I publish an "Editorial and Opinion Blog", Editorial and Opinion. My News Blog is @ News . I have a Jazz Blog @ Jazz and a Technology Blog @ Technology. My domain is Armwood.Com @ Armwood.Com.
What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White
Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.
This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Threats and Vandalism Leave American Jews on Edge in Trump Era - The New York Times
"The high-pitched, rambling voice on the telephone was disguised and garbled, and warned of a slaughter of Jews. The voice spoke of a bomb loaded with shrapnel and of an imminent “blood bath.” Moments later, the caller hung up.
The mid-January threat to a Jewish community center turned out to be a hoax. The warning was one of at least 100 that Jewish community centers and schools have reported since the beginning of the year, a menacing pattern that has upended daily life for people in 33 states and prompted a federal investigation that has come under increasing scrutiny from lawmakers, security specialists and Jewish leaders.
Combined with the recent vandalism at Jewish cemeteries in Missouri and Pennsylvania, the calls have stoked fears that a virulent anti-Semitism has increasingly taken hold in the early days of the Trump administration."
Threats and Vandalism Leave American Jews on Edge in Trump Era - The New York Times
Donald Trump is a greater enemy of people of color than ISIS.
The Trump administration has just declared war on people of color. Voting rights changed the South and areas in the North. It is a bedrock of our freedom. The Trump administration as chosen to become our enemy. We must fight and defeat them by any means necessary. We and our ancestors fought for these rights. We are not going to let an ignorant low class rich hustler from a trashy KKK and Nazi supporting family defeat us. Trump has engaged in racist policies all of his life. The Nixon Justice Department brought action against he and his criminal father. We must literally drive these crazy bigots from our government. Trump must be removed from the presidency. The time is now.
Trump’s Justice Department Is No Longer Opposing Texas’s Discriminatory Voter-ID Law | The Nation
Trump’s Justice Department Is No Longer Opposing Texas’s Discriminatory Voter-ID Law | The Nation
The Ways to Destroy Democracy | The Nation
"The first politician to tour the country by air during an election campaign, Hitler issued an endless stream of slogans to win potential supporters over. He would make Germany great again. He would give Germans work once more. He would put Germany first. He would revive the nation’s rusting industries, laid to waste by the economic depression. He would crush the alien ideologies—socialism, liberalism, communism—that were undermining the nation’s will to survive and destroying its core values."
The Ways to Destroy Democracy | The Nation
House Trump-Russia Probe Kneecapped Before It Gets Started - The Daily Beast
House Trump-Russia Probe Kneecapped Before It Gets Started - The Daily Beast
2008 Redux - Samsung heir will be indicted for bribery, embezzlement, perjury, and hiding criminal profits - The Verge
"Samsung's heir apparent, Lee Jae-yong, will be indicted on multiple charges including bribery and perjury in his native South Korea, The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg report. The country's special prosecutor plans to indict Lee along with another four executives, a spokesperson for the body told reporters on Tuesday, in relation to bribes allegedly given to the South Korean government in exchange for favors.
Lee faces formal charges of bribery, perjury, embezzlement, hiding assets abroad, and concealing profit from criminal acts. He was arrested earlier this month following claims that Samsung paid 43 billion won ($38 million) to secure government support of a huge corporate merger in 2015. Money was allegedly directed from Samsung to companies controlled by a close friend of South Korean president Park Geun-hye. President Park herself was impeached last December after a corruption scandal that gripped the country."
Samsung heir will be indicted for bribery, embezzlement, perjury, and hiding criminal profits - The Verge
The Fight for Obamacare Has Turned - The New York Times
The Fight for Obamacare Has Turned - The New York Times
Monday, February 27, 2017
Exclusive: ICE put detained immigrants in solitary confinement for hunger striking - The Verge
"Beginning last April, and picking up in the weeks following the November election, dozens of detainees at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in rural Georgia went on hunger strike in protest of their detention. The private prison corporation that runs the facility, CoreCivic — formerly Corrections Corporation of America — responded swiftly to the expanding demonstration: as immigrant detainees refused to eat, CoreCivic staff began immediately locking them in solitary confinement for their participation in the non-violent protest.
According to ICE detainment logs obtained by The Verge through a Freedom of Information Act request, more than two dozen detainees were put in solitary confinement for hunger striking — some simply for declaring they would refuse to eat, even if they hadn’t yet skipped a meal. The logs also show that CoreCivic may have attempted to gather information on hunger strike organizers through cultivating detainee informants, who were later locked in solitary confinement themselves for protection."
Exclusive: ICE put detained immigrants in solitary confinement for hunger striking - The Verge
Exclusive: ICE put detained immigrants in solitary confinement for hunger striking - The Verge
"Beginning last April, and picking up in the weeks following the November election, dozens of detainees at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in rural Georgia went on hunger strike in protest of their detention. The private prison corporation that runs the facility, CoreCivic — formerly Corrections Corporation of America — responded swiftly to the expanding demonstration: as immigrant detainees refused to eat, CoreCivic staff began immediately locking them in solitary confinement for their participation in the non-violent protest.
According to ICE detainment logs obtained by The Verge through a Freedom of Information Act request, more than two dozen detainees were put in solitary confinement for hunger striking — some simply for declaring they would refuse to eat, even if they hadn’t yet skipped a meal. The logs also show that CoreCivic may have attempted to gather information on hunger strike organizers through cultivating detainee informants, who were later locked in solitary confinement themselves for protection."
Exclusive: ICE put detained immigrants in solitary confinement for hunger striking - The Verge
Pair gets 35 years for terrorizing party with Confederate flags - NY Daily News
A Georgia man and woman have been sentenced to a combined 35 years after terrorizing a black child’s birthday party with Confederate flags, racial slurs and threats.
Jose Ismael Torres and Kayla Rae Norton were convicted earlier this month under a street gang terrorism law for the 2015 harassment in Douglassville, outside Atlanta, and cried in court on Monday.
Video footage from the party, little more than a month after Dylann Roof’s Charleston church massacre, shows a parade of trucks roaring by with Confederate battle flags.
One person is heard shouting the n-word, while witnesses said that another had a gun sand said “he was gonna kill the n-----s.”
Pair gets 35 years for terrorizing party with Confederate flags - NY Daily News
Why Trump’s Anti-Trans ‘States’ Rights’ Claim Will Backfire - The Daily Beast
"It’s widely known that the Trump administration has overturned Obama-era protections for transgender students. It’s less well known that the way it did so, emphasizing states’ rights, was a gigantic tactical mistake that is going to blow up in their faces.
The substantive issue is whether transgender students in public schools should be allowed to use gender-appropriate restrooms, or whether schools may require them to use single-stall bathrooms or those corresponding to the students’ biological sex at birth.
Legally speaking, there are two avenues in which this debate is moving forward. First are two “guidance letters” by the Education Department, stating that Title IX—which prohibits discrimination in educational contexts based on sex—covers trans students as well, and requires schools to let them use gender-appropriate restrooms. That letter didn’t have the force of law, but because the DoE could withhold funds from non-conforming school districts, it did wield the power of the purse-strings.
Those letters were officially retracted in a February 22 letter by the civil rights directors of the Education and Justice Departments.
But there’s also the second legal avenue, which is a case brought by the ACLU on behalf of Gavin Grimm, a transgender student in Virginia—a case that will be argued at the Supreme Court on March 28. In that case, G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, the Court is set to decide the same question: whether Title IX covers trans people.
In that regard, the February 22 letter is extremely odd. It doesn’t take a position on Title IX, instead saying that the government needs more time to “further and more completely consider the legal issues involved.” And it adds, echoing President Trump’s statements, that “there must be due regard for the primary role of the States and local school districts in establishing educational policy.”
That was a huge mistake, for three reasons.
First, the administration missed the opportunity to tell the Supreme Court its interpretation of Title IX. Earlier in the litigation, courts had deferred to the Obama administration’s interpretation. But with that gone, the Supreme Court now has…. nothing.
“We don’t really know the government’s position on Title IX,” said Joshua Block, the ACLU’s lead lawyer, in a press call discussing the G.G. case. “Technically, their position is neutral.”
That’s exactly right. And while the new government’s position isn’t technically part of the G.G. litigation, its February 22 letter practically begs the Court to weigh in.
It wouldn’t have been hard to simply take the opposite view. True, the new administration has only been in office a month, but that’s certainly not stopped them from taking bold positions on immigration, national security, and a myriad of other issues. Moreover, they’re not working on a blank slate. Conservatives (and one district court) have articulated anti-trans interpretations of Title IX for years.
Here, I’ll articulate one right now: Title IX is about sex discrimination, and was passed in 1972. The term “transgender” wasn’t invented until 1975, and there’s not a scintilla of evidence that Congress had anything like it in mind. Anyway, sex and gender are different things. This is a massive expansion of legislation that is totally unjustified by the statute or its legislative history.
That wasn’t hard to say—and yet the Trump administration chose not to say it, abdicating legal ground that it could easily have occupied.
Second, emphasizing states’ rights is incoherent. Said Block, “sex discrimination in public schools hasn’t been left up to the states since 1972. That’s why Title IX was passed. The federal government said that it is going to protect everyone no matter what state they live in.”
That, too, is exactly right. Like it or not, the whole point of federal legislation on civil rights is to take primacy over states’ rights. That, unlike the question of transgender equality, is in the statutory history of Title IX, and it’s absurd to argue “states’ rights” against a law that understands states’ rights quite clearly, and deliberately takes precedence over them...."
Why Trump’s Anti-Trans ‘States’ Rights’ Claim Will Backfire - The Daily Beast
Sunday, February 26, 2017
Customs: Ali’s son wasn't detained because he's Muslim
"LOUISVILLE, Ky. — The U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed Saturday that it held Muhammad Ali Jr., the son of the late legendary boxer, for questioning in a Florida airport earlier this month, but said Ali wasn't singled out because he's a Muslim.
Ali Jr., 44, and his mother, Khalilah Camacho-Ali, the second wife of Muhammad Ali, were pulled aside for questioning at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on Feb. 7 while returning from a speaking engagement in Jamaica, Chris Mancini, a Florida lawyer and friend of the Ali family, told The Courier-Journal on Friday.
Mancini said the pair were detained because of their Arabic-sounding names, and Ali Jr. was repeatedly asked, "Where did you get your name from?" and "Are you Muslim?"
Customs spokesman Daniel Hetlage declined to provide details of the incident, citing policies that protect travelers' privacy, but he wrote in an email that the agency does not discriminate on the basis of religion, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
"We treat all travelers with respect and sensitivity," he said. "Integrity is our cornerstone. We are guided by the highest ethical and moral principles."
Reached by phone, Hetlage said it's not uncommon for customs and border protection officers to pull travelers aside after initial passport inspection for a secondary screening, which can consist of additional questions and verification of a traveler's identity. What is asked in these interviews varies depending on the situation, he said, but "we have no interest in questioning anyone for two hours about their religion."
Questions about religion can and do sometimes come up, he said, but it isn't something officers — who process more than 1.2 million international travelers daily — routinely ask about.
"With the number of Muslims flying in and out internationally every day, the math doesn't even support it," Hetlage said.
Ali Jr., who was born in Philadelphia and holds a U.S. passport, told customs officers that he is Muslim, said Mancini, who added that the questions asked of Ali Jr. are indicative of profiling. He also said he and the Ali family are considering filing a federal lawsuit following the incident."
Customs: Ali’s son wasn't detained because he's Muslim
Border agents stopped Muhammad Ali Jr. Here’s how we can all fight back | Opinion | The Guardian
Outrageous, unAmerican and unconstitutional. This is the reason Trumps religious ban is nothing but nascent fascism.
Border agents stopped Muhammad Ali Jr. Here’s how we can all fight back | Opinion | The Guardian
White House scrambles to damp down scandal over FBI inquiry into Russia ties | US news | The Guardian
"The White House made a messy attempt on Sunday to control public perceptions of a widening scandal over alleged contacts between aides to Donald Trump and Russian intelligence officials during the 2016 election, alleging that the FBI had dismissed reports of such links.
The scandal has shown little sign of coming under control, with a Republican congressman calling for an independent inquiry, multiple congressional committees pursuing investigations and Trump escalating a war with the media in an apparent attempt at distraction.
White House scrambles to damp down scandal over FBI inquiry into Russia ties | US news | The Guardian
The Murders of My Colleagues - The New York Times
"Last year was one of the most deadly for Mexican reporters in recent history. Even the total number of victims is hard to pin down, thanks to botched investigations and confusion about how many of the dead officially worked as journalists. But most press groups count at least nine slain here in 2016, some as many 16. Reporters Without Borders said Mexico was the third most perilous country in the world for journalists, after Syria and Afghanistan — in other words, the most perilous outside a declared war zone."
The Murders of My Colleagues - The New York Times
Saturday, February 25, 2017
The Immigration Facts Donald Trump Doesn’t Like - The New York Times
"Let’s be clear: The moral case against President Trump’s plan to uproot and expel millions of unauthorized immigrants is open-and-shut. But what about the economic cost? This is where deeply shameful collides with truly stupid.
The Migration Policy Institute reported in 2013 that the federal government spends more each year on immigration enforcement — through Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol — than on all other federal law enforcement agencies combined. The total has risen to more than $19 billion a year, and more than $306 billion in all since 1986, measured in 2016 dollars. This exceeds the sum of all spending for the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Drug Enforcement Administration; the Secret Service; the Marshals Service; and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
ICE and the Border Patrol already refer more cases for federal prosecution than the entire Justice Department, and the number of people they detain each year (more than 400,000) is greater than the number of inmates being held by the Federal Bureau of Prisons for all other federal crimes.
That is blank-check, steroidal enforcement — and Mr. Trump and the Homeland Security secretary, John Kelly, want more."
(Via.). The Immigration Facts Donald Trump Doesn’t Like - The New York Times:
These Are Children, Not Bad Hombres - The New York Times
"Last year 7-year-old Kendra Cruz Garcia and her 10-year-old-brother, Roberto Guardado Cruz, crossed the Rio Grande alone. When their tiny boat reached the shore, they started walking into Texas.
The Border Patrol agents who soon caught the Salvadoran siblings deemed them ‘unaccompanied’ because no parent was with them. Children with this designation are granted special, well-deserved protections.
They aren’t subject to quick deportation and are entitled to a full hearing before an immigration judge. They can’t be held for long periods in immigration jails. Instead, they are transferred to child-friendly shelters operated by Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement, and released, usually within a month, to a parent, relative or sponsor while their court hearings proceed. Instead of facing cross-examination by adversarial prosecutors, children are interviewed by an asylum officer trained to gently probe whether they qualify to stay in the country legally.
In other words, they are treated with kindness and decency by our government because they are innocent children.
Continue reading the main story But President Trump has decided to get tough on many of the 60,000 Central American children who arrive at our border each year begging for safety after fleeing some of the most dangerous places on earth. His executive orders, and memos from the Department of Homeland Security on how to interpret them, could strip this special treatment from the roughly 60 percent of unaccompanied children who have a parent already living in the United States. If Kendra and Roberto were just entering the United States now, they would fall into this group; instead they kept their protections and were eventually united with their mother, a house painter in Los Angeles.
Parents like her, the argument goes, are exploiting benefits established to help children who really are alone here. The administration has threatened to deport parents who send for their children or prosecute them for hiring smugglers.
Last week Mr. Trump’s press secretary said the president’s intention was to prioritize the deportation of immigrants who ‘represent a threat to public safety.’ Supporters say he’s upholding the law. But these children are not threats, and there are many ways to preserve the integrity of our immigration laws while treating them humanely.
"
(Via.). These Are Children, Not Bad Hombres - The New York Times:
People From 7 Travel-Ban Nations Pose No Increased Terror Risk, Report Says - The New York Times
"When President Trump signed an executive order last month temporarily barring visitors from seven mostly Muslim countries, he said he was moving to protect the United States from terrorist attacks. The Homeland Security secretary, John F. Kelly, echoed the president, saying the travel ban was necessary because vetting procedures ‘in those seven countries are suspect.’
But an internal report written by intelligence analysts at Mr. Kelly’s department appears to undercut the assessment that people from the seven countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — pose a heightened threat of terrorism. The three-page report found that ‘country of citizenship is unlikely to be a reliable indicator of potential terrorist activity.’
The report adds to the difficulties the Trump administration has faced in carrying out the travel ban. Federal judges have suspended the order, and the administration has said it will redo it to withstand legal scrutiny, but has not given a timetable.
The Department of Homeland Security assessment, first reported by The Associated Press, found that only a small number of people from the seven countries had been involved in terrorism-related activities in the United States since the Syrian civil war began in 2011. In addition, the report noted, while terrorist groups in Iraq, Syria and Yemen pose a threat to the United States, militant groups in the other four countries have a more regional focus.
The report also found that in the past six years, the terrorism threat reached much more widely than the seven countries listed — individuals from 26 countries had been ‘inspired’ to carry out attacks in the United States.
Furthermore, few individuals from the seven countries affected by the ban have access to the United States, the report said, noting the small numbers of visas granted by the State Department to citizens of those nations."
(Via.). .People From 7 Travel-Ban Nations Pose No Increased Terror Risk, Report Says - The New York Times:
Immigration Agents Discover New Freedom to Deport Under Trump - The New York Times
"In Virginia, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents waited outside a church shelter where undocumented immigrants had gone to stay warm. In Texas and in Colorado, agents went into courthouses, looking for foreigners who had arrived for hearings on other matters.
At Kennedy International Airport in New York, passengers arriving after a five-hour flight from San Francisco were asked to show their documents before they were allowed to get off the plane.
The Trump administration’s far-reaching plan to arrest and deport vast numbers of undocumented immigrants has been introduced in dramatic fashion over the past month. And much of that task has fallen to thousands of ICE officers who are newly emboldened, newly empowered and already getting to work.
Gone are the Obama-era rules that required them to focus only on serious criminals. In Southern California, in one of the first major roundups during the Trump administration, officers detained 161 people with a wide range of felony and misdemeanor convictions, and 10 who had no criminal history at all.
Immigrant Mother in Denver Takes Refuge as Risk of Deportation Looms FEB. 15, 2017 ‘Before, we used to be told, ‘You can’t arrest those people,’ and we’d be disciplined for being insubordinate if we did,’ said a 10-year veteran of the agency who took part in the operation. ‘Now those people are priorities again. And there are a lot of them here.’"
(Via.). Immigration Agents Discover New Freedom to Deport Under Trump - The New York Times:
Friday, February 24, 2017
The Death of Compassion - The New York Times
"Folks, we have been here before.
After Ronald Reagan, a celebrity-turned-politician, carried 49 states in his devastating defeat of Walter Mondale in 1984, Democrats were whining and moaning, shuffling their feet and scratching their heads.
Reagan had done particularly well with those who would come to be known as Reagan Democrats — white, working-class voters, particularly in the Rust Belt, whom a New York Times contributor would later describe as ‘blue-collar, ethnic voters,’ who were drawn to Reagan’s messages of economic growth and nationalistic pride.
But just like Donald Trump’s path to victory, Reagan’s was strewn with racial hostilities and prejudicial lies.
While Trump’s tropes involved Mexicans and Muslims and that tired euphemism of disastrous inner cities, Reagan used the ‘welfare queen’ scare, as far back as his unsuccessful bid for president in 1976.
Continue reading the main story RELATED COVERAGE
Opinion Charles M. Blow The G.O.P.’s ‘Black People’ Platform JAN. 6, 2012
Charles M. Blow Politics, public opinion and social justice. Harry and Sidney: Soul Brothers FEB 20 Drip, Drip, Drip FEB 15 The Power of Disruption FEB 13 Trump’s Leading Rivals Wear Robes FEB 9 A Lesson in Black History FEB 6 See More »
As I have written before, Reagan explained at nearly every stop that there was a woman in Chicago who ‘used 80 names, 30 addresses, 15 telephone numbers to collect food stamps, Social Security, veterans’ benefits for four nonexistent, deceased veteran husbands, as well as welfare. Her tax-free cash income alone has been running $150,000 a year.’
But it was not as it seemed.
As my colleague Paul Krugman wrote in 2007: ‘Reagan repeatedly told the bogus story of the Cadillac-driving welfare queen — a gross exaggeration of a minor case of welfare fraud. He never mentioned the woman’s race, but he didn’t have to.’
As Gene Demby perfectly summed up on NPR in 2013: ‘In the popular imagination, the stereotype of the ‘welfare queen’ is thoroughly raced — she’s an indolent black woman, living off the largess of taxpayers. The term is seen by many as a dog whistle, a way to play on racial anxieties without summoning them directly.’
So, then as now, economic anxiety and throbbing xenophobia were convenient shields behind which brewing racial animus could hide.
Indeed, Trump’s slogan ‘Make American Great Again’ was first used by Reagan.
And yet, Democrats in 1984 were quick to look for the lessons they could learn on how to reach out to the Reagan coalition, instead of condemning it.
In the days following Reagan’s win that year, The New York Times reported:
‘Democratic Party leaders began yesterday what they foresee as a long and agonizing appraisal of how they can renew their appeal to the white majority in presidential elections and still hold the allegiance of minorities, the poor and others who seek federal assistance.’"
Trump Intensifies His Attacks on Journalists and Condemns F.B.I. ‘Leakers’ - The New York Times
"WASHINGTON — President Trump turned the power of the White House against the news media on Friday, escalating his attacks on journalists as ‘the enemy of the people’ and berating members of his own F.B.I. as ‘leakers’ who he said were putting the nation at risk.
In a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference, Mr. Trump criticized as ‘fake news’ organizations that publish anonymously sourced reports that reflect poorly on him. And in a series of Twitter posts, he assailed the F.B.I. as a dangerously porous agency, condemning unauthorized revelations of classified information from within its ranks and calling for an immediate hunt for leakers.
Hours after the speech, as if to demonstrate Mr. Trump’s determination to punish reporters whose coverage he dislikes, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, barred journalists from The New York Times and several other news organizations from attending his daily briefing, a highly unusual breach of relations between the White House and its press corps."
(Via.). Trump Intensifies His Attacks on Journalists and Condemns F.B.I. ‘Leakers’ - The New York Times:
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Republican Health Plans Have Winners And Losers, Just Like Obamacare | FiveThirtyEight
Now, Republicans who have promised for years to repeal and replace the ACA are tasked with balancing winners and losers, coverage and cost. GOP House members outlined their replacement plan last week. Here’s a look at how the main policy proposals would shake out against the current system.
Insuring the sickest Americans
Underlying the tradeoffs of any health policy is the world’s most expensive medical system. Until we do something about the high cost of care overall, someone has to pay, whether it’s the federal government with tax dollars, companies or individuals. But just a sliver of the population is responsible for the majority of health care spending in the U.S., and figuring out how to pay for the most costly patients is one of the biggest challenges in health care policy.
Before the ACA, many states had high-risk pools: state-run programs for people with serious medical needs who couldn’t get health insurance elsewhere. Most enrollees had been turned down for coverage by insurance companies because of pre-existing health conditions and didn’t have an employer-sponsored plan. In 2007, 34 states had pools that spent more than $1.8 billion on the 201,000 people enrolled in these programs, which did little to reduce the overall uninsured rate but were life changing for many of the people they did cover.
By requiring that insurers cover everyone, including those with pre-existing conditions, the ACA did away with those programs. Republicans have pushed to bring this system back, because removing the people who cost the most to treat would result in lower premiums for everyone else in the general insurance pool. That shift would isolate the people with the greatest medical needs, however, and leave them open to funding shortfalls. The programs rely on sick people paying more for care, anywhere from about 120 percent to 250 percent of what a healthier counterpart would pay, which can be an added strain on families. In Minnesota, which had the oldest and largest high-risk pool in the country, a 60-year-old man in the program paid $685 per month for a plan with a $2,000 deductible in 2014, according to information gathered by Lynn Blewett, a professor at the University of Minnesota who has studied high-risk pools. “For people who could afford it, it was a good product,” Blewett said. “But there were a lot of people who couldn’t afford it.”
Republican Health Plans Have Winners And Losers, Just Like Obamacare | FiveThirtyEight
Amazon argues Constitution protects your chats with Alexa - CNET
"Amazon says the First Amendment protects your conversations with Alexa.
"Such interactions may constitute expressive content that implicates privacy concerns and First Amendment protections," the company's lawyers wrote in a court filing Friday.
The legal filing addresses a warrant obtained by Benton County, Arkansas, investigators for any recordings gathered by an Alexa-powered Echo device that was in the home of a homicide suspect in 2015. Investigators say the recordings could provide clues to help them investigate the death of Victor Collins, who was found dead in the hot tub of James Bates in Bentonville. Bates has been charged with first-degree murder and released on bail."
Amazon argues Constitution protects your chats with Alexa - CNET
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
What the Jewish Cemetery Attack and Trump’s Movement Have in Common - The Daily Beast
"...Jewish cemeteries are a reminder of Jewish death, and Jewish death means the Holocaust, a genocide still unprecedented in scope and scale.
The bigoted, racist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, white supremacist far right knows this. (Their wanna-be “alt” signifier can go to hell.) Whoever committed the acts of vandalism in the Chesed Shel Emet cemetery, they knew that defiling a cemetery is a particularly loathsome act, and defiling the graves of dead Jews, many of whom were surely Holocaust refugees or survivors, has a very particular resonance.
This is also why, after calling out white supremacy last Spring and being promoted for doing so by the Daily Stormer, I received hundreds of tweets with pictures of me in a gas chamber, me wearing a Jude star, my head on the body of a rat. And why, despite myself, they actually hurt..."
What the Jewish Cemetery Attack and Trump’s Movement Have in Common - The Daily Beast
Undocumented Woman With a Brain Tumor Locked Up by ICE - The Daily Beast
The pain was caused by a brain tumor and, today, lawyers for the woman who remains in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement fear she’ll die there without ever seeing or speaking to her family again.
It’s a scenario that advocates worry could become far more common under President Donald Trump’s new immigration enforcement rules.
According to her legal team, helmed by attorney Marcia Kasdan, the woman — who we will identify as Sara to protect her privacy — was being held at the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas, when she started complaining of terrible headaches.
In her court testimony, Sara acknowledged that she illegally crossed the border on Nov. 4, 2015, and border patrol agents apprehended her. A sworn statement from Border Patrol agent Roberto Gonzalez Jr. says Sara told him on Nov. 8, 2015 that she came to the U.S. to work, and not to seek asylum.
She told an immigration judge on Jan. 12, 2016, that she actually did come to the U.S. from her native El Salvador seeking asylum, and that she feared her aunt — who she said is gang-affiliated — would kill her because she was in a relationship with a Salvadoran police officer. But Sara missed the deadline to file her asylum claim, so the judge ordered her deportation. Her legal team, which began working with her after she missed that deadline and acknowledges that it was missed, appealed. She has been in detention since then."
Undocumented Woman With a Brain Tumor Locked Up by ICE - The Daily Beast
INS v. LOPEZ-MENDOZA | FindLaw
Relevant Case law setting guideline limits to ICE searches an seizures of undocumented aliens.
“United States Supreme CourtINS v. LOPEZ-MENDOZA, (1984)No. 83-491Argued: April 18, 1984 Decided: July 5, 1984Respondent Mexican citizens were ordered deported by an Immigration Judge. Respondent Lopez-Mendoza unsuccessfully objected to being summoned to the deportation hearing following his allegedly unlawful arrest by an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) agent, but he did not object to the receipt in evidence of his admission, after the arrest, of illegal entry into this country. Respondent Sandoval-Sanchez, who also admitted his illegal entry after being arrested by an INS agent, unsuccessfully objected to the evidence of his admission offered at the deportation proceeding, contending that it should have been suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful arrest. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the deportation orders. The Court of Appeals reversed respondent Sandoval-Sanchez' deportation order, holding that his detention by INS agents violated the Fourth Amendment, that his admission of illegal entry was the product of this detention, and that the exclusionary rule barred its use in a deportation proceeding. The court vacated respondent Lopez-Mendoza's deportation order and remanded his case to the BIA to determine whether the Fourth Amendment had been violated in the course of his arrest…..”
It's legal for an immigration agent to pretend to be a police officer outside someone's door. But should it be? - LA Times
"During a nationwide operation this month by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a team of ICE agents in Los Angeles approached the house of a man targeted for deportation.
“Good morning, police,” one agent announced in the pre-dawn darkness.
A man opened the door moments later.
“Good morning, how you doing? I’m a police officer. We’re doing an investigation,” the agent said.
The exchange, captured on a video released publicly by ICE, seemed routine. But it has reignited long-simmering objections from immigrant rights attorneys and advocates, who say the scene illustrates unethical — and in some cases, illegal — ruses ICE agents have used for years, portraying themselves as officers from local police departments to ensnare people or fool them into revealing the whereabouts of family members.
The use of the tactic, critics said, is particularly egregious in heavily immigrant cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco, where police and elected officials have tried for decades to distinguish their cops from federal immigration agents, in an effort to convince immigrants living illegally in their cities that they can interact with local police without fear of deportation. The practice of using ruses predates the Trump administration. But the president’s announcement of his intent to dramatically increase the number of people ICE apprehends for deportation has increased concerns by immigrant advocates that the tactic will grow even more prevalent.
“There is something fundamentally unfair about ICE exploiting local and state policies that are trying to improve public safety by promoting immigrants’ trust in law enforcement,” said Frances Miriam Kreimer, senior attorney at Dolores Street Community Services in San Francisco.
Kreimer is challenging the legality of a ruse ICE officers used to arrest a client, in which they told the man they were police officers investigating a crime.
'I’m not going to do it.' Police aren't eager to help Trump enforce immigration laws'I’m not going to do it.' Police aren't eager to help Trump enforce immigration laws"
Trump on Slavery: ‘Boy, That Is Not Good’ - The Daily Beast
Trump on Slavery: ‘Boy, That Is Not Good’ - The Daily Beast
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Malaysia: Convicted for Showing a Film | Human Rights Watch
Malaysia: Convicted for Showing a Film | Human Rights Watch
Hate groups increase for second consecutive year as Trump electrifies radical right | Southern Poverty Law Center
"The number of hate groups in the United States rose for a second year in a row in 2016 as the radical right was energized by the candidacy of Donald Trump, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) annual census of hate groups and other extremist organizations, released today."
Hate groups increase for second consecutive year as Trump electrifies radical right | Southern Poverty Law Center
Jewish Community Centers in the U.S. Face Bomb Threats - The Atlantic
"The Nashville Jewish Community Center has now gotten so many telephone bomb threats that the dates run together, said Leslie Sax, the executive director. The first call came on January 9, when Nashville was one of the first 15 JCCs to get threats. The next call was January 18, accompanying yet another national wave. The latest was just this weekend, on Presidents’ Day, when 11 JCCs around the country were threatened, according to a spokesperson for the national organization. The Nashville facility, more full than usual with people exercising on the holiday weekend, was evacuated before security gave the all-clear.
“Most people just feel sadness—they’re sad that this is happening,” Sax said. “Everyone keeps saying they’re disheartened and frustrated.” But even though people are upset, they don’t seem to be scared. “I haven’t heard fear,” she said."
Jewish Community Centers in the U.S. Face Bomb Threats - The Atlantic
President Trump denounces anti-Semitism | MSNBC
I am confused. Why did Trump hire Bannon, the former head of Brietbart News? "Breitbart Calls Trump Foe “Renegade Jew.” This Is How Anti-Semitism Goes Mainstream" https://goo.gl/ZizAsq
New Trump Deportation Rules Allow Far More Expulsions - The New York Times
"WASHINGTON — The Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday released a set of documents translating President Trump’s executive orders on immigration and border security into policy, bringing a major shift in the way the agency enforces the nation’s immigration laws.
Under the Obama administration, undocumented immigrants convicted of serious crimes were the priority for removal. Now, immigration agents, customs officers and border patrol agents have been directed to remove anyone convicted of any criminal offense.
That includes people convicted of fraud in any official matter before a governmental agency and people who “have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits.”
The policy also calls for an expansion of expedited removals, allowing Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to deport more people immediately. Under the Obama administration, expedited removal was used only within 100 miles of the border for people who had been in the country no more than 14 days. Now it will include those who have been in the country for up to two years, and located anywhere in the nation.
The change in enforcement priorities will require a considerable increase in resources. With an estimated 11 million people in the country illegally, the government has long had to set narrower priorities, given the constraints on staffing and money.
In the so-called guidance documents released on Tuesday, the department is directed to begin the process of hiring 10,000 new immigration and customs agents, expanding the number of detention facilities and creating an office within Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help families of those killed by undocumented immigrants. Mr. Trump had some of those relatives address his rallies in the campaign, and several were present when he signed an executive order on immigration last month at the Department of Homeland Security.
The directives would also instruct Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as well as Customs and Border Protection, the parent agency of the Border Patrol, to begin reviving a program that recruits local police officers and sheriff’s deputies to help with deportation, effectively making them de facto immigration agents. The effort, called the 287(g) program, was scaled back during the Obama administration.
The program faces resistance from many states and dozens of so-called sanctuary cities, which have refused to allow their law enforcement workers to help round up undocumented individuals.
Senior Homeland Security officials told reporters Tuesday morning that the directives were intended to more fully make use of the enforcement tools that Congress has already given to the department to crack down on illegal immigration. The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity during a morning conference call, emphasized that some of the proposals for increased enforcement would roll out slowly as the department finalizes the logistics and legal rules for more aggressive action.
In particular, the officials said that returning Central American refugees to Mexico to await hearings would be done only in a limited fashion, and only after discussions with the government of Mexico, which would most likely have to agree to accept the refugees.
The officials also made clear that nothing in the directives would change the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which provides work permits and deportation protection for the young people commonly referred to as Dreamers.
But the officials also made clear that the department intended to aggressively follow Mr. Trump’s promise that immigration laws be enforced to the maximum extent possible, marking a significant departure from the procedures in place under President Barack Obama.
That promise has generated fear and anger in the immigrant community, and advocates for immigrants have warned that the new approach is a threat to many undocumented immigrants who had previously been in little danger of being deported.
New Trump Deportation Rules Allow Far More Expulsions - The New York Times: ""
Monday, February 20, 2017
Uber to investigate 'abhorrent' harassment claims - CNET
In a Sunday blog post, former Uber engineer Susan Fowler alleged many women in the company were sexually harassed by other employees and complaints were dismissed by HR.
Her chief claim was that one manager had inappropriately sexually propositioned many women, but Uber management repeatedly "refused" to punish him as he was a "high performer."
Uber CEO Travis Kalanick tweeted a response, saying an investigation would be launched."
Uber to investigate 'abhorrent' harassment claims - CNET
Ryancare: You Can Pay More for Less! - The New York Times
"In a half-baked policy paper released on Thursday, the House speaker, Paul Ryan, trotted out washed-up ideas for “improving” the country’s health care system that would do anything but. For example, the paper calls for reducing spending on Medicaid, which now provides insurance to more than 74 million poor, disabled and older people. Many millions of them would be cast out of the program. The Republican plan would also force most people who don’t get their health insurance through an employer to pay more by slashing subsidies that the A.C.A., or Obamacare, now provides. The proposal would allow families to sock away more money in health savings accounts, which may sound good at first but would primarily benefit affluent people who can afford to save more.
The paper is Mr. Ryan’s blueprint for effectively repealing and replacing Obamacare. Unsurprisingly, he and his colleagues offered no estimates of how many people would lose coverage or how much premiums and deductibles would rise for middle-class and poor families. Yet those missing details did not stop the Trump administration’s top health official from embracing the proposal. Tom Price, the secretary of health and human services and a former Ryan lieutenant in the House, said the president “is all in on this.”
Ryancare: You Can Pay More for Less! - The New York Times
A Back-Channel Plan for Ukraine and Russia, Courtesy of Trump Associates - The New York Times
"A week before Michael T. Flynn resigned as national security adviser, a sealed proposal was hand-delivered to his office, outlining a way for President Trump to lift sanctions against Russia.
Mr. Flynn is gone, having been caught lying about his own discussion of sanctions with the Russian ambassador. But the proposal, a peace plan for Ukraine and Russia, remains, along with those pushing it: Michael D. Cohen, the president’s personal lawyer, who delivered the document; Felix H. Sater, a business associate who helped Mr. Trump scout deals in Russia; and a Ukrainian lawmaker trying to rise in a political opposition movement shaped in part by Mr. Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort.
At a time when Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia, and the people connected to him, are under heightened scrutiny — with investigations by American intelligence agencies, the F.B.I. and Congress — some of his associates remain willing and eager to wade into Russia-related efforts behind the scenes.
Mr. Trump has confounded Democrats and Republicans alike with his repeated praise for the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, and his desire to forge an American-Russian alliance. While there is nothing illegal about such unofficial efforts, a proposal that seems to tip toward Russian interests may set off alarms."
A Back-Channel Plan for Ukraine and Russia, Courtesy of Trump Associates - The New York Times
Sunday, February 19, 2017
Trump’s Labor Pick Has a History of Attacking Voting Rights | The Nation
" Alexander Acosta was once accused of undermining the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. Now he could become secretary of labor."
Trump’s Labor Pick Has a History of Attacking Voting Rights | The Nation
Breaking the Anti-Immigrant Fever - The New York Times
"Americans have been watching the Trump administration unfold for almost a month now, in all its malevolent incompetence. From morning tweets to daytime news to late-night comedy, many watch and fret and mock, and then sleep, sometimes fitfully.
Others, a large minority, lie awake, thinking about losing their families, jobs and homes. They have been vilified by the president as criminals, though they are not. They have tried to build honest lives here and suddenly are as fearful as fugitives. They await the fists pounding on the door, the agents in black, the cuffs, the van ride, the cell. They are terrified that the United States government will find them, or their parents or their children, demand their papers, and take them away.
About 11 million people are living in this country outside the law. Suddenly, by presidential decree, all are deportation priorities, all are supposed criminals, all are threatened with broken lives, along with members of their families. The end could come for them any time.
This is not an abstract or fanciful depiction. It is not fake news. It’s the United States of today, this month, this morning..."
Breaking the Anti-Immigrant Fever - The New York Times
Is It Time to Call Trump Mentally Ill? - The New York Times
"A lot of people seem to be questioning President Trump’s mental health. This month, Representative Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, went so far as to say he was considering proposing legislation that would require a White House psychiatrist.
More controversial is the number of mental health experts who are joining the chorus. In December, a Huffington Post article featured a letter written by three prominent psychiatry professors that cited President Trump’s “grandiosity, impulsivity, hypersensitivity to slights or criticism, and an apparent inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality” as evidence of his mental instability. While stopping short of giving the president a formal psychiatric diagnosis, the experts called for him to submit to a full medical and neuropsychiatric evaluation by impartial investigators.
A practicing psychologist went further in late January. He was quoted in a U.S. News and World Report article titled “Temperament Tantrum,” saying that President Trump has malignant narcissism, which is characterized by grandiosity, sad
Is It Time to Call Trump Mentally Ill? - The New York Times
Trump, an Outsider Demanding Loyalty, Struggles to Fill Top Posts - The New York Times
"MELBOURNE, Fla. — During President Trump’s transition to power, his team reached out to Elliott Abrams for help building a new administration. Mr. Abrams, a seasoned Republican foreign policy official, sent lists of possible candidates for national security jobs.
One by one, the answer from the Trump team came back no. The reason was consistent: This one had said disparaging things about Mr. Trump during the campaign; that one had signed a letter opposing him. Finally, the White House asked Mr. Abrams himself to meet with the president about becoming deputy secretary of state, only to have the same thing happen — vetoed because of past criticism.
Trump, an Outsider Demanding Loyalty, Struggles to Fill Top Posts - The New York Times
Saturday, February 18, 2017
'Least racist person' Trump stirs row with reply to black reporter - BBC News
'Least racist person' Trump stirs row with reply to black reporter - BBC News
Friday, February 17, 2017
Thursday, February 16, 2017
Flynn's Resignation Could Thrust White House Into Legal Thicket - NBC News
"The resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn raises deep, unresolved questions about President Donald Trump's relationship with Russia and whether America's longtime adversary tried to tilt the election in his favor.
The leap from Flynn's actions to some broader conspiracy remains huge. But the lingering concerns could develop into a legal minefield for the White House, as congressional inquiries unfold and calls mount for an independent criminal probe, lawyers and scholars say.
Michael Flynn Jim Lo Scalzo / EPA Other officials from the Trump campaign or White House could potentially be swept into the scandal, which has fed suspicions of Trump's relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, his business ties with Russia and reports of Russian hackers' leaking information that damaged Trump's rival, Hillary Clinton.
'The problem isn't what already has happened. It's what will happen now, as the Senate investigations ramp up,' said Stan Brand, a former general counsel to the House of Representatives who has represented high-profile government officials in public corruption cases."
(Via.). Flynn's Resignation Could Thrust White House Into Legal Thicket - NBC News:
Dumb, dumb and dumber. Trump: 'I Was Given The Information' on Incorrect Electoral College Margin - NBC News
"Donald Trump said Thursday that his victory in the 2016 election was "the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan."
It's a claim that Trump has repeated numerous times since November. And by any measure, it is flatly and demonstrably false.
Trump officially received 304 electoral college votes when all the counting was over; he would have notched 306 from his performance on Election Day, but two "faithless" electors did not vote for him when the Electoral College met in December.
In comparison, in 2012, Barack Obama received 332 electoral votes. And that was significantly less than Obama's 2008 showing, when he won 365 electoral votes.
Trump's 304 total does not even mark the highest tally for just a Republican presidential candidate since the Reagan era. Republican George H.W. Bush won 426 electoral votes in 1988.
In fact, since Nixon's election in 1972, only two presidents - George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter - have received fewer electoral votes than Trump in a general election.
Presented with that set of facts during his Thursday press conference, Trump demurred, saying only that he "was given" the data citing his historic victory.
"I don't know, I was given that information. I actually, I've seen that information around," he told NBC News. "But it was a very substantial victory, do you agree with that?"
The president declined to answer NBC's question about why Americans should trust him after he repeated the untrue figure
Trump: 'I Was Given The Information' on Incorrect Electoral College Margin - NBC News: ""
(Via.)
Drip, Drip, Drip - The New York Times - Charles Blow
"Two things bear repeating ad infinitum:
In July, at a televised campaign event, Trump said: ‘Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.’
Then in October, an hour after the release of the ‘Access Hollywood’ tapes of Trump boasting about sexually assaulting women, WikiLeaks began to dump the Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s hacked emails on the internet.
Coincidence? Maybe. But that would be one hell of a coincidence, considering all the other reinforcing ‘coincidences’: Trump’s inexplicable, inexhaustible praise of Russia and Vladimir Putin; Putin’s failure to respond to Obama’s sanctions; an explosive report last week from CNN that read: ‘For the first time, U.S. investigators say they have corroborated some of the communications detailed in a 35-page dossier compiled by a former British intelligence agent.’"
What Did Trump Know, and When Did He Know It? - The New York Times
During the Watergate scandal, until now the most outrageous political scandal in American history, the crucial question was drawled by Senator Howard Baker of Tennessee: “What did the president know, and when did he know it?”
Today the question is the same.
This is not about Mike Flynn. It is about the president who appointed him, who earlier considered Flynn for vice president. The latest revelation of frequent contacts between the Trump team and Russian intelligence should be a wake-up call to Republicans as well as Democrats.
When Vice President Mike Pence was asked by Chris Wallace of Fox News on Jan. 15 if there had been any contacts between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, he answered: “Of course not. Why would there be any contacts?”
Great question, Mr. Vice President.
Look, there’s a great deal we don’t know, but Russian interference in our election is potentially a bigger scandal than Watergate ever was. Watergate didn’t change an election’s result — President Richard Nixon would have won anyway in 1972 — while the 2016 election was close enough that Russian interference might have tipped the balance.
Mike Flynn and Donald Trump at a campaign event in New Hampshire in September. Credit Damon Winter/The New York TimesWe don’t know whether the Russians had domestic help in their effort to steal the U.S. election, but here are a few dots that are begging to be connected:
First, the American intelligence community agrees that the Kremlin interfered during the campaign in an attempt to help Donald Trump. This isn’t a single agency’s conclusion, but reportedly a “strong consensus” among the C.I.A., the F.B.I. and the director of national intelligence.
The Trump Administration is imploding. The level of fear and mistrust is so high that open war has broken out between the intelligence...Paul W. Case Sr. Well stated, but this goes even deeper. Since intelligence agencies were aware of these contacts during the campaign, Comey must have been...stone 1 hour agoI believe Trump did not win because the Russians tried to influence the election.Trump did not win the election.He lost.He won where it. Second, the dossier prepared by a former MI6 Russia expert outlines collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. CNN reports that American intelligence has communications intercepts corroborating elements of the dossier, and the latest revelation of repeated and constant contacts between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign give additional weight to the dossier’s allegations — although it’s also important to note that officials told The Times that they had seen no evidence of such cooperation in election manipulation.
Third, President Trump has been mystifyingly friendly toward Russia and President Vladimir Putin. As Jeffrey H. Smith, a former general counsel to the C.I.A., puts it: “The bigger issue here is why Trump and people around him take such a radically different view of Russia than has been the case for decades. We don’t know the answer to that.”
Fourth, Flynn, before taking office, discussed Obama administration sanctions on Russia with the Russian ambassador. Flynn has now resigned, but he was steeped in the principle of a chain of command; I doubt he made these calls completely on his own. Daniel Benjamin, a former counterterrorism coordinator at the State Department who has known Flynn for years, says it would have been out of character for Flynn to do so. So who told Flynn to make these calls? Steve Bannon? Trump himself?
We’re back to our question: What did the president know, and when did he know it?
The White House hasn’t responded to my inquiries, and Trump lashes out wildly at “the fake news media” without answering questions. He reminds me of Nixon, who in 1974 said Watergate “would have been a blip” if it weren’t for journalists “who hate my guts.” Soon afterward, Nixon resigned.
Trump supporters say that the real scandal here is leaks that make the administration look bad. A bit hypocritical? It’s dizzying to see a president who celebrated the hacking of his rival’s campaign emails suddenly evince alarm about leaks.
Sure, leaks are always a concern, but they pale beside the larger issues of the integrity of our leaders and our elections. Published reports have quoted people in the intelligence community as fearing that information given to the White House will end up in Russian hands, even that the “Kremlin has ears” in the White House Situation Room.
I referred to Trump last year as “the Russian poodle,” and we’ve known for years of Trump’s financial ties to Russia, with his son Donald Jr. saying in 2008, “We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.” It’s all the more important now that Trump release his tax returns so that we can understand any financial leverage Russia has over him. Yet the same Republicans who oversaw eight investigations of Benghazi shrug at far greater concerns involving Trump and Russia.
I’m just appalled at how little people seem to care about the fact that Russians interfered in our presidential election, clearly, unequivocally, on the part of one candidate,” Michael McFaul, a former ambassador to Russia, told me. “What’s more important than that?” To which I add: Only one thing could be more important — if the Russians had help from within the U.S.
As I said, there’s a great deal we don’t know. But we urgently need a bipartisan investigation, ideally an independent panel modeled on the 9/11 Commission. It must address what is now the central question: “What did the president know, and when did he know it?”
What Did Trump Know, and When Did He Know It? - The New York Times: ""
Time for Congress to Investigate Mr. Trump’s Ties to Russia - The New York Times
"In history, this is where Congress steps in. During the Vietnam War, Watergate and the Iran-contra scandal, when a president’s actions or policies crossed the line, Congress investigated and held the White House to account. The time has come for it to do so again.
In the last week alone, Americans have witnessed the firing of President Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and learned with shock and incredulity that members of Mr. Trump’s campaign and inner circle were in repeated contact with Russian intelligence officials.
Coming on top of credible information from America’s intelligence agencies that Russia tried to destabilize and influence the 2016 presidential campaign, these latest revelations are more than sufficient reason for Congress to investigate what Moscow has been up to and whether people at the highest levels of the United States government have aided and abetted the interests of a nation that has tried to thwart American foreign policy since the Cold War.
Given that context, one might expect Mr. Trump to be clamoring for details that would eliminate any suspicion that his administration is in league with an enemy. Instead he has waged an unhinged attack on the intelligence agencies themselves, praising President Vladimir Putin of Russia at every turn and pointing fingers everywhere but at himself, while refusing to take a single step to resolve questions about his administration’s ties to Russia.
Hence the urgent need for high-level congressional intervention. The ideal vehicle would be an investigative committee of senior senators from both parties as well as members of the House. Some Senate Republicans are beginning to step up. Senator Richard Burr, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has already said his committee will investigate the election hacking. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Dianne Feinstein, the panel’s top-ranking Democrat, are asking for a briefing and transcripts of Mr. Flynn’s calls to the Russian ambassador.
Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Pat Roberts favor a broader investigation. John Cornyn, the Senate majority whip, has also raised the possibility of an investigation by Senate committees with jurisdiction over the intelligence community.
The Democrats would obviously be on board — Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, has also called for the Senate Intelligence Committee to lead a bipartisan inquiry. The person who needs to make this happen is Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader. Whatever form the committee takes, as Mr. Schumer said on Wednesday, all members must be granted equal access to ‘intelligence officials, transcripts and documents that they need to answer critical questions, and they must be permitted to make their findings public to the maximum extent possible.’
245 COMMENTS Admittedly, this is hoping for a lot from a Republican leadership whose natural inclination is to protect the president. This week, for instance, congressional Republicans closed off one avenue to forcing the release of Mr. Trump’s tax returns, which he has refused to divulge and which could help prove to Americans that he is not indebted to Russian financial entities. (It bears repeating, in this regard, that Mr. Trump didn’t fire Mr. Flynn this week for chummily discussing American sanctions on Russia with Moscow’s ambassador, or for lying about it. Mr. Trump knew all that for weeks. He fired Mr. Flynn after both of them got caught.)
With or without the administration’s cooperation, Congress’s plain and urgent duty, lest it be judged complicit, is to get to the bottom of this crisis."
(Via.Time for Congress to Investigate Mr. Trump’s Ties to Russia - The New York Times: