thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Embracing Supreme Court Expansion Carries No Political Cost, Study Says

OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images Anti-abortion and abortion rights activists square off outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington .
Under the high court 's new conservative majority , abortion rights are in jeopardy .
The study documented reactions to the idea among 2,400 Democrats , Republicans and independents from the political swing states of Michigan , Pennsylvania , Ohio , Wisconsin and Minnesota .
It was conducted by political scientist Aaron Belkin from San Francisco State University and James Druckman of Northwestern University ’ s Institute for Policy Research .
Druckman , a public opinion expert , designed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Take Back the Court , a progressive judicial reform group that Belkin runs .
The survey asked participants to react to two different Democrat-Republican matchups .
The first was a “ status quo ” group pitting a standard Democratic candidate who wants to expand health care access , repeal President Donald Trump ’ s tax cuts , regulate guns and fight climate change against a Republican candidate who holds inverse positions but also wants to reshape the judiciary .
In a second matchup , survey participants evaluated a “ court expansion ” matchup @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hypothetical Democratic candidate .
In that scenario , the Democrat would propose expanding the court to make it “ more representative of America , bring greater balance to the court , and prevent the domination of the Supreme Court by a single political party , ” according to the study .
The Republican candidate would call the idea “ a threat to the independence of the judiciary and the rights of all Americans by radical liberals trying to change the rules so a few cities in New York and California can impose their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Among the dozens of correlations reported in the study , none indicated any statistically significant relationship between candidate endorsement of court expansion and consequences for the 2020 election .
The only statistically significant finding is that when a Democratic candidate endorses court expansion , GOP voters come to feel 0.5 % warmer toward the Republican Party .
Aside from that , candidate endorsement has no statistically significant impact on actual behavior , including the likelihood of voting or the likelihood of voting for a Democratic or Republican candidate .
In other words , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is no impact on election results .
“ There is no statistically significant effect , in other words , of exposure to a court expansion message on likelihood of voting , vote choice , or willingness to accept a lower personal financial reward so as to withhold economic support from the opposing party , ” Belkin and Druckman concluded in the study .
But Take Back the Court knows that it is in the early stages of mainstreaming an idea that was relegated to the political fringes as recently as three years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Supreme Court expansion is not the kind of radioactive cause that some Democrats are warning against is a victory itself .
“ Judicial reform will be necessary to take our democracy back , and our data show that there is no reason for leaders to shy away from saying what needs to be said , ” Belkin said in a statement to HuffPost .
“ This is the time to address the threats we face explicitly and head on , and not bury our heads in the sand.
” Take Back the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of liberal groups , including Demand Justice , that want Democratic voters to value control of the judiciary as much as Republican voters .
Many conservatives who are otherwise averse to Trump publicly called on their co-ideologues to back him for the sake of gaining control of the Supreme Court and reshaping the federal judiciary .
And indeed , as a result of his presidency , conservatives enjoy a decisive majority on the court and Trump has moved faster than many of his modern predecessors to fill vacancies on the federal bench .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ decadeslong schemes to conquer the courts , which put reproductive rights and a host of other progressive priorities at risk of extinction , must be met with analogous creativity and assertiveness .
Since Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was willing to hold up then-President Barack Obama ’ s nominee for a Supreme Court seat , the thinking is that the time for niceties has passed .
Expanding the court would allow liberals to shape the Supreme Court ’ s direction without having to wait until conservative appointees die on the bench @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s focus on public opinion ― both moving it and leveraging it to sway lawmakers ― stems from his work as an LGBTQ rights pioneer .
As a founder of the Palm Center in San Francisco , Belkin designed a public education campaign aimed at eroding support for the military ’ s “ don ’ t ask , don ’ t tell ” policy barring gay and queer military service members from serving openly .
He recounted the story of that successful repeal fight in the e-book , “ How We Won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ Don ’ t Ask , Don ’ t Tell .
’ ”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Expanding the Supreme Court, an increasingly popular reform among some progressive activists, is not politically costly for Democrats, according to an academic survey commissioned by a group that supports the idea.
The study documented reactions to the idea among 2,400 Democrats, Republicans and independents from the political swing states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin and Minnesota. It was conducted by political scientist Aaron Belkin from San Francisco State University and James Druckman of Northwestern University’s Institute for Policy Research. Druckman, a public opinion expert, designed the study, while the funding came from Take Back the Court, a progressive judicial reform group that Belkin runs.
Advertisement
The survey asked participants to react to two different Democrat-Republican matchups. The first was a “status quo” group pitting a standard Democratic candidate who wants to expand health care access, repeal President Donald Trump’s tax cuts, regulate guns and fight climate change against a Republican candidate who holds inverse positions but also wants to reshape the judiciary.
Anti-abortion and abortion rights activists square off outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington. Under the high court's new conservative majority, abortion rights are in jeopardy. OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images
In a second matchup, survey participants evaluated a “court expansion” matchup between a hypothetical Republican candidate and a hypothetical Democratic candidate. In that scenario, the Democrat would propose expanding the court to make it “more representative of America, bring greater balance to the court, and prevent the domination of the Supreme Court by a single political party,” according to the study. The Republican candidate would call the idea “a threat to the independence of the judiciary and the rights of all Americans by radical liberals trying to change the rules so a few cities in New York and California can impose their will on the rest of us.”
Among the dozens of correlations reported in the study, none indicated any statistically significant relationship between candidate endorsement of court expansion and consequences for the 2020 election. The only statistically significant finding is that when a Democratic candidate endorses court expansion, GOP voters come to feel 0.5% warmer toward the Republican Party.
Advertisement
Aside from that, candidate endorsement has no statistically significant impact on actual behavior, including the likelihood of voting or the likelihood of voting for a Democratic or Republican candidate. In other words, when Democratic candidates endorse court expansion, there is no impact on election results.
“There is no statistically significant effect, in other words, of exposure to a court expansion message on likelihood of voting, vote choice, or willingness to accept a lower personal financial reward so as to withhold economic support from the opposing party,” Belkin and Druckman concluded in the study.
For an ordinary political cause, not being an active drag on a candidate is not exactly a selling point.
But Take Back the Court knows that it is in the early stages of mainstreaming an idea that was relegated to the political fringes as recently as three years ago. Conducting academically sound research showing that Supreme Court expansion is not the kind of radioactive cause that some Democrats are warning against is a victory itself.
“Judicial reform will be necessary to take our democracy back, and our data show that there is no reason for leaders to shy away from saying what needs to be said,” Belkin said in a statement to HuffPost. “This is the time to address the threats we face explicitly and head on, and not bury our heads in the sand.”
Advertisement
Take Back the Court is part of a budding contingent of liberal groups, including Demand Justice, that want Democratic voters to value control of the judiciary as much as Republican voters. Many conservatives who are otherwise averse to Trump publicly called on their co-ideologues to back him for the sake of gaining control of the Supreme Court and reshaping the federal judiciary. And indeed, as a result of his presidency, conservatives enjoy a decisive majority on the court and Trump has moved faster than many of his modern predecessors to fill vacancies on the federal bench.
Take Back the Court maintains that Republicans’ decadeslong schemes to conquer the courts, which put reproductive rights and a host of other progressive priorities at risk of extinction, must be met with analogous creativity and assertiveness. Since Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was willing to hold up then-President Barack Obama’s nominee for a Supreme Court seat, the thinking is that the time for niceties has passed. Expanding the court would allow liberals to shape the Supreme Court’s direction without having to wait until conservative appointees die on the bench decades from now.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Barr Aimed To Block Turkish Bank Indictment After Erdogan Asked Trump For Help: Report

Attorney General William Barr attempted to block U.S. prosecution of a Turkish bank last year after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan asked Donald Trump for help in the matter , according to a new CNN report that supports earlier accounts .
Barr personally attempted to head off prosecution of Halkbank in a suspected multibillion-dollar scheme to evade sanctions against Iran , CNN reported , citing “ a person familiar with the discussions.
” He reportedly tried to steer a settlement that would have allowed the bank to dodge an indictment shortly after Erdogan pressed Trump for help last spring .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however .
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman of the Southern District of New York insisted on criminal prosecution , CNN reported .
Barr faces increasing criticism for appearing to do Trump ’ s bidding to manipulate Justice Department cases to punish the president ’ s enemies or help his allies .
In this situation , Barr ’ s reported efforts seemed aimed at attempting to satisfy the request of an authoritarian foreign leader .
The CNN account appears to ratify a Bloomberg report from last year .
After Erdogan pressed Trump for help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president told the Turkish leader that Barr and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin would handle it , sources told Bloomberg in an article in October .
Mnuchin ’ s office has confirmed to Sen. Ron Wyden ( D-Ore. ) that Treasury officials became involved in the case at Trump ’ s direction , according to a letter Wyden wrote last week to Barr .
Officials also revealed that Trump , senior White House adviser Jared Kushner and Mnuchin met with Turkey ’ s finance minister and Erdogan ’ s son-in-law in the Oval @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not reveal details of the meeting , according to Wyden .
Barr directed Halkbank officials how to work out a deal , Bloomberg reported .
But the bank failed to do so and was ultimately charged in October with fraud , money laundering , and sanctions offenses by Berman ’ s office .
The charges followed Turkey ’ s invasion of Syria and political blowback for Trump .
The indictment was filed a day after Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey for the Syria incursion .
Former national security adviser John Bolton expressed concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favors for the “ autocratic ” leaders of Turkey and China , according to draft of a manuscript for his upcoming book obtained by The New York Times .
Bolton wrote that he complained to Barr about his fears .
Barr referred to the Halkbank case and told Bolton that Trump may have been exaggerating his influence in what was supposed to be an independent investigation by the Justice Department , according to the manuscript .
Wyden ’ s letter to Barr demands answers to a series of questions for his investigation into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Halkbank case .
The attorney general has come under intensifying pressure after the Justice Department last week overturned a sentencing recommendation by its own prosecutors of seven to nine years for Roger Stone , Trump ’ s longtime pal .
Stone was convicted of seven felonies , including lying to investigators and witness tampering .
Barr has since ordered a review of the case against Trump ’ s former national security adviser Michael Flynn , who initially pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about his communication with the Russian ambassador before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ withdrew his guilty plea last month .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Attorney General William Barr attempted to block U.S. prosecution of a Turkish bank last year after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan asked Donald Trump for help in the matter, according to a new CNN report that supports earlier accounts.
Barr personally attempted to head off prosecution of Halkbank in a suspected multibillion-dollar scheme to evade sanctions against Iran, CNN reported, citing “a person familiar with the discussions.” He reportedly tried to steer a settlement that would have allowed the bank to dodge an indictment shortly after Erdogan pressed Trump for help last spring.
Advertisement
Barr ultimately failed to stop an indictment, however. U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman of the Southern District of New York insisted on criminal prosecution, CNN reported.
Barr faces increasing criticism for appearing to do Trump’s bidding to manipulate Justice Department cases to punish the president’s enemies or help his allies. In this situation, Barr’s reported efforts seemed aimed at attempting to satisfy the request of an authoritarian foreign leader.
The CNN account appears to ratify a Bloomberg report from last year. After Erdogan pressed Trump for help with the Halkbank case in April, the president told the Turkish leader that Barr and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin would handle it, sources told Bloomberg in an article in October.
Mnuchin’s office has confirmed to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) that Treasury officials became involved in the case at Trump’s direction, according to a letter Wyden wrote last week to Barr. Officials also revealed that Trump, senior White House adviser Jared Kushner and Mnuchin met with Turkey’s finance minister and Erdogan’s son-in-law in the Oval Office in April, though they did not reveal details of the meeting, according to Wyden.
Advertisement
Barr directed Halkbank officials how to work out a deal, Bloomberg reported. But the bank failed to do so and was ultimately charged in October with fraud, money laundering, and sanctions offenses by Berman’s office.
The charges followed Turkey’s invasion of Syria and political blowback for Trump. The indictment was filed a day after Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey for the Syria incursion.
Former national security adviser John Bolton expressed concerns last year that Trump was doing personal favors for the “autocratic” leaders of Turkey and China, according to draft of a manuscript for his upcoming book obtained by The New York Times.
Bolton wrote that he complained to Barr about his fears. Barr referred to the Halkbank case and told Bolton that Trump may have been exaggerating his influence in what was supposed to be an independent investigation by the Justice Department, according to the manuscript.
A spokeswoman for the Justice Department denied that the conversation occurred.
DOJ statement in response to tonight’s NYT story on John Bolton and Attorney General Barr. pic.twitter.com/WzekTSqY0f — KerriKupecDOJ (@KerriKupecDOJ) January 28, 2020
Advertisement
Wyden’s letter to Barr demands answers to a series of questions for his investigation into Trump for “possible improper interference” in the Halkbank case.
NEW: I've been investigating Trump's interference in the investigation into Turkish-owned Halkbank, and my suspicions were just confirmed. Attorney General Barr — at Trump’s request — was trying to orchestrate a sweetheart deal to please President Erdogan. https://t.co/g1DICgh2Fz — Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) February 15, 2020
Barr’s office could not immediately be reached for comment on the CNN report.
The attorney general has come under intensifying pressure after the Justice Department last week overturned a sentencing recommendation by its own prosecutors of seven to nine years for Roger Stone, Trump’s longtime pal. Stone was convicted of seven felonies, including lying to investigators and witness tampering.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Virginia Assault Weapon Ban Fails As Senate Dems Balk On Gun Control

RICHMOND , Va. ( AP ) — Virginia Gov .
Ralph Northam 's push to ban the sale of assault weapons has failed after members of his own party balked at the proposal .
Senators voted to shelve the bill for the year and ask the state crime commission to study the issue , an outcome that drew cheers from a committee room packed with gun advocates .
Four moderate Democrats joined Republicans in Monday 's committee vote , rejecting legislation that would have prohibited the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms , including popular AR-15 style rifles , and banned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 12 rounds .
The bill was a top priority for Northam , a Democrat who has campaigned heavily for a broad package of gun-control measures .
The legislation also engendered the biggest pushback from gun owners and gun-right advocates , who accused the governor and others of wanting to confiscate commonly owned guns and accessories from law-abiding gun owners .
Northam has said repeatedly he does not want to confiscate guns , but argued that banning new sales of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines would help prevent mass murders .
Virginia is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heated debate over gun control and mass shootings .
Tens of thousands of gun-rights activists from across the country flooded the state Capitol and surrounding area in protest , some donning tactical gear and carrying military-style rifles .
Northam has been able to get much of his gun-control agenda passed this year , but struggled with the proposed assault weapon ban .
Earlier proposals to ban possession of AR-15-style rifles or to require owners to register them with state police have been scrapped .
The governor had hoped a watered-down would win over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ estimated 8 million AR-style guns have been sold since they were introduced to the public in the 1960s .
The weapons are known as easy to use , easy to clean and easy to modify with a variety of scopes , stocks and rails .
Lawmakers in both the House and Senate have already advanced several other gun-control measures and should finalize passage in the coming days .
Those bills include limiting handgun purchases to once a month , universal background checks on gun purchases , allowing localities to ban guns in public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a red flag bill that would allow authorities to temporarily take guns away from anyone deemed to be dangerous to themselves or others .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam's push to ban the sale of assault weapons has failed after members of his own party balked at the proposal.
Senators voted to shelve the bill for the year and ask the state crime commission to study the issue, an outcome that drew cheers from a committee room packed with gun advocates.
Advertisement
Four moderate Democrats joined Republicans in Monday's committee vote, rejecting legislation that would have prohibited the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms, including popular AR-15 style rifles, and banned the possession of magazines that hold more than 12 rounds.
The bill was a top priority for Northam, a Democrat who has campaigned heavily for a broad package of gun-control measures.
The legislation also engendered the biggest pushback from gun owners and gun-right advocates, who accused the governor and others of wanting to confiscate commonly owned guns and accessories from law-abiding gun owners. Northam has said repeatedly he does not want to confiscate guns, but argued that banning new sales of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines would help prevent mass murders.
Virginia is the current epicenter of the country's heated debate over gun control and mass shootings. Tens of thousands of gun-rights activists from across the country flooded the state Capitol and surrounding area in protest, some donning tactical gear and carrying military-style rifles.
Advertisement
Northam has been able to get much of his gun-control agenda passed this year, but struggled with the proposed assault weapon ban. Earlier proposals to ban possession of AR-15-style rifles or to require owners to register them with state police have been scrapped. The governor had hoped a watered-down would win over enough Democratic moderates for passage.
An estimated 8 million AR-style guns have been sold since they were introduced to the public in the 1960s. The weapons are known as easy to use, easy to clean and easy to modify with a variety of scopes, stocks and rails.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Far-Right Group Plotted To Attack Muslims, Politicians: German Prosecutors

ASSOCIATED PRESS An unidentified person is brought to the Federal Supreme Court by police officers in Karlsruhe , Germany , Saturday , Feb 15 , 2020 .
The person are one of among 12 men detained Friday in nationwide raids on suspicion of forming and supporting a “ right-wing terrorist organization.
” A federal judge on Saturday ordered the men held in investigative detention .
( Uli Deck/dpa via AP ) BERLIN ( Reuters ) - German federal prosecutors won a court order to detain 12 men arrested on suspicion of involvement in a far-right plot to overthrow the political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The men were arrested on Friday , four on suspicion of forming a right-wing terrorist organization last September and the rest of offering them financial support .
They were planning to stage attacks on politicians , asylum seekers and Muslims , and a federal court judge ordered them detained pending further investigations on Saturday , prosecutors said .
Popular support for far-right groups is growing in Germany , notably in the country ’ s former Communist east , as part of a polarization at both ends of the political spectrum that is undermining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since World War Two .
The men , aged between 20 and 50 , named their group ‘ Derharte Kern ’ ( The Hard Core ) , the Welt am Sonntag newspaper reported on Sunday , saying they had been arrested in six different states .
The suspects , some with blankets draped over their heads , were escorted by police wearing balaclavas and body armor into the Federal Court in Karlsruhe for Saturday ’ s hearing , ReutersTV footage showed .
Citing investigators , Welt am Sonntag said the men had got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a messaging service owned byFacebook , and met up subsequently .
The group was put under surveillance in late summer 2019 .
In the raids , investigators found stores of materials that could be used to produce home-made bombs , the newspaper wrote .
No further comment was immediately available from federal prosecutors .
German law allows for individuals suspected of being on the verge of committing serious offenses to be detained for up to six months , extendable to 12 months in extreme cases , according to legal experts .

An unidentified person is brought to the Federal Supreme Court by police officers in Karlsruhe, Germany, Saturday, Feb 15, 2020. The person are one of among 12 men detained Friday in nationwide raids on suspicion of forming and supporting a “right-wing terrorist organization.” A federal judge on Saturday ordered the men held in investigative detention. (Uli Deck/dpa via AP) ASSOCIATED PRESS
BERLIN (Reuters) - German federal prosecutors won a court order to detain 12 men arrested on suspicion of involvement in a far-right plot to overthrow the political order by means of targeted attacks.
The men were arrested on Friday, four on suspicion of forming a right-wing terrorist organization last September and the rest of offering them financial support.
Advertisement
They were planning to stage attacks on politicians, asylum seekers and Muslims, and a federal court judge ordered them detained pending further investigations on Saturday, prosecutors said.
Popular support for far-right groups is growing in Germany, notably in the country’s former Communist east, as part of a polarization at both ends of the political spectrum that is undermining the mainstream establishment that been in government since World War Two.
The men, aged between 20 and 50, named their group ‘Derharte Kern’ (The Hard Core), the Welt am Sonntag newspaper reported on Sunday, saying they had been arrested in six different states.
The suspects, some with blankets draped over their heads, were escorted by police wearing balaclavas and body armor into the Federal Court in Karlsruhe for Saturday’s hearing, ReutersTV footage showed.
Advertisement
Citing investigators, Welt am Sonntag said the men had got to know each other via WhatsApp, a messaging service owned byFacebook, and met up subsequently. The group was put under surveillance in late summer 2019.
In the raids, investigators found stores of materials that could be used to produce home-made bombs, the newspaper wrote.
No further comment was immediately available from federal prosecutors.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--House Speaker Pelosi Warns Allies Not To Use Chinese Phone Company With Spying Abilities

BRUSSELS ( AP ) — No NATO ally should succumb to the temptation of letting Chinese tech giant Huawei into their next-generation cellular networks , U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday at Allied headquarters , turning U.S. opposition to Huawei into a bipartisan effort .
Pelosi said the invasion of privacy that would result from having Huawei integrated into Europe ’ s 5G communication networks would be “ like having the state police , the Chinese state police , right in your pocket.
” She insisted such technology was far too sensitive to turn to over to Chinese interests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technology cheaper , thanks to the fact that the company relied on Western know-how to build its systems .
“ While some people say that its cheaper to do Huawei — well yeah — it ’ s a People ’ s Liberation Army initiative using reversed engineering from Western technology , ” Pelosi , the senior Democratic lawmaker , told reporters in Brussels .
“ So , of course it ’ s going to be cheaper to put on the market .
And if it ’ s cheaper , then they get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) bring in their autocracy of lack of privacy.
” U.S. President Donald Trump ’ s administration has also raised national security concerns about Huawei , the world ’ s largest telecommunications equipment manufacturer , and is aggressively lobbying Western allies to bar the company from their wireless , high-speed networks .
Trump administration officials , including Cabinet secretaries , say Huawei can give the Chinese government backdoor access to data , allegations that the company rejects .
The U.S. has been trying to have European nations ban the gear from next-generation cellular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from banning it altogether .
Britain , notably , announced last month that it would allow Huawei to participate in certain non-sensitive areas of its networks .
Pelosi warned allies not to cave in to Chinese pressure to take Huawei .
“ You can not sell the privacy of the people of your country down the river , ” Pelosi said .

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaks to press at the Munich Security Conference. Sven Hoppe via Getty Images
BRUSSELS (AP) — No NATO ally should succumb to the temptation of letting Chinese tech giant Huawei into their next-generation cellular networks, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday at Allied headquarters, turning U.S. opposition to Huawei into a bipartisan effort.
Pelosi said the invasion of privacy that would result from having Huawei integrated into Europe’s 5G communication networks would be “like having the state police, the Chinese state police, right in your pocket.”
Advertisement
She insisted such technology was far too sensitive to turn to over to Chinese interests, even though they can deliver such technology cheaper, thanks to the fact that the company relied on Western know-how to build its systems.
“While some people say that its cheaper to do Huawei — well yeah — it’s a People’s Liberation Army initiative using reversed engineering from Western technology,” Pelosi, the senior Democratic lawmaker, told reporters in Brussels. “So, of course it’s going to be cheaper to put on the market. And if it’s cheaper, then they get the market share and then they (China) bring in their autocracy of lack of privacy.”
U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has also raised national security concerns about Huawei, the world’s largest telecommunications equipment manufacturer, and is aggressively lobbying Western allies to bar the company from their wireless, high-speed networks.
Trump administration officials, including Cabinet secretaries, say Huawei can give the Chinese government backdoor access to data, allegations that the company rejects.
Advertisement
The U.S. has been trying to have European nations ban the gear from next-generation cellular networks, but countries are shying away from banning it altogether. Britain, notably, announced last month that it would allow Huawei to participate in certain non-sensitive areas of its networks.
Pelosi warned allies not to cave in to Chinese pressure to take Huawei.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Pete Buttigieg: If Donald Trump Won't Leave White House, He Can 'Do Chores'

In part due to President Donald Trump ’ s own handling of the subject .
many Americans have expressed fears that if soundly loses the 2020 election , he won ’ t leave the office willingly .
If that happens , Pete Buttigieg has a plan : He ’ ll put Trump to work ― doing chores around the White House .
During a town hall in Reno , Nevada , in advance of the state ’ s Saturday caucuses , the Democratic presidential candidate was asked what he would do if he beat Trump in November and the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he refused to step down .
He then explained that Americans who didn ’ t want Trump to have a second term had a duty to vote in November .
“ I think we want to set a goal of winning big enough that this election is way beyond cheating distance , and that Trumpism goes into the history books too , ” he said .
“ It ’ s got to be a win so big that Senate Republicans are reunited with their consciences , and only a political shockwave can do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has more than once broached the prospect of blowing off the two-term limit for presidents that was officially added to the Constitution through the 22nd amendment in 1951 .
In a Twitter post last June , he rhetorically wondered whether “ the people would demand that I stay longer ?
” ... ..news is that at the end of 6 years , after America has been made GREAT again and I leave the beautiful White House ( do you think the people would demand that I stay longer ?
KEEP AMERICA GREAT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will quickly go out of business & be forever gone !
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) June 16 , 2019 In the wake of China ’ Xi Jinping having been given the opportunity to serve as “ president for life , ” Trump ’ s suggested that such a move isn ’ t a bad idea , according to The Week .
The president ’ s banter on the issue has become no joking matter for other politicians .
Last May , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D_calif . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House willingly in 2020 , regardless of the election ’ s results .
In June , Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov .
William Weld told HBO talk show host Bill Maher he doubted Trump would willingly cede the Oval Office if he loses in November ’ s vote .
“ He ’ ll have a run at saying , ‘ It was a rigged game so I ’ m not leaving , ’ ” Weld said .
He added that didn ’ t think “ the military and indeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the investigative agencies — would stand for that in this country.
” Maher himself held forth on the concern late last month .
“ So my question to all Democratic candidates is , what ’ s the plan ?
” he said .
“ If you win and the next day he claims he ’ s avoiding the election because of irregularities he ’ s hearing about , what do you do ?
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In part due to President Donald Trump’s own handling of the subject, many Americans have expressed fears that if he soundly loses the 2020 election, he won’t leave the office willingly.
If that happens, Pete Buttigieg has a plan: He’ll put Trump to work ― doing chores around the White House.
Advertisement
During a town hall in Reno, Nevada, in advance of the state’s Saturday caucuses, the Democratic presidential candidate was asked what he would do if he beat Trump in November and the president insisted the results were a hoax and he refused to step down.
Buttigieg’s initial response: “I guess if he’s willing to do chores, I guess we could work something out.”
He then explained that Americans who didn’t want Trump to have a second term had a duty to vote in November.
“I think we want to set a goal of winning big enough that this election is way beyond cheating distance, and that Trumpism goes into the history books too,” he said. “It’s got to be a win so big that Senate Republicans are reunited with their consciences, and only a political shockwave can do that.”
Advertisement
You can see the exchange here:
Trump, seemingly in jest, has more than once broached the prospect of blowing off the two-term limit for presidents that was officially added to the Constitution through the 22nd amendment in 1951. In a Twitter post last June, he rhetorically wondered whether “the people would demand that I stay longer?”
.....news is that at the end of 6 years, after America has been made GREAT again and I leave the beautiful White House (do you think the people would demand that I stay longer? KEEP AMERICA GREAT), both of these horrible papers will quickly go out of business & be forever gone! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 16, 2019
In the wake of China’s Xi Jinping having been given the opportunity to serve as “president for life,” Trump’s suggested that such a move isn’t a bad idea, according to The Week.
The president’s banter on the issue has become no joking matter for other politicians.
Last May, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) admitted she worried that Trump would not leave the White House willingly in 2020, regardless of the election’s results.
Advertisement
In June, Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld told HBO talk show host Bill Maher he doubted Trump would willingly cede the Oval Office if he loses in November.
“He’ll have a run at saying, ‘It was a rigged game so I’m not leaving,’” Weld said. He added that didn’t think “the military and indeed even the Justice Department — the rank-and-file, the investigative agencies — would stand for that in this country.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--U.S. Judges Call Emergency Meeting Over Fears About William Barr And Trump: Report

An association of federal judges is holding an emergency meeting Tuesday to address concerns about the interventions in politically sensitive cases by Attorney General William Barr and President Donald Trump , USA Today reported .
The Federal Judges Association , which has about 1,100 members , called for the meeting last week after Trump attacked federal prosecutors ’ sentencing recommendation for his longtime pal and convicted felon Roger Stone and then soon after the Justice Department pulled back the recommendation .
Trump also criticized the judge who is presiding over Stone ’ s case .
“ There are plenty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe , the president of the association , told the newspaper .
“ We ’ ll talk all of this through.
” The issues are so serious that the judges “ could not wait ” for the association ’ s April conference to address them , according to Rufe , a judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania who was appointed by George W. Bush in 2002 .
The meeting will be arranged via a conference call involving 15 to 20 officers and members of the association ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Today .
The judge said she doesn ’ t yet know if the association will share the results of the meeting .
More than 2,000 former Justice Department officials and federal prosecutors called on Barr to resign in an open letter Sunday .
The letter condemned Barr ’ s treatment of the Stone case as “ openly and repeatedly ” flouting the “ fundamental principle ” of equal justice .
The attorney general has come under intensifying pressure after the Justice Department overturned its own prosecutors ’ sentencing recommendation of seven to nine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of seven felonies , including lying to investigators and witness tampering .
Barr has also ordered a review of the case against Trump ’ s former national security adviser Michael Flynn , who initially pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about his communication with the Russian ambassador before Trump was sworn into office .
Flynn withdrew his guilty plea last month .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
An association of federal judges is holding an emergency meeting Tuesday to address concerns about the interventions in politically sensitive cases by Attorney General William Barr and President Donald Trump, USA Today reported.
The Federal Judges Association, which has about 1,100 members, called for the meeting last week after Trump attacked federal prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation for his longtime pal and convicted felon Roger Stone and then soon after the Justice Department pulled back the recommendation.
Advertisement
Trump also criticized the judge who is presiding over Stone’s case.
“There are plenty of issues that we are concerned about,” U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, the president of the association, told the newspaper. “We’ll talk all of this through.”
The issues are so serious that the judges “could not wait” for the association’s April conference to address them, according to Rufe, a judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania who was appointed by George W. Bush in 2002.
The meeting will be arranged via a conference call involving 15 to 20 officers and members of the association’s executive committee, Rufe told USA Today. The judge said she doesn’t yet know if the association will share the results of the meeting.
More than 2,000 former Justice Department officials and federal prosecutors called on Barr to resign in an open letter Sunday. The letter condemned Barr’s treatment of the Stone case as “openly and repeatedly” flouting the “fundamental principle” of equal justice.
Advertisement
The attorney general has come under intensifying pressure after the Justice Department overturned its own prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation of seven to nine years for Stone. He was convicted of seven felonies, including lying to investigators and witness tampering.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Former Deputy Attorney General Shares Dire Warning If William Barr Does Not Resign

A former deputy attorney general in George H.W .
Bush ’ s administration has warned that the integrity of the Justice Department has been compromised by the current attorney general , William Barr , paving the way for “ virtually autocratic ” leadership by President Donald Trump .
In an op-ed for The Atlantic published Monday , Donald Ayer , who has known Barr for more than four decades and once worked with him at the Department of Justice , warned of a grim future if his former colleague is not removed from office .
Reflecting on Barr ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he has “ appeared to function much more as the president ’ s personal advocate than as an attorney general serving the people and government of the United States.
” Any optimism that Barr would stand strong against attempts to inject politics into the department ’ s work was misplaced , Ayer wrote , highlighting a series of “ disturbing ” events beginning with his “ public whitewashing of Robert Mueller ’ s report , which included powerful evidence of repeated obstruction of justice by the president , ” and ending with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr ’ s reported intervention in the criminal prosecution of Trump ’ s friend Roger Stone .
“ For whatever twisted reasons , he believes that the president should be above the law , and he has as his foil in pursuit of that goal a president who , uniquely in our history , actually aspires to that status.
” The fundamental reason that Barr is unfit for office , according to Ayer , is that he does not believe in the central tenet of America ’ s democracy : that “ no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is a banana republic where all are subject to the whims of a dictatorial president and his henchmen .
To prevent that , we need a public uprising demanding that Bill Barr resign immediately , or failing that , be impeached.
” Ayer is just one of more than 2,000 former prosecutors and DOJ officials to call for Barr ’ s resignation in the wake of the extraordinary events of the past week .
Last Tuesday , four career prosecutors withdrew from the Stone case after top Justice Department officials overruled their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr had intervened on his behalf , the president openly applauded Barr for “ taking charge ” of the case on Twitter .
Later in an interview , Barr said that constant tweets and commentary were complicating his job .
Barr ’ s pushback was faulted widely as an attempt to cover up what critics suggested was a coordinated attempt between him and Trump to defuse the firestorm over the preferential treatment given Trump ’ s longtime ally .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A former deputy attorney general in George H.W. Bush’s administration has warned that the integrity of the Justice Department has been compromised by the current attorney general, William Barr, paving the way for “virtually autocratic” leadership by President Donald Trump.
In an op-ed for The Atlantic published Monday, Donald Ayer, who has known Barr for more than four decades and once worked with him at the Department of Justice, warned of a grim future if his former colleague is not removed from office.
Advertisement
Reflecting on Barr’s first year of service, Ayer concluded that he has “appeared to function much more as the president’s personal advocate than as an attorney general serving the people and government of the United States.”
Any optimism that Barr would stand strong against attempts to inject politics into the department’s work was misplaced, Ayer wrote, highlighting a series of “disturbing” events beginning with his “public whitewashing of Robert Mueller’s report, which included powerful evidence of repeated obstruction of justice by the president,” and ending with the “worst of all”: Barr’s reported intervention in the criminal prosecution of Trump’s friend Roger Stone.
“For whatever twisted reasons, he believes that the president should be above the law, and he has as his foil in pursuit of that goal a president who, uniquely in our history, actually aspires to that status.”
The fundamental reason that Barr is unfit for office, according to Ayer, is that he does not believe in the central tenet of America’s democracy: that “no person is above the law.”
Advertisement
“Bill Barr’s America is not a place that anyone, including Trump voters, should want to go,” Ayer concluded.
“It is a banana republic where all are subject to the whims of a dictatorial president and his henchmen. To prevent that, we need a public uprising demanding that Bill Barr resign immediately, or failing that, be impeached.”
Ayer is just one of more than 2,000 former prosecutors and DOJ officials to call for Barr’s resignation in the wake of the extraordinary events of the past week. Last Tuesday, four career prosecutors withdrew from the Stone case after top Justice Department officials overruled their sentencing recommendation. Seemingly confirming concerns that Barr had intervened on his behalf, the president openly applauded Barr for “taking charge” of the case on Twitter. Later in an interview, Barr said that constant tweets and commentary were complicating his job.
Barr’s pushback was faulted widely as an attempt to cover up what critics suggested was a coordinated attempt between him and Trump to defuse the firestorm over the preferential treatment given Trump’s longtime ally.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Trump Tweets 'Happy President's Day' And Gets Dragged By Twitter Users

On Monday morning , Donald Trump tweeted “ Happy President ’ s Day , ” and ― surprise !
― a lot of Twitter users elected to turn his punctuation into fodder for jokes .
Please take note of the apostrophe before the “ s ” in Trump ’ s tweet below , which implies that the day belongs to just one president .
Many Twitter users assumed Trump was celebrating himself , given his brand of unbridled egotism .
The apostrophe misplacement really does say it all .
https : //t.co/dSN2YCqgO9 — Brian Tyler Cohen ( @ briantylercohen ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has never set in stone the correct spelling for the holiday , so it ’ s possible Trump just made a typo — or was thinking of George Washington , whose birthday is observed on the third Monday of February — but some found it a little hard to give him the benefit of the doubt .
Apostrophes are stubborn .
President 's - singular possessive Presidents ' - plural possessive .
There 's no benefit of the doubt of ignorance of rule of possessive nouns .
After-all , he 's the man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he 's wishing George Washington a Happy Birthday Day .
https : //t.co/V8ZGqrLMWh — Darlene McDonald ( @ VoteDarlene ) February 17 , 2020 Others took issue with Trump ’ s use of the word “ happy.
” Some people had quibbles about which presidents get celebrated on the day .
I think today is only for presidents who have n't been impeached ... https : //t.co/sP8LaWwaft — Rep. Mark Pocan ( @ repmarkpocan ) February 17 , 2020 But one person hoped the president ’ s holiday tweet was a sign of @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
On Monday morning, Donald Trump tweeted “Happy President’s Day,” and ― surprise! ― a lot of Twitter users elected to turn his punctuation into fodder for jokes.
Please take note of the apostrophe before the “s” in Trump’s tweet below, which implies that the day belongs to just one president.
Advertisement
HAPPY PRESIDENT’S DAY! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2020
Many Twitter users assumed Trump was celebrating himself, given his brand of unbridled egotism.
The apostrophe misplacement really does say it all. https://t.co/dSN2YCqgO9 — Brian Tyler Cohen (@briantylercohen) February 17, 2020
The White House has never set in stone the correct spelling for the holiday, so it’s possible Trump just made a typo — or was thinking of George Washington, whose birthday is observed on the third Monday of February — but some found it a little hard to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Advertisement
Apostrophes are stubborn.
President's - singular possessive
Presidents' - plural possessive.
There's no benefit of the doubt of ignorance of rule of possessive nouns. After-all, he's the man who wants to be King.
Perhaps he's wishing George Washington a Happy Birthday Day. https://t.co/V8ZGqrLMWh — Darlene McDonald (@VoteDarlene) February 17, 2020
Others took issue with Trump’s use of the word “happy.”
It's a day for HAPPY presidents, not miserable, angry, deranged, crooked ones. https://t.co/OpPmLitIf9 — Greg Olear (@gregolear) February 17, 2020
Some people had quibbles about which presidents get celebrated on the day.
I think today is only for presidents who haven't been impeached... https://t.co/sP8LaWwaft — Rep. Mark Pocan (@repmarkpocan) February 17, 2020
But one person hoped the president’s holiday tweet was a sign of good things to come:
You're resigning?!!? Fantastic, a happy president's day indeed! — sdm1177 (@sdm1177) February 17, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Bolton Says He’s Worried Trump White House Could Suppress His Book

John Bolton , President Donald Trump ’ s former national security adviser , alluded Monday that he was worried the administration could try to bury details about his time in the White House as it reviews the manuscript for his highly anticipated memoir .
“ I hope it ’ s not suppressed , ” Bolton reportedly said during a 90-minute appearance at Duke University .
“ This is an effort to write history , and I did it the best I can .
We ’ ll have to see what comes out of the censorship.
” The remarks were Bolton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclusion of Congress ’ s impeachment inquiry into Trump ’ s pressure campaign on Ukraine to investigate a political rival .
The president was impeached in the House on two charges : abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
The Senate acquitted him last month , largely along party lines .
Bolton has frustrated those who hoped he would share details about his work for Trump as many current and former officials testified he was a key witness to the president ’ s effort to compel Ukraine to open an investigation into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son Hunter .
Bolton had offered to testify should the Senate subpoena him , but Democrats weren ’ t able to gain enough votes to do so , and he ’ s made no public statements on the matter .
He again declined to speak about the Ukraine episode on Monday , merely saying that readers would “ love Chapter 14 ” of his book , which is undergoing a prepublication national security review .
The administration has already issued a terse warning about the contents of the manuscript , telling Bolton it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information , including details marked “ top secret ” ( Bolton has maintained that there are no classified details in the book ) .
The book is scheduled to be published March 17 , although NBC notes his aides are unsure if it will make it through the review before that date .
The New York Times noted Monday that Trump has continued to slam Bolton in private , saying efforts to chronicle his time in the administration amount to a betrayal .
“ I didn ’ t think I was obligated to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said at Duke on Monday .
“ When my first book came out I didn ’ t .
But we ’ re in the process now … and for now I ’ m going to let it go.
” Some details from the book have already leaked , including several allegations that Bolton was worried Trump did too many favors for the authoritarian leaders of China and Turkey .
But Bolton hinted Monday that there were many more revelations to be made , calling details about Trump ’ s call with Ukraine merely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Bolton also took aim at Trump ’ s proclivity to use Twitter to share details about the inner workings of his administration and to announce major policy decisions .
“ I say things in the manuscript about what he said to me , ” Bolton said on Monday .
“ I hope they become public someday .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, suggested Monday that he was worried the administration could try to bury details about his time in the White House as it reviews the manuscript for his highly anticipated memoir.
“I hope it’s not suppressed,” Bolton reportedly said during a 90-minute appearance at Duke University. “This is an effort to write history, and I did it the best I can. We’ll have to see what comes out of the censorship.”
Advertisement
The remarks were Bolton’s first public statements since the conclusion of Congress’s impeachment inquiry into Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine to investigate a political rival. The president was impeached in the House on two charges: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The Senate acquitted him last month, largely along party lines.
Bolton has frustrated those who hoped he would share details about his work for Trump as many current and former officials testified he was a key witness to the president’s effort to compel Ukraine to open an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter. Bolton had offered to testify should the Senate subpoena him, but Democrats weren’t able to gain enough votes to do so, and he’s made no public statements on the matter.
The auditorium applauds when Duke professor Peter Feaver asks Bolton why he was willing to comply with Senate subpoena but not House subpoena. — Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) February 17, 2020
He again declined to speak about the Ukraine episode on Monday, merely saying that readers would “love Chapter 14” of his book, which is undergoing a prepublication national security review. The administration has already issued a terse warning about the contents of the manuscript, telling Bolton it contains “significant amounts” of classified information, including details marked “top secret” (Bolton has maintained that there are no classified details in the book).
Advertisement
The book is scheduled to be published March 17, although NBC notes his aides are unsure if it will make it through the review before that date. The New York Times noted Monday that Trump has continued to slam Bolton in private, saying efforts to chronicle his time in the administration amount to a betrayal.
“I didn’t think I was obligated to go through prepublication review,” Bolton said at Duke on Monday. “When my first book came out I didn’t. But we’re in the process now … and for now I’m going to let it go.”
Some details from the book have already leaked, including several allegations that Bolton was worried Trump did too many favors for the authoritarian leaders of China and Turkey. But Bolton hinted Monday that there were many more revelations to be made, calling details about Trump’s call with Ukraine merely “sprinkles on the ice cream sundae.”
Bolton also took aim at Trump’s proclivity to use Twitter to share details about the inner workings of his administration and to announce major policy decisions.
“I say things in the manuscript about what he said to me,” Bolton said on Monday. “I hope they become public someday.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Christian Lawmakers Group Blames Satan After Twitter Poll Goes Badly Awry

Never ask a question when you might not like the answer .
A group ostensibly representing Christian lawmakers launched a poll on Twitter over the weekend asking if America would be better off with more Christians in elected office .
Do you believe America would be better off if more Christians served in elected office ?
# Retweet # Poll # Election2020 # America # SuperTuesday # Vote — National Association of Christian Lawmakers ( @ ChristLawmakers ) February 16 , 2020 After more than 16,000 replies , the answer was an overwhelming “ no , ” which received 95.8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the group accused “ atheists and Satanists ” of “ religious persecution ” for voting in the poll .
Congress is overwhelmingly Christian , far out of proportion with the people they represent .
According to a Pew survey last year , the Senate and House are nearly 90 percent Christian versus 65 percent of America as a whole .
One in four Americans now considers themselves atheist , agnostic or “ nothing in particular , ” a position publicly held by just one member of the current Congress , Sen. Kyrsten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her religion as “ none.
” Rep. Jared Huffman ( D-Calif. ) describes himself as a humanist while a handful of others haven ’ t acknowledged a faith or lack thereof .
The National Association of Christian Lawmakers was started last year by Arkansas State Sen. Jason Rapert ( R ) , who warned about the rise of witches in a recruitment email .
It ’ s not clear how many members the group has , but its board of advisors includes a number of current and former elected officials , including former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to raise $ 500,000 via GoFundMe stalled at less than $ 20,000 , more than half of which came from a single anonymous donor .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A group ostensibly representing Christian lawmakers launched a poll on Twitter over the weekend asking if America would be better off with more Christians in elected office.
It didn’t go well:
Advertisement
After more than 16,000 replies, the answer was an overwhelming “no,” which received 95.8% of the vote. In response, the group accused “atheists and Satanists” of “religious persecution” for voting in the poll.
Congress is overwhelmingly Christian, far out of proportion with the people they represent. According to a Pew survey last year, the Senate and House are nearly 90% Christian, compared with 65% of America as a whole.
One in four Americans now considers themselves atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular,” a position publicly held by just one member of the current Congress, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), who lists her religion as “none.” Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) describes himself as a humanist, while a handful of others haven’t acknowledged a faith or lack thereof.
The National Association of Christian Lawmakers was started last year by Arkansas State Sen. Jason Rapert (R), who warned about the rise of witches in a recruitment email. It’s not clear how many members the group has, but its board of advisers includes a number of current and former elected officials, including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Reagan’s Daughter Tears Into Trump's 'Cruelty And Wanton Disregard' For Constitution

Patti Davis , the daughter of former President Ronald Reagan , warned in a scathing new opinion column that America risks “ forgetting what the presidency is supposed to be ” — because of Donald Trump .
“ We are so bombarded with the crudeness of Donald Trump , his cruelty and wanton disregard for the tenets of our Constitution , that the image of a president who has a moral compass , reveres our democracy and follows its laws is fading from our collective psyche , ” Davis wrote in a column for The Daily Beast published Monday .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ critic of Trump , recalled her father once explaining to her why Jewish people sent to Nazi concentration camps didn ’ t turn on and trample the soldiers ( who they outnumbered ) because “ they were too afraid ” and “ when people are frightened , he said , anything can be done to them.
” “ Almost on a daily basis now , we hear about how frightened people are of Donald Trump — Republican Senators , people working in the White House in various capacities , apparently many in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ They fear his wrath and his insatiable appetite for revenge .
Those of us who are horrified at the dismantling of our democracy fear him because he may very well be destroying more than we can ever rebuild .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Patti Davis, the daughter of former President Ronald Reagan, warned in a scathing new opinion column that America risks “forgetting what the presidency is supposed to be” — because of Donald Trump.
“We are so bombarded with the crudeness of Donald Trump, his cruelty and wanton disregard for the tenets of our Constitution, that the image of a president who has a moral compass, reveres our democracy and follows its laws is fading from our collective psyche,” Davis wrote in a column for The Daily Beast published Monday.
Advertisement
Davis, who has become a vocal critic of Trump, recalled her father once explaining to her why Jewish people sent to Nazi concentration camps didn’t turn on and trample the soldiers (who they outnumbered) because “they were too afraid” and “when people are frightened, he said, anything can be done to them.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Lou Dobbs Brews Up Bizarre New Theory About Justice Department's Independence

Lou Dobbs mocked thousands of former Justice Department officials for signing a letter calling for Attorney General William Barr ’ s resignation over the botched sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone , claiming that the idea the department should be independent from the president is “ idiotic.
” On Monday ’ s “ Lou Dobbs Tonight , ” the Fox Business host built upon an argument he pushed last week that the idea of Department of Justice independence from the White House is “ crap.
” Dobbs expanded Monday , reasoning that Trump should have influence on the department because one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ How can anyone say the Justice Department is independent of the administration when it contains , for example , a national security division ?
” he posited .
“ Just who the hell would they report to ?
Nobody could say national security is anything less than what is in the clear purview of the president of the United States , the commander in chief .
His authorities , his responsibilities include oversight of national security , including Justice and its 110,000 employees.
” “ Where do they get this idiotic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that the Justice Department is independent of the executive and independent of the president ?
” Dobbs asked his guest , Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani .
The letter ’ s signatories , many of whom have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations , strongly condemned Trump ’ s and Barr ’ s interference in the administration of justice .
The letter underscored the importance of law enforcement ’ s independence from politics , saying , “ Governments that use the enormous power of law enforcement to punish their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitutional republics ; they are autocracies.
” Since the Watergate scandal of the 1970s , every presidency has put regulations in place to preserve the integrity of Justice Department investigations by ensuring they ’ re prevented from political influence by the White House .
Last week , four career prosecutors withdrew from the Roger Stone case after top Justice Department officials overruled their sentencing recommendation that Stone should get seven to nine years in prison for witness tampering and lying to Congress .
Trump later thanked Barr for taking charge of the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the attorney general had intervened at his behest .
Trump had publicly blasted the initial recommended sentence against his friend as unfair .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Lou Dobbs mocked thousands of former Justice Department officials for signing a letter calling for Attorney General William Barr’s resignation over the botched sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone, claiming that the idea the department should be independent from the president is “idiotic.”
On Monday’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” the Fox Business host built upon an argument he pushed last week that the idea of Department of Justice independence from the White House is “crap.” Dobbs expanded Monday, reasoning that Trump should have influence on the department because one of its many divisions oversees national security.
Advertisement
“How can anyone say the Justice Department is independent of the administration when it contains, for example, a national security division?” he posited.
“Just who the hell would they report to? Nobody could say national security is anything less than what is in the clear purview of the president of the United States, the commander in chief. His authorities, his responsibilities include oversight of national security, including Justice and its 110,000 employees.”
Lou Dobbs argues the Department of Justice is not independent because there's a national security division in it pic.twitter.com/MYwHcxEQHl — Jason Campbell (@JasonSCampbell) February 18, 2020
Dobbs also blasted the 2,000-plus former Justice Department officials calling for Barr’s resignation in a letter published Sunday.
Advertisement
“Where do they get this idiotic idea that the Constitution should be ignored and that the Justice Department is independent of the executive and independent of the president?” Dobbs asked his guest, Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.
The letter’s signatories, many of whom have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations, strongly condemned Trump’s and Barr’s interference in the administration of justice.
The letter underscored the importance of law enforcement’s independence from politics, saying, “Governments that use the enormous power of law enforcement to punish their enemies and reward their allies are not constitutional republics; they are autocracies.”
Since the Watergate scandal of the 1970s, every presidency has put regulations in place to preserve the integrity of Justice Department investigations by ensuring they’re prevented from political influence by the White House.
Last week, four career prosecutors withdrew from the Roger Stone case after top Justice Department officials overruled their sentencing recommendation that Stone should get seven to nine years in prison for witness tampering and lying to Congress. Trump later thanked Barr for taking charge of the case, which appeared to confirm concerns that the attorney general had intervened at his behest. Trump had publicly blasted the initial recommended sentence against his friend as unfair.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Bernie Sanders Makes His Pitch To California's 5.4 Million Independent Voters

Speaking to a crowd of 10,396 people , according to a count from his campaign , Sanders gave his usual stump speech focusing on the key pillars of his presidential bid : “ Medicare for All , ” raising the minimum wage , building a sustainable economy .
But toward the end of his remarks , Sanders made a personal appeal to the San Francisco Bay Area audience ahead of the state ’ s March 3 primary .
“ This is the most consequential election in the modern history of our country , ” Sanders said .
“ I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ largest state in this country .
You have the most delegates to the Democratic National Convention .
The candidate who wins here in California stands a pretty good chance to win the nomination.
” He urged unaffiliated voters , also known as No Party Preference ( NPP ) voters , to request a Democratic ballot “ so that we can win here in California.
” ( The California Democratic Party allows NPPs to request a Democratic ballot when voting by mail or in person , or they can re-register as a Democrat .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ here poses a unique challenge for Sanders , who himself is an independent and has long appealed to voters unsatisfied with the Democratic establishment .
Sanders ’ base also skews young and nonwhite — groups that are well-represented among California ’ s independent voters .
The Sanders campaign has made a massive effort this cycle to reach these voters .
His team opened a hotline where voters can call with questions , and has educated its canvassers and phone bankers on how to speak to voters in four different languages about getting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the ballot issue during campaign events in California , as he did during Monday ’ s rally .
As of last October , more than 5.4 million of California 's 20 million registered voters had selected no party preference — more than the 4.8 million in the state who have registered as Republicans .
With California voters heading to the polls three months earlier than they did in 2016 , the Golden State and its 494 delegates could have a significant impact in the nominating contest this year .
In 2016 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote in the Democratic presidential primary .
By the time voters cast their ballots on June 7 of that year , Hillary Clinton was already projected to have clinched enough delegates to secure the nomination , rendering California ’ s votes essentially ceremonial .
Clinton won the primary by six points , but some Sanders supporters speculated that those projections suppressed voter turnout .
Anger over the California primary simmered throughout the summer , reaching a boiling point at the 2016 Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia .
As party leaders urged Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California delegates voiced their dismay over how the nomination process had progressed .
Even Sanders ’ own supporters booed him at a delegate breakfast where he called for party unity in the face of a potential Trump presidency .
“ It always felt like it was somewhat less relevant before , so it ’ s nice to see California vote on Super Tuesday , ” said Sean Carson , a Sanders supporter from Marin County .
“ I think it ’ s kind of appropriate — we start off with Iowa , New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but they ’ re very small places .
California is kind of a cultural melting pot , it ’ s a very diverse state.
” One potential wild card is former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg , who entered the Democratic race late and has since spent hundreds of millions of dollars on campaign ads — including $ 124 million on Super Tuesday states like California .
Bloomberg , a former Republican , has gained ground in recent California polls and picked up endorsements from prominent California Democrats such as San Francisco @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa .
“ California this time around will be a case study on whether a billionaire can buy the election or whether a grassroots campaign that has really centered on talking to voters , knocking on doors that have never been knocked on before , and meeting people where they are in the language that they speak , can win , ” said Bahr .
“ I think we will win .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
RICHMOND, Calif. ― Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) returned to California on Monday with a clear message for the state’s millions of unaffiliated voters: Make sure you get a Democratic ballot.
Speaking to a crowd of 10,396 people, according to a count from his campaign, Sanders gave his usual stump speech focusing on the key pillars of his presidential bid: “Medicare for All,” raising the minimum wage, building a sustainable economy. But toward the end of his remarks, Sanders made a personal appeal to the San Francisco Bay Area audience ahead of the state’s March 3 primary.
Advertisement
“This is the most consequential election in the modern history of our country,” Sanders said. “I think you all know, you are the largest state in this country. You have the most delegates to the Democratic National Convention. The candidate who wins here in California stands a pretty good chance to win the nomination.”
He urged unaffiliated voters, also known as No Party Preference (NPP) voters, to request a Democratic ballot “so that we can win here in California.” (The California Democratic Party allows NPPs to request a Democratic ballot when voting by mail or in person, or they can re-register as a Democrat.)
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders speaks during a campaign event on Feb. 17, 2020, in Richmond, California, ahead of the state's Democratic presidential primary on March 3rd. Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
As of October 2019, more than 5.4 million of the state’s 20 million registered voters had selected no party preference. That’s more than the 4.8 million Californians who have registered as Republicans.
Advertisement
The large number of unaffiliated voters here poses a unique challenge for Sanders, who himself is an independent and has long appealed to voters unsatisfied with the Democratic establishment. Sanders’ base also skews young and nonwhite — groups that are well-represented among California’s independent voters.
The Sanders campaign has made a massive effort this cycle to reach these voters. His team opened a hotline where voters can call with questions, and has educated its canvassers and phone bankers on how to speak to voters in four different languages about getting the right ballot. Sanders himself has spoken about the ballot issue during campaign events in California, as he did during Monday’s rally.
The campaign has also promoted early voting among its supporters. At Monday’s rally, volunteers were on hand to collect mail-in ballots.
“We see this as an unprecedented opportunity to expand the Democratic electorate,” said Sanders’ California communications director Anna Bahr.
As of last October, more than 5.4 million of California's 20 million registered voters had selected no party preference — more than the 4.8 million in the state who have registered as Republicans. Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
Advertisement
With California voters heading to the polls three months earlier than they did in 2016, the Golden State and its 494 delegates could have a significant impact in the nominating contest this year.
In 2016, California was one of the last states to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. By the time voters cast their ballots on June 7 of that year, Hillary Clinton was already projected to have clinched enough delegates to secure the nomination, rendering California’s votes essentially ceremonial. Clinton won the primary by six points, but some Sanders supporters speculated that those projections suppressed voter turnout.
Anger over the California primary simmered throughout the summer, reaching a boiling point at the 2016 Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. As party leaders urged Sanders supporters to rally around Clinton, many California delegates voiced their dismay over how the nomination process had progressed. Even Sanders’ own supporters booed him at a delegate breakfast where he called for party unity in the face of a potential Trump presidency.
At Monday’s rally, Sanders supporters seemed optimistic that the earlier primary date will help Californians have a voice in the nominating process.
“It always felt like it was somewhat less relevant before, so it’s nice to see California vote on Super Tuesday,” said Sean Carson, a Sanders supporter from Marin County. “I think it’s kind of appropriate — we start off with Iowa, New Hampshire, and they have importance, but they’re very small places. California is kind of a cultural melting pot, it’s a very diverse state.”
Advertisement
“I think it could definitely help other voters and other states move in a certain direction,” said Lupe Pulido, a Sanders supporter from Richmond. “I do feel that California has a big wave.”
“It always felt like it was somewhat less relevant before, so it’s nice to see California vote on Super Tuesday.” - Sean Carson, Sanders supporter
Most recent polls show Sanders in the lead here this time around. A clear-cut victory for the senator in California would signal broad support from one of the nation’s most diverse voting populations.
One potential wild card is former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who entered the Democratic race late and has since spent hundreds of millions of dollars on campaign ads — including $124 million on Super Tuesday states like California. Bloomberg, a former Republican, has gained ground in recent California polls and picked up endorsements from prominent California Democrats such as San Francisco Mayor London Breed and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.
“California this time around will be a case study on whether a billionaire can buy the election or whether a grassroots campaign that has really centered on talking to voters, knocking on doors that have never been knocked on before, and meeting people where they are in the language that they speak, can win,” said Bahr. “I think we will win.”
Advertisement
During Monday’s rally, Bloomberg was the only Democratic opponent Sanders mentioned by name.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--John Bolton Teases Ukraine Scandal Details In Upcoming Book, Sparks Online Backlash

John Bolton faced backlash on social media Monday night after he teased what he ’ s written about the Ukraine scandal in his upcoming book about working as President Donald Trump ’ s national security adviser .
Bolton , during an appearance at Duke University in North Carolina , reportedly declined to talk about Trump ’ s Ukraine misconduct — which saw the president impeached by the Democratic-controlled House on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress and later acquitted by the GOP-controlled Senate .
Instead , Bolton told the audience that readers will “ love Chapter 14 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March 17 release .
BREAKING : John Bolton spoke publicly for the first time since the impeachment trial .
He was asked whether he thought Trump 's July 25 call was “ perfect.
” Bolton says “ you 'll love Chapter 14 ” of his book.
# Hardball pic.twitter.com/FBr4jQIiDf — Hardball ( @ hardball ) February 18 , 2020 Trump ’ s phone call with Ukraine ’ s president — in which he reportedly pressured him to announce an investigation into potential Democratic 2020 rival Joe Biden in exchange for withheld military aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ice cream sundae , ” added Bolton , who also expressed concern that the Trump White House would try to censor his writing .
The hashtag # BoycottBoltonsBook trended on Twitter as critics , including Andy Lassner , the executive producer of “ The Ellen DeGeneres Show , ” accused Bolton of putting “ money before country ” for not speaking out in public earlier .
Bolton remained silent before , during and after the Senate voted against allowing him to testify as a key witness during Trump ’ s trial .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to save our country , and you blew your chance to look like any sort of coy hero , ” wrote author Allison Winn Scotch .
Oh fuck right off @ AmbJohnBolton .
Chapter 14 is n't going to save our country , and you blew your chance to look like any sort of coy hero .
https : //t.co/rI1PEwYmo3 — Allison Winn Scotch ( @ aswinn ) February 18 , 2020 Dear America : Please do not reward an avaricious warmonger who kept the lying , lawbreaking , treasonous Donald Trump in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his book .
He 'll be on all the talk shows and the media will publish the juicy bits for free .
Love , Canada # BoycottBoltonsBook https : //t.co/4etNDPxDPM — Antonia Zerbisias ( @ AntoniaZ ) February 18 , 2020 You could have spoken for the love of country ... but why ?
When you can speak for the love of money instead !
!
!
— Leo Rautins ( @ LeoRautins ) February 18 , 2020 Seems Bolton took Buzzfeed ’ s Clickbait for Seniors workshop “ if you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far you ’ re going to BLACK OUT when you chapter 14 ” https : //t.co/1hf434PRoe — Virginia Heffernan ( @ page88 ) February 18 , 2020 If you 've pre-ordered John Bolton 's book , I encourage you to cancel it .
I do n't say that lightly .
We should not reward exploitative behavior like this .
Every important tidbit will come out in the news .
If you *must* buy it , wait six months to kill pre-sales.
# BoycottBoltonsBook — Charlotte Clymer 🏳🌈 ( @ cmclymer ) February 18 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would n't testify under oath ... he wanted to sell books .
I think it 's the modus operandi of most every member of the trump administration who leaves .
They figure it 's an opportunity to pull a trump and profit off their Time in office .
# BoycottBoltonsBook — Jack Wallen ( @ jlwallen ) February 18 , 2020 Everyone must boycott his book .
He put his own wants , needs , and thirst for attention and money before America and the constitution .
He sacrificed America for a payout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 , 2020 We ’ re not interested in Chapter 14 or anything else John Bolton has to say unless he says it under oath .
Testify .
@ simonschuster # BoycottBoltonsBook — mollyswordmcdonough🌊 ( @ mollysmcdonough ) February 18 , 2020 “ You ’ ll love chapter 14 '' is an actual thing Bolton said in response to a question about the president of the United States allegedly pressuring a foreign power to interfere in the election for his own political gain .
https : //t.co/PObnpaw5mN — Adrienne LaFrance ( @ AdrienneLaF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ d buy several copies of Bolton ’ s book IF only he would testify at House investigation but he didn ’ t , so Frack his book—75 % of Americans who see Trump as an immediate real threat to USA future should just not buy Bolton ’ s book IF Trump hasn ’ t banned it from being printed .
— JustChasingTruth ( @ KogerView ) February 18 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
John Bolton faced backlash on social media Monday night after he teased what he’s written about the Ukraine scandal in his upcoming book about working as President Donald Trump’s national security adviser.
Bolton, during an appearance at Duke University in North Carolina, reportedly declined to talk about Trump’s Ukraine misconduct — which saw the president impeached by the Democratic-controlled House on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress and later acquitted by the GOP-controlled Senate.
Advertisement
Instead, Bolton told the audience that readers will “love Chapter 14” of his memoir slated for a March 17 release.
BREAKING: John Bolton spoke publicly for the first time since the impeachment trial.
He was asked whether he thought Trump's July 25 call was “perfect.” Bolton says “you'll love Chapter 14” of his book.#Hardball pic.twitter.com/FBr4jQIiDf — Hardball (@hardball) February 18, 2020
Trump’s phone call with Ukraine’s president — in which he reportedly pressured him to announce an investigation into potential Democratic 2020 rival Joe Biden in exchange for withheld military aid — was just the “sprinkles on the ice cream sundae,” added Bolton, who also expressed concern that the Trump White House would try to censor his writing.
The hashtag #BoycottBoltonsBook trended on Twitter as critics, including Andy Lassner, the executive producer of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show,” accused Bolton of putting “money before country” for not speaking out in public earlier.
Advertisement
Bolton remained silent before, during and after the Senate voted against allowing him to testify as a key witness during Trump’s trial.
“Chapter 14 isn’t going to save our country, and you blew your chance to look like any sort of coy hero,” wrote author Allison Winn Scotch.
Money before country.
The @AmbJohnBolton way.
That’s his legacy. — andy lassner (@andylassner) February 18, 2020
Find out about chapter 14 next week on Celebrity Grifter! — Brian Ray (@brianrayguitar) February 18, 2020
John Bolton has brought resistance grifter to a whole new level. — Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) February 18, 2020
Advertisement
I think I’m not alone when I say to @AmbJohnBolton: You missed your chance to make a difference. History called and you passed. Now shut it and go away. — Elie Honig (@eliehonig) February 18, 2020
Such incredible courage for him to break his silence so he can sell books. https://t.co/AHc8tuoBAl — David Cicilline (@davidcicilline) February 17, 2020
Respectfully @AmbJohnBolton, I don’t give a damn about your book. I care about this country. And you had an opportunity to stand up for this country and testify under oath. But you chose not to. https://t.co/CW5C9Ak3H1 — Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) February 17, 2020
If you have something to say of vital public and national security interest, what’s the rationale of saying “nice try” and urging people to buy your book? https://t.co/PiQpf9YlNX — Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) February 18, 2020
Coy Bolton cries censorship https://t.co/W5fzXtiFpX — Debra J. Saunders (@debrajsaunders) February 18, 2020
Advertisement
Oh fuck right off @AmbJohnBolton. Chapter 14 isn't going to save our country, and you blew your chance to look like any sort of coy hero. https://t.co/rI1PEwYmo3 — Allison Winn Scotch (@aswinn) February 18, 2020
Dear America:
Please do not reward an avaricious warmonger who kept the lying, lawbreaking, treasonous Donald Trump in the White House. Do not buy his book. He'll be on all the talk shows and the media will publish the juicy bits for free.
Love, Canada #BoycottBoltonsBook https://t.co/4etNDPxDPM — Antonia Zerbisias (@AntoniaZ) February 18, 2020
I know what he can do with chapter 14. pic.twitter.com/ZUP7ILaD7v — Tammy Lively (@tammylively) February 18, 2020
You could have spoken for the love of country...but why? When you can speak for the love of money instead!!! — Leo Rautins (@LeoRautins) February 18, 2020
Seems Bolton took Buzzfeed’s Clickbait for Seniors workshop
“if you’re not bored with my batty cowardice so far you’re going to BLACK OUT when you chapter 14” https://t.co/1hf434PRoe — Virginia Heffernan (@page88) February 18, 2020
Advertisement
If you've pre-ordered John Bolton's book, I encourage you to cancel it. I don't say that lightly. We should not reward exploitative behavior like this. Every important tidbit will come out in the news. If you *must* buy it, wait six months to kill pre-sales.#BoycottBoltonsBook — Charlotte Clymer 🏳🌈 (@cmclymer) February 18, 2020
Now we know why Bolton wouldn't testify under oath ... he wanted to sell books. I think it's the modus operandi of most every member of the trump administration who leaves. They figure it's an opportunity to pull a trump and profit off their Time in office. #BoycottBoltonsBook — Jack Wallen (@jlwallen) February 18, 2020
Everyone must boycott his book. He put his own wants, needs, and thirst for attention and money before America and the constitution. He sacrificed America for a payout — _ (@BaronChau91) February 18, 2020
Advertisement
We’re not interested in Chapter 14 or anything else John Bolton has to say unless he says it under oath.
Testify. @simonschuster #BoycottBoltonsBook — mollyswordmcdonough🌊 (@mollysmcdonough) February 18, 2020
“You’ll love chapter 14" is an actual thing Bolton said in response to a question about the president of the United States allegedly pressuring a foreign power to interfere in the election for his own political gain. https://t.co/PObnpaw5mN — Adrienne LaFrance (@AdrienneLaF) February 18, 2020
No, we won't. Because we're not buying it. #BoycottBoltonsBook — Jimmy from the BX (@BloodwingBX) February 18, 2020
I said I’d buy several copies of Bolton’s book IF only he would testify at House investigation but he didn’t, so Frack his book—75% of Americans who see Trump as an immediate real threat to USA future should just not buy Bolton’s book IF Trump hasn’t banned it from being printed. — JustChasingTruth (@KogerView) February 18, 2020
If you think being coy is going to help you sell books, think again...@AmbJohnBolton — e-Ticker News (@eTickerNews) February 18, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-17--Dallas Paper Chucks Candidate Endorsements, Wants Voters To Think For A Change

The paper will continue to endorse local candidates , but , on a national level , “ we can best serve our readers by sorting through the messages that politicians throw at voters , ” the Morning News explained .
It will explore such issues as taxation , economic policy and immigration .
It will also speak up for “ individual liberty , the rule of law and alliances with like-minded democracies , ” the editorial noted .
“ We believe that society must arc toward justice , compassion and responsibility.
” The election is “ larger ” than Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What ’ s at stake in 2020 is the basic art of democracy ” — and a turning away from the “ crisis of contempt.
” “ We stand ... with Abraham Lincoln , who reminded us in his second inaugural address ” ... that ‘ we should proceed with “ malice toward none , with charity toward all , ” ’ ” the paper stated .
The editorial concluded : “ We ’ ll start that conversation on civility ... by framing and supporting ideas rather than a candidate for president ... @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the voter .
For our fate resides in your hands.
” Check it out here .

Its rationale is that the more thoughtful, voter-empowering approach will quell the rise of political personality cults, overheated extremes — and contempt.
“From the start, this nation was always an idea, a concept about liberty ... that invited a perpetual debate about how society should be,” the newspaper noted. Now the nation is “at a crossroads.” It can “pivot into a bright future or fall into an abyss.”
There’s currently a “broad push to drive our politics to extremes, to destroy without building consensus for what should be built,” the newspaper warned. Political debates are being driven by “assessments of political personalities” and “populist passions on the left and right,” it added. The result is distracted voters who empower a candidate without ever “seriously debating policy implications.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Bloomberg Makes Debate Stage, Facing Democratic Rivals For 1st Time

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg has qualified for the upcoming Democratic presidential debate , marking the first time he ’ ll stand alongside the rivals he has so far avoided by bypassing the early voting states and using his personal fortune to define himself through television ads .
A new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll published Tuesday shows Sen. Bernie Sanders with a double-digit lead in the Democratic primary contest , at 31 % support nationally , with Bloomberg in second place at 19 % .
The former New York City mayor will appear in Wednesday ’ s debate in Las Vegas alongside Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sens .
Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg .
Fellow billionaire and philanthropist Tom Steyer is still hoping to qualify .
The Democratic National Committee recently changed its rules for how a candidate qualifies for the debate , opening the door for Bloomberg to be on stage and drawing the ire of some candidates who dropped out of the race for failing to make prior stages .
Candidates were previously required to receive a certain number of campaign contributions to qualify , but Bloomberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 60 billion , is not taking donations .
The prime-time event will be a stark departure from Bloomberg ’ s highly choreographed campaign .
He ’ s poured more than $ 300 million into television advertising , a way to define himself for voters without facing criticism .
While he ’ s campaigned in more than two dozen states , he does not take questions from voters and delivers a standard stump speech that lasts less than 15 minutes , often reading from a teleprompter .
He encounters the occasional protester , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chattanooga , Tennessee , yelling , “ This is not democracy .
This is a plutocracy !
” But his friendly crowds usually quickly overwhelm the protesters with chants of “ We like Mike !
” Bloomberg is likely to face far more direct fire in the debate .
His fellow Democratic contenders have stepped up their attacks against him in recent days , decrying him for trying to “ buy the election ” and criticizing his support of the “ stop-and-frisk ” tactic while mayor of New York City that led police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for searches .
Bloomberg has barely crossed paths on the trail with his fellow Democrats .
He decided to skip the first four voting states of Iowa , New Hampshire , Nevada and South Carolina in favor of focusing on the 14 states that vote on March 3 and the contests that come afterward .
He rarely mentions his rivals by name , though his campaign is centered on the idea that none of them can beat President Donald Trump .
And Bloomberg , more than anyone , has predicated his campaign on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s been aggressive in targeting African American voters in the South , a core demographic for Biden ’ s campaign .
“ I ’ m going to get a chance to debate him on everything from redlining to stop and frisk to a whole range of other things , ” Biden told reporters last week .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Billionaire Mike Bloomberg has qualified for the upcoming Democratic presidential debate, marking the first time he’ll stand alongside the rivals he has so far avoided by bypassing the early voting states and using his personal fortune to define himself through television ads.
A new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll published Tuesday shows Sen. Bernie Sanders with a double-digit lead in the Democratic primary contest, at 31% support nationally, with Bloomberg in second place at 19%.
Advertisement
The former New York City mayor will appear in Wednesday’s debate in Las Vegas alongside Sanders, former Vice President Joe Biden, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Fellow billionaire and philanthropist Tom Steyer is still hoping to qualify.
The Democratic National Committee recently changed its rules for how a candidate qualifies for the debate, opening the door for Bloomberg to be on stage and drawing the ire of some candidates who dropped out of the race for failing to make prior stages. Candidates were previously required to receive a certain number of campaign contributions to qualify, but Bloomberg, who is worth an estimated $60 billion, is not taking donations.
The prime-time event will be a stark departure from Bloomberg’s highly choreographed campaign. He’s poured more than $300 million into television advertising, a way to define himself for voters without facing criticism. While he’s campaigned in more than two dozen states, he does not take questions from voters and delivers a standard stump speech that lasts less than 15 minutes, often reading from a teleprompter.
He encounters the occasional protester, including one who jumped on stage recently in Chattanooga, Tennessee, yelling, “This is not democracy. This is a plutocracy!” But his friendly crowds usually quickly overwhelm the protesters with chants of “We like Mike!”
Advertisement
Bloomberg is likely to face far more direct fire in the debate. His fellow Democratic contenders have stepped up their attacks against him in recent days, decrying him for trying to “buy the election” and criticizing his support of the “stop-and-frisk” tactic while mayor of New York City that led police to target mostly black and Hispanic men for searches.
Bloomberg has barely crossed paths on the trail with his fellow Democrats. He decided to skip the first four voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina in favor of focusing on the 14 states that vote on March 3 and the contests that come afterward.
He rarely mentions his rivals by name, though his campaign is centered on the idea that none of them can beat President Donald Trump. And Bloomberg, more than anyone, has predicated his campaign on a potential Biden collapse. He’s been aggressive in targeting African American voters in the South, a core demographic for Biden’s campaign.
Biden said he doesn’t think “you can buy an election.”
“I’m going to get a chance to debate him on everything from redlining to stop and frisk to a whole range of other things,” Biden told reporters last week.
___
Catch up on the 2020 election campaign with AP experts on our weekly politics podcast, “Ground Game.”