline.com/2022/02/neil-cavuto-returns-covid-pneumonia-1234957583/

“);var a = g[r.size_id].split(“x”).map((function(e) {return Number(e)})), s = u(a, 2);o.width = s[0],o.height = s[1]}o.rubiconTargeting = (Array.isArray(r.targeting) ? r.targeting : []).reduce((function(e, r) {return e[r.key] = r.values[0],e}), {rpfl_elemid: n.adUnitCode}),e.push(o)} else l.logError(“Rubicon bid adapter Error: bidRequest undefined at index position:” + t, c, d);return e}), []).sort((function(e, r) {return (r.cpm || 0) – (e.cpm || 0)}))},getUserSyncs: function(e, r, t) {if (!A && e.iframeEnabled) {var i = “”;return t && “string” == typeof t.consentString && (“boolean” == typeof t.gdprApplies ? i += “?gdpr=” + Number(t.gdprApplies) + “&gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString : i += “?gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString),A = !0,{type: “iframe”,url: n + i}}},transformBidParams: function(e, r) {return l.convertTypes({accountId: “number”,siteId: “number”,zoneId: “number”}, e)}};function m() {return [window.screen.width, window.screen.height].join(“x”)}function b(e, r) {var t = f.config.getConfig(“pageUrl”);return e.params.referrer ? t = e.params.referrer : t || (t = r.refererInfo.referer),e.params.secure ? t.replace(/^http:/i, “https:”) : t}function _(e, r) {var t = e.params;if (“video” === r) {var i = [];return t.video && t.video.playerWidth && t.video.playerHeight ? i = [t.video.playerWidth, t.video.playerHeight] : Array.isArray(l.deepAccess(e, “mediaTypes.video.playerSize”)) && 1 === e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize.length ? i = e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize[0] : Array.isArray(e.sizes) && 0

(CNN)A 36-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of impregnating woman in a vegetative state who gave birth last month at a Phoenix health care facility, Phoenix Police Chief Jeri Williams said Wednesday.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/arizona-woman-birth-vegetative-state/index.html

Prince Harry and Meghan have welcomed a baby boy.

“As every father and parent would ever say, you know, your baby is absolutely amazing,” Harry said Monday in announcing the birth of his first child. “But this little thing is absolutely to die for, so I’m just over the moon.”

The newborn weighed 7 pounds, 3 ounces. The baby was born at 5:26 a.m. local time, according to Buckingham Palace.

Both mom and baby are “doing incredibly well,” Prince Harry said in his brief remarks outside Frogmore Cottage, the Windsor home where he and Meghan will raise their son.

Steve Parsons/AP
Prince Harry speaks at Windsor Castle in England, May 6, 2019, after his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex gave birth to a baby boy.

The public will get their first glimpse of the family of three — Meghan, Harry and the baby — later this week, according to Harry.

In the meantime, he and Meghan will spend time bonding with their baby.

When asked about a name, Harry said he and Meghan are “still thinking” about it, adding, “That’s the next bit.”

Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, is with the couple at Frogmore Cottage, according to Buckingham Palace. The Los Angeles-based Ragland is “overjoyed by the arrival of her first grandchild,” the palace said.

Harry’s royal family members — including Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Camilla, Prince William and Kate — and relatives of Princess Diana, Harry and William’s late mother, were informed of the baby’s birth and are “delighted with the news,” according to Buckingham Palace.

Meghan, 37, went into labor in her 41st week of pregnancy, one week past her due date.

“I’m so incredibly proud of my wife,” said Harry, 34, who called the birth of his son “amazing” and “absolutely incredible.”

Following royal tradition, a framed notice of birth for Harry and Meghan’s son went on display on a ceremonial easel at the gates of Buckingham Palace Monday.

Tolga Akmen/AFP/Getty Images
Members of staff set up an official notice on an easel at the gates of Buckingham Palace in London on May 6, 2019 announcing the birth of a son to Britain’s Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.

Baby Sussex’s place in the royal family

The baby is seventh in line to the British throne, falling behind Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis and Prince Harry.

Baby Sussex will not automatically be a prince, unlike his cousins Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, who were designated as his or her royal highness and given the title of prince or princess.

The baby’s great-grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, can step in to give him that title, however.

He is the fourth grandchild for Prince Charles and the eighth great-grandchild for Queen Elizabeth. Meghan and Harry’s son will share a close birthday to his cousin, Princess Charlotte, who turned 4 on May 2.

Samir Hussein/Samir Hussein/WireImage/Getty Images, FILE
Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attend the Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey, March 11, 2019, in London.

Baby Sussex appears to be the first mixed-race child born into the royal family. Meghan was born to a white father and a black mother and grew up as a biracial child in Los Angeles.

Some royal historians have pointed out though that when Queen Charlotte married King George III in the 1700s, he was believed to have descended from the black branch of the Portuguese royal family. The couple had 15 children, according to the British royal family’s website.

The son of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, could hold dual American and British nationality, a first for a royal baby.

Meghan, a California native, is reportedly still waiting for her British citizenship application to be approved.

Chris Jackson/Getty Images, FILE
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex watch a musical performance as they attend a Commonwealth Day Youth Event at Canada House, March 11, 2019, in London, England.

“From what I understand, Harry and Meghan will have to acquire documentation for their child to prove U.S. citizenship and it’s not clear if they will do that but of course the option is there,” said ABC News royal contributor Victoria Murphy.

Harry and Meghan as parents

Prince Harry married Meghan last May. Five months later, they announced the pregnancy as they embarked on their 16-day tour of Australia, New Zealand Fiji and Tonga.

In candid moments interacting with children during that tour and in the months since, Harry and Meghan have given a glimpse into the kind of hands-on parents they are expected to be.

Harry spoke about his love for little ones in a 2016 interview with “GMA” co-anchor Robin Roberts, saying he “can’t wait for the day” he has children. At the time, he said he tries to be the “fun uncle” for Prince William and Kate’s children.

“I’ve got a kid inside of me, I want to keep that, I adore kids,” he added. “I enjoy everything that they bring to the party, and they just say what they think.”

Meghan’s friends have also described her as someone with a maternal instinct who is genuine in her interactions, particularly with kids.

“When you see her at walkabouts, when she crouches down to talk to the kids and genuinely has real conversations with people, that’s Meg,” a former costar of Meghan’s told People magazine in February. “That’s how she crouches down with our kids at home. That’s how she plays with them. That’s how she engages with people and how she always has.”

Source Article from https://abcnews.go.com/culture/story/duchess-meghan-labor-1st-child-palace-announces-62376637

UPLAND, Ind. (AP) — Dozens of graduates and faculty have protested the selection of Vice President Mike Pence as the commencement speaker at Taylor University in Indiana by walking out moments before his introduction.

The Indianapolis Star reports the protesters in caps and gowns rose and quietly walked down the aisle and out of the auditorium in the Kesler Student Activities Center at the university in Upland, Indiana.

The protest was planned and discussed prior to Saturday’s ceremony. Some faculty and students at the nondenominational Christian liberal arts school debated the appropriateness of the former Indiana governor at the commencement ceremony.

Most of Taylor’s graduating class did not leave. Pence received a standing ovation.

Graduate Laura Rathburn said Pence’s “presence makes it difficult for everyone at Taylor to feel welcomed.”




Source Article from https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/05/18/dozens-protest-pence-at-taylor-university-commencement/23729580/

But Manchin is also intrigued by a proposal from Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), which would extend the $300 unemployment benefits until July 18 — and amounts to a cut from both the Carper proposal and the House bill. Manchin spoke by telephone with Portman on Friday afternoon as the intrigue grew and the Senate stalled.

“There’s bipartisan support for what Rob’s trying to do. And Manchin’s getting beat up by his side. They’re trying to get him in line, so to speak. And he’s trying to do the right thing,” said Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.). “He knows that the Portman amendment saves a lot of money and is better policy. But Democrats in his caucus obviously don’t want to give Republicans a bipartisan win on this.”

Thune said he believed the Portman proposal could pass despite skepticism among some conservatives about any additional federal unemployment payments. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said he didn’t know where Manchin’s vote was. He said Democrats “don’t want” Portman’s amendment: “We want to get this wrapped up.”

The Carper proposal, hatched by both moderate and progressive Democrats, also links up the expiration of unemployment benefits with the current lapse of government funding at the end of September. But a vote on the measure was delayed as Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Catherine Cortez-Masto (D-Nev.) held an animated discussion with Manchin on the Senate floor.

Sinema indicated to Manchin that he could theoretically vote for both Carper’s Democratic amendment and Portman’s GOP amendment in an attempt to end the stalemate. The two parties are fighting over which order to hold the amendment votes in.

Democrats said they were concerned that approving the GOP changes on unemployment benefits could require another round of negotiations with the House and Biden. That would risk pushing the bill’s consideration closer to March 14, when the current round of boosted benefits is set to expire.

“If it gets to a certain level it may require renegotiating with the House and the White House and then it has to come back to the Senate. And that’s not a desirable outcome,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.). “The clock’s ticking, so timing is pretty important.”

The Democratic compromise has the White House’s backing, with chief of staff Ron Klain and press secretary Jen Psaki both tweeting statements of support.

“The President believes it is critical to extend expanded unemployment benefits through the end of September to help Americans who are struggling,“ Psaki said, noting that the deal will ultimately “provide more relief to the unemployed“ than the legislation that passed the House last week.

Five hours into the Senate’s first amendment vote on the minimum wage, which began late Friday morning, there was no final roll call as Democrats continued to tussle over unemployment benefits. And there’s still plenty more drama ahead, with the GOP seeking to inflict maximum political pain. The protracted ordeal, known as “vote-a-rama,” is widely despised by members of both parties and guaranteed to leave sleepless members running on fumes just ahead of the bill’s passage in the upper chamber, likely Saturday. But there’s no way around it.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/05/covid-aid-bill-senate-vote-amendments-473805

President Trump’s Navy Secretary Richard Spencer said he was fired in the controversy over a Navy SEAL because the president gave him an order he couldn’t, “in good conscience,” carry out.

Secretary Spencer’s removal follows a dispute that began when the president reversed the Navy’s demotion of Edward Gallagher, who was convicted of posing for a photo with a dead ISIS fighter in Iraq. Gallagher was also accused of murdering a prisoner of war, but was acquitted of that charge.

In a statement, Spencer’s boss, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, said he fired Spencer “after losing trust and confidence in him regarding his lack of candor.”

Either way, the case of the Navy vs. Edward Gallagher has now turned into a full-scale fiasco, complete with conflicting accounts of why the Navy secretary had to go, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.

Spencer was fired a day after denying reports he might resign over the Gallagher affair. “I have not threatened to resign. I am here, I work at the pleasure of the president,” he said in Nova Scotia during the Halifax International Security Forum.

Esper said that while Spencer had been publicly pushing for Gallagher’s removal from the Navy, privately he had gone behind Esper’s back to negotiate with the White House on ways to short-circuit disciplinary hearings against Gallagher.

Last week, the president tweeted that “The Navy will not be taking Gallagher’s Trident pin” – the symbol of his status as an elite Navy SEAL.

Spencer said he needed to see an order in writing from the president before stopping Gallagher’s appearance before a review board that could have kicked him out of the elite unit. “If the president requests to stop the process, the process stops,” Spencer said.

But Spencer’s resignation letter made it sound like he was fired before he could embarrass the president by resigning on principle. He wrote: “I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took.”

For his part, President Trump tweeted he was “not pleased” with the way the Navy handled the Gallagher case, and with Spencer’s inability to manage cost overruns on big ticket items like a new aircraft carrier.

That capped a day in which Gallagher appeared on Fox News and made openly insubordinate statements about his superior officers: “This is all about ego and retaliation. This has nothing to do with good order and discipline,” he said.

It didn’t end well for Spencer, but it did for Gallagher. Secretary Esper has directed that Gallagher be allowed to keep his Trident. And in a statement to Fox News last night, Gallagher thanked the president for stepping in multiple times and “correcting all the wrongs” done to him.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/edward-gallagher-controversy-navy-secretary-richard-spencer-fired-says-he-was-ordered-to-violate-sacred-oath/

Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., speaks during a news conference about the Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act in 2020. Till, pictured at right, was a 14-year-old African-American who was lynched in Mississippi in 1955.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP file photo


hide caption

toggle caption

J. Scott Applewhite/AP file photo

Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., speaks during a news conference about the Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act in 2020. Till, pictured at right, was a 14-year-old African-American who was lynched in Mississippi in 1955.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP file photo

WASHINGTON — Congress gave final approval Monday to legislation that for the first time would make lynching a federal hate crime in the U.S., sending the bill to President Joe Biden to sign into law.

Years in the making, the Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act is among some 200 bills that have been introduced over the past century that have tried to ban lynching in America.

It is named for the Black teenager whose brutal killing in Mississippi in 1955 — and his mother’s insistence on a open funeral casket to show the world what had been done to her child — became a pivotal moment in the Civil Rights era.

“After more than 200 failed attempts to outlaw lynching, Congress is finally succeeding in taking a long overdue action by passing the Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

The bill would make it possible to prosecute a crime as a lynching when a conspiracy to commit a hate crime results in death or serious bodily injury, according to the bill’s champion, Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill. The maximum sentence under the Anti-Lynching Act is 30 years.

The House overwhelming approved a similar measure in 2020, but it was blocked in the Senate.

Last week, the House overwhelmingly approved a revised version and the Senate passed the bill unanimously late Monday.

“Lynching is a longstanding and uniquely American weapon of racial terror that has for decades been used to maintain the white hierarchy,” said Rush.

The congressman said passage of the Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act “sends a clear and emphatic message that our nation will no longer ignore this shameful chapter of our history and that the full force of the U.S. federal government will always be brought to bear against those who commit this heinous act.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2022/03/07/1085087769/after-more-than-a-century-of-trying-congress-passes-an-anti-lynching-bill