thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Hours Before Impeachment Trial Begins, Trump Addresses World Economic Forum In Switzerland

DAVOS , Switzerland ( AP ) — President Donald Trump reverted to his role as salesman Tuesday , telling a gathering of the world ’ s top businessmen in the Swiss Alps that he ’ s led a “ spectacular ” turnaround of the U.S. economy and encouraged them to invest in America .
Trump addressed the annual World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland , hours before his historic impeachment trial was to reconvene in the U.S. Senate in Washington .
The two-day visit will test Trump ’ s ability to balance his anger over being impeached with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stage .
He reminded the audience that when he spoke here two years ago , early in his presidency , “ I told you that we had launched the great American comeback.
” “ Today I ’ m proud to declare the United States is in the midst of an economic boom , the likes of which the world has never seen before , ” the president said .
Trump ’ s participation in the annual gathering of political and business elites in the Alpine ski resort will provide another conspicuous split-screen moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment trial before entering the hall to deliver his speech , Trump called it “ disgraceful ” and part of “ the witch hunt that ’ s been going on for years.
” “ But we look forward to being here , ” he said .
Climate issues are a main theme at this year ’ s forum and the phrase “ Act on Climate ” was written in the snow at the landing zone where Trump ’ s Marine One helicopter set down in Davos .
Late last year , the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement signed by nearly 200 nations .
Under the deal , each country sets goals to curb emissions of heat-trapping gasses that lead to climate change .
Trump has called the Paris accord an unfair economic burden to the U.S. economy .
In an apparent nod to concerns about climate change , Trump announced that the U.S. will join the economic forum ’ s initiative to plant 1 trillion trees across the globe .
The effort aims to mobilize an online community to boost reforestation and grow trees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dioxide — often caused by the burning of fossil fuels .
The trees initiative aims to boost spending on reforestation by business , governments and philanthropists , according to its web site 1t.org .
Trump said the U.S. is among countries with the cleanest water and air on earth , oft-stated claims by the president that are contradicted by the statistics .
After decades of improvement , progress in U.S. air quality has stalled and , over the past two years , America had more polluted air days than just a few years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis of Environmental Protection Agency data .
Trump ’ s claims about water are true in that the U.S. is tied with nine other countries as having the cleanest drinking water , according to Yale University ’ s global Environmental Performance Index .
Trump spent much more of his approximately 30-minute speech talking about how the U.S. economy has performed under his leadership .
“ America is thriving .
America is flourishing and yes , America is winning again like never before , ” Trump said before talking about a newly signed trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreement with Mexico and Canada .
He also spoke of record low unemployment , stock market gains and millions of people removed from the welfare rolls .
Trump ’ s second appearance at the conference ends Wednesday when he travels back to a Washington that is consumed by the impeachment trial .
The Democratic-controlled House impeached the Republican president last month for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress after it was revealed that he had pressed Ukraine ’ s president to announce investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden , a Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ withheld foreign aid that Congress had approved for the Eastern European nation and dangled the prospect of an Oval Office meeting as leverage .
Trump denies any wrongdoing and argues that Democrats want to remove him from office because they know they can ’ t deny him reelection in November .
Trump would be forced to leave office if convicted , but the Republican-controlled Senate is expected to acquit him .
The White House has not named any of the business leaders Trump is set to meet with .
But he is scheduled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the leaders of Iraq , Pakistan , Switzerland and Iraq ’ s self-governing Kurdish region , as well as the forum ’ s founder , the White House said .
Trump also will have his first meeting with the new European Commission president , Ursula von der Leyen , the first woman to hold the position .
That meeting could be the most significant , said analyst Matt Goodman , given Trump ’ s many disagreements with Europe over tax and trade policy , like a new digital levy by the French that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amazon and Google to pay up .
“ She ’ s new and she ’ s formidable , ” said Goodman , who studies international economic policy as a senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington .
Trump has smarted over the French tax , and his administration has announced plans to impose retaliatory tariffs of up to 100 % on cheese , wine , lipstick and other French imports .
France has threatened to fight back .
But after speaking to Trump on Monday , French @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ great discussion ” about the digital tax and “ will work together on a good agreement to avoid tariff escalation.
” Trump later retweeted Macron , adding the word : ” Excellent !
” The U.S. has also threatened to impose retaliatory duties on $ 7.5 billion worth of European airplanes , cheese , wine and other goods in a separate dispute over subsidies for Airbus , a competitor to Chicago-based Boeing Co. Trump also has sought to wring trade concessions from the EU by threatening tariffs on German autos , @ @ @ @ @

DAVOS, Switzerland (AP) — President Donald Trump reverted to his role as salesman Tuesday, telling a gathering of the world’s top businessmen in the Swiss Alps that he’s led a “spectacular” turnaround of the U.S. economy and encouraged them to invest in America.
Trump addressed the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, hours before his historic impeachment trial was to reconvene in the U.S. Senate in Washington. The two-day visit will test Trump’s ability to balance his anger over being impeached with a desire to project leadership on the world stage.
He reminded the audience that when he spoke here two years ago, early in his presidency, “I told you that we had launched the great American comeback.”
“Today I’m proud to declare the United States is in the midst of an economic boom, the likes of which the world has never seen before,” the president said.
Trump’s participation in the annual gathering of political and business elites in the Alpine ski resort will provide another conspicuous split-screen moment in his presidency. Asked about the impeachment trial before entering the hall to deliver his speech, Trump called it “disgraceful” and part of “the witch hunt that’s been going on for years.”
“But we look forward to being here,” he said.
Climate issues are a main theme at this year’s forum and the phrase “Act on Climate” was written in the snow at the landing zone where Trump’s Marine One helicopter set down in Davos.
Late last year, the Trump administration began pulling the U.S. out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement signed by nearly 200 nations. Under the deal, each country sets goals to curb emissions of heat-trapping gasses that lead to climate change. Trump has called the Paris accord an unfair economic burden to the U.S. economy.
In an apparent nod to concerns about climate change, Trump announced that the U.S. will join the economic forum’s initiative to plant 1 trillion trees across the globe. The effort aims to mobilize an online community to boost reforestation and grow trees that can help gobble up excess carbon dioxide — often caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The trees initiative aims to boost spending on reforestation by business, governments and philanthropists, according to its web site 1t.org.
Trump said the U.S. is among countries with the cleanest water and air on earth, oft-stated claims by the president that are contradicted by the statistics.
After decades of improvement, progress in U.S. air quality has stalled and, over the past two years, America had more polluted air days than just a few years earlier, according to an Associated Press analysis of Environmental Protection Agency data.
Trump’s claims about water are true in that the U.S. is tied with nine other countries as having the cleanest drinking water, according to Yale University’s global Environmental Performance Index.
Trump spent much more of his approximately 30-minute speech talking about how the U.S. economy has performed under his leadership.
“America is thriving. America is flourishing and yes, America is winning again like never before,” Trump said before talking about a newly signed trade deal with China and a pending trade agreement with Mexico and Canada. He also spoke of record low unemployment, stock market gains and millions of people removed from the welfare rolls.
Trump’s second appearance at the conference ends Wednesday when he travels back to a Washington that is consumed by the impeachment trial.
The Democratic-controlled House impeached the Republican president last month for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress after it was revealed that he had pressed Ukraine’s president to announce investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden, a Democrat and a Trump political rival. Trump withheld foreign aid that Congress had approved for the Eastern European nation and dangled the prospect of an Oval Office meeting as leverage.
Trump denies any wrongdoing and argues that Democrats want to remove him from office because they know they can’t deny him reelection in November. Trump would be forced to leave office if convicted, but the Republican-controlled Senate is expected to acquit him.
The White House has not named any of the business leaders Trump is set to meet with. But he is scheduled to hold talks Tuesday and Wednesday with the leaders of Iraq, Pakistan, Switzerland and Iraq’s self-governing Kurdish region, as well as the forum’s founder, the White House said.
Trump also will have his first meeting with the new European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, the first woman to hold the position.
That meeting could be the most significant, said analyst Matt Goodman, given Trump’s many disagreements with Europe over tax and trade policy, like a new digital levy by the French that will force American tech giants such as Amazon and Google to pay up.
“She’s new and she’s formidable,” said Goodman, who studies international economic policy as a senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
He predicted a difficult year ahead for U.S.-EU relations.
Trump has smarted over the French tax, and his administration has announced plans to impose retaliatory tariffs of up to 100% on cheese, wine, lipstick and other French imports. France has threatened to fight back.
But after speaking to Trump on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted that they had a “great discussion” about the digital tax and “will work together on a good agreement to avoid tariff escalation.” Trump later retweeted Macron, adding the word: ”Excellent!”
The U.S. has also threatened to impose retaliatory duties on $7.5 billion worth of European airplanes, cheese, wine and other goods in a separate dispute over subsidies for Airbus, a competitor to Chicago-based Boeing Co.
Trump also has sought to wring trade concessions from the EU by threatening tariffs on German autos, including BMW and Mercedes-Benz.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Trump Tweets 'Read The Transcripts' And Gets Mocked By People Who Have

President Donald Trump may be at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland , but that didn ’ t stop him from attempting to gaslight America .
On Tuesday , the president implored people on Twitter to “ read the transcripts.
” Presumedly , he was serious because the tweet was in all caps , the universally recognized signifier that the sender is pissed off about something .
The president was referring to a record of his phone calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky , the one that sparked the ongoing impeachment inquiry .
However , exact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been released .
What Trump is referring to as “ transcripts ” are really partial summaries of his conversations with Zelensky and not verbatim records .
Not surprisingly , the all caps tweet was thoroughly mocked by Twitter wits .
the one where you mention Burisma and the Bidens but not corruption ?
Yes , I read that one .
The one where you linked investigation to aid ( `` I would like you to do us a favor though '' ) ?
Yup , read it .
— Jennifer Rubin ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ARE NO TRANSCRIPTS .
IT SAYS SO IN THE DOCUMENT ITSELF .
It ’ s a memorandum , # DerangedDonald .
And there ’ s plenty of other evidence .
pic.twitter.com/8FXbnySY3P — GoodMansBrother ( @ DreierFrode ) January 21 , 2020 Don ’ t mind me .
I ’ m just here waiting for trump to actually release the transcripts .
All he has released was a call summary .
And even that summary was enough to impeach him .
pic.twitter.com/3Qd7D3cE9M — Todd Awesome ( @ ToddJAwesome ) January 21 , 2020 You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bribe Ukraine ?
Here ?
pic.twitter.com/zVRDQSrH9r — Sarah Burris ( @ SarahBurris ) January 21 , 2020 '' I would like you to do us a favor though . ''
Thanks for the reminder of what got us here in the first place .
But if you 'd like to clear things up , feel free to go to the Senate and testify .
Under oath .
Coward-in-Chief — Jean L.P. Jaurès 🌎🔬📚⚖ ( @ larsp2740 ) January 21 , 2020 '' I want you to do us a favor though '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ January 21 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump may be at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, but that didn’t stop him from attempting to gaslight America.
On Tuesday, the president implored people on Twitter to “read the transcripts.” Presumedly, he was serious because the tweet was in all caps, the universally recognized signifier that the sender is pissed off about something.
Advertisement
READ THE TRANSCRIPTS! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 21, 2020
The president was referring to a record of his phone calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the one that sparked the ongoing impeachment inquiry.
However, exact, full transcripts of the calls have not been released.
What Trump is referring to as “transcripts” are really partial summaries of his conversations with Zelensky and not verbatim records.
Not surprisingly, the all caps tweet was thoroughly mocked by Twitter wits.
the one where you mention Burisma and the Bidens but not corruption? Yes, I read that one. The one where you linked investigation to aid ("I would like you to do us a favor though")? Yup, read it. — Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
THERE ARE NO TRANSCRIPTS.
IT SAYS SO IN THE DOCUMENT ITSELF.
It’s a memorandum, #DerangedDonald . And there’s plenty of other evidence. pic.twitter.com/8FXbnySY3P — GoodMansBrother (@DreierFrode) January 21, 2020
Don’t mind me. I’m just here waiting for trump to actually release the transcripts. All he has released was a call summary. And even that summary was enough to impeach him. pic.twitter.com/3Qd7D3cE9M — Todd Awesome (@ToddJAwesome) January 21, 2020
You mean the ones that have you trying to bribe Ukraine? Here? pic.twitter.com/zVRDQSrH9r — Sarah Burris (@SarahBurris) January 21, 2020
"I would like you to do us a favor though."
Thanks for the reminder of what got us here in the first place.
But if you'd like to clear things up, feel free to go to the Senate and testify. Under oath.
Coward-in-Chief — Jean L.P. Jaurès 🌎🔬📚⚖ (@larsp2740) January 21, 2020
"I want you to do us a favor though" — Jeff Lewis (@ChicagoPhotoSho) January 21, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Pete Buttigieg's Mayoral Staff Was Disproportionately White

At an NAACP forum last year , Democratic presidential contender Pete Buttigieg told the audience that as mayor of South Bend , Indiana , he strived to appoint aides who reflected the city ’ s diversity , and as president he would do the same .
But a new analysis by HuffPost of the executive staff Buttigieg surrounded himself with during eight years as mayor found that two-thirds were white , in a city that is roughly half nonwhite .
( Prior analyses did not look at his entire tenure as mayor ) .
Of the 20 or so staffers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chief of staff , deputy mayor , or executive assistants , two were Hispanic and five were Black .
( One of those employees was held over from a previous administration . )
It ’ s another measure of what critics have often said as Buttigieg runs for president : that during his career in public service , his commitment to diversity has been mainly rhetorical .
His remarks at the NAACP event were a response to a critical question about the makeup of his presidential campaign staff .
But just days before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Intercept reported that seven out of the city ’ s nine department heads were white , along with four of his six executive staffers .
Among the few people of color in his office was a Black administrative assistant who has worked for South Bend since 1998 , long before he was mayor .
HuffPost ’ s new analysis also shows that the racial diversity of his executive staff did not change dramatically from his first term as mayor to his second , when he was reelected with a promise to appoint @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any organization — government , business , you name it — performs better when it ’ s got diverse makeup and diverse leadership , ” he said to a local news channel shortly after winning his second term in November 2015 .
“ This is a community that one of our strengths is the diversity of the residents who make this community up .
The same needs to be true of our city administration.
” “ As mayor of South Bend , Pete worked to promote equity and inclusion , created the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Inclusion , commissioned the first-ever study to quantify the racial wealth gap in South Bend , and reformed the city ’ s procurement process to increase the number of contracts awarded to minority- and women-owned businesses , ” Sean Savett , a spokesperson for the campaign , said .
Some 40 % of his entire staff consisted of people of color for most of his administration , Savett added , as are roughly 40 % of his presidential campaign staff .
“ As a presidential candidate , Pete has made it a priority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diversity of the country and of our party … and Pete has pledged to make sure his Cabinet will reflect the diversity of the people it represents , ” the spokesman said .
As he seeks the presidency , Buttigieg is a leading contender in the polls in several early nominating states .
But the surveys show he has attracted little support from Black or other minority voters who form a huge share of the Democratic Party ’ s base .
His often-fraught relationship with South Bend ’ s Black community has come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has struggled to forge a better relationship with people of color going forward : Black Lives Matter activists interrupted a recent gathering of South Bend Black leaders who supported the mayor ’ s record , and his campaign mistakenly said that his “ Douglass Plan ” to attack systemic racism was supported by dozens of prominent Black Democrats ; in fact , many of the people they named said they had never signed onto it .
South Bend residents constantly criticized the lack of diversity on Buttigieg ’ s staff while he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new mayor removed the popular Black chief of police .
The chief had been embroiled in a scandal involving the improper recordings of police officers allegedly making racist statements .
His demotion and later firing frayed the mayor ’ s relationship with many in South Bend ’ s Black community .
The city ’ s former fire chief , one of several Black men who had been in a city leadership role before Buttigieg became mayor , recalled telling him at the time : “ You led us to believe that a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your administration .
But Mayor Pete , I don ’ t see that .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
At an NAACP forum last year, Democratic presidential contender Pete Buttigieg told the audience that as mayor of South Bend, Indiana, he strived to appoint aides who reflected the city’s diversity, and as president he would do the same.
“By appointing people who reflect our community, we’ve not only had better representation but we’ve made better decisions,” he said.
Advertisement
But a new analysis by HuffPost of the executive staff Buttigieg surrounded himself with during eight years as mayor found that two-thirds were white, in a city that is roughly half nonwhite. (Prior analyses did not look at his entire tenure as mayor).
Of the 20 or so staffers who served Buttigieg in high-level positions like chief of staff, deputy mayor, or executive assistants, two were Hispanic and five were Black. (One of those employees was held over from a previous administration.)
Approximately half the South Bend population is non-Hispanic white; another quarter is Black; about 15% is Hispanic.
Attracting support from Black voters has proved a major hurdle for Democrat Pete Buttigieg's presidential bid. Elizabeth Frantz / Reuters
Advertisement
It’s another measure of what critics have often said as Buttigieg runs for president: that during his career in public service, his commitment to diversity has been mainly rhetorical.
His remarks at the NAACP event were a response to a critical question about the makeup of his presidential campaign staff. But just days before he left office on Jan. 1, The Intercept reported that seven out of the city’s nine department heads were white, along with four of his six executive staffers. (The Buttigieg campaign disputes those numbers, saying that six of the department heads were white and that his executive staff included a seventh member who was Black.) Among the few people of color in his office was a Black administrative assistant who has worked for South Bend since 1998, long before he was mayor.
HuffPost’s new analysis also shows that the racial diversity of his executive staff did not change dramatically from his first term as mayor to his second, when he was reelected with a promise to appoint diverse leadership.
“Research shows that any organization — government, business, you name it — performs better when it’s got diverse makeup and diverse leadership,” he said to a local news channel shortly after winning his second term in November 2015. “This is a community that one of our strengths is the diversity of the residents who make this community up. The same needs to be true of our city administration.”
Buttigieg’s presidential staff stressed the candidate’s commitment to diversity during his time as mayor.
Advertisement
“As mayor of South Bend, Pete worked to promote equity and inclusion, created the city’s first office of Diversity & Inclusion, commissioned the first-ever study to quantify the racial wealth gap in South Bend, and reformed the city’s procurement process to increase the number of contracts awarded to minority- and women-owned businesses,” Sean Savett, a spokesperson for the campaign, said.
Some 40% of his entire staff consisted of people of color for most of his administration, Savett added, as are roughly 40% of his presidential campaign staff. Savett added that turnover among people of color was lower than for white people. “As a presidential candidate, Pete has made it a priority to build a team that reflects the diversity of the country and of our party … and Pete has pledged to make sure his Cabinet will reflect the diversity of the people it represents,” the spokesman said.
As he seeks the presidency, Buttigieg is a leading contender in the polls in several early nominating states. But the surveys show he has attracted little support from Black or other minority voters who form a huge share of the Democratic Party’s base.
His often-fraught relationship with South Bend’s Black community has come up for frequent scrutiny. And Buttigieg has struggled to forge a better relationship with people of color going forward: local Black Lives Matter activists interrupted a recent gathering of South Bend Black leaders who supported the mayor’s record.
And when his campaign said that his “Douglass Plan” to attack systemic racism was supported by dozens of prominent Black South Carolina Democrats, reporters discovered that several of the prominent people on the list were unaware that the campaign was framing their support like an endorsement, and that many of the signees were white.
Advertisement
South Bend residents constantly criticized the lack of diversity on Buttigieg’s staff while he was mayor — no more than when the new mayor removed the popular Black chief of police. The chief had been embroiled in a scandal involving the improper recordings of police officers allegedly making racist statements. His demotion and later firing frayed the mayor’s relationship with many in South Bend’s Black community.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--A Joe Biden Mailer Targeting Iowa Voters Uses Sinister Image Of Iran

Scott Olson/Getty Images Former Vice President Joe Biden has emphasized his foreign policy experience , including at the Democratic presidential debate in Des Moines , Iowa , last week .
Former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s presidential campaign is using stark imagery in an Iowa mailer that appears to pitch him as a bulwark against the Iranian government , including Iranian President Hassan Rouhani , with whom former President Barack Obama negotiated the Iran nuclear agreement .
The mailer ’ s front features a dark , red-hued drawing of an Iranian tank in the foreground .
A soldier standing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Iranian military officials led by President Rouhani .
A framed photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , Iran ’ s supreme leader , is in the background alongside them .
Inside , the pamphlet contains information and images promoting Biden ’ s foreign policy experience ― fairly typical campaign material .
A headline in large , navy-blue letters across the top of the two-page spread says , “ Joe Biden : Strong , Steady Leadership.
” A photo on the third page shows Biden speaking at a lectern with U.S. military service-members and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It suggests that Iran ― rather than , say , the so-called Islamic State , Russia , or China ― represents the greatest threat to the U.S. And it frames the relationship between the two countries as fundamentally belligerent .
The campaign ’ s inclusion of Rouhani ― a political moderate in the Iranian context , especially given his role in the historic U.S.-Iran nuclear deal in 2015 ― is especially puzzling .
Biden is fond of touting the role he played in Obama ’ s negotiation of the accord with Iran and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week ’ s Democratic debate in Des Moines , that he would reinstate it if elected president .
Tensions between the U.S. and Iran have escalated significantly since President Donald Trump announced in May 2018 that his administration would be withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal .
Andrew Bates , a spokesman for Biden ’ s presidential campaign , responded with incredulity at the notion that the mailer was in any way at odds with Biden ’ s support for the Iran nuclear deal and opposition to Trump ’ s march to war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the mailer presents reflects Biden ’ s concern about Trump ’ s erratic leadership and how it brought the country to the brink of war with Iran , Bates said .
“ I ’ m not a doctor or theologian , but I can ’ t understand how sounding the alarm about Donald Trump rushing toward war was anything but called for after the events of this month , ” he said .
“ The Obama-Biden administration used diplomacy to mobilize a global effort and cut off Iran ’ s pathways to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away from an agreement that was working and unleashed a cycle that brought us to the brink of war , ” he continued .
“ Vice President Biden has blasted that decision ever since Trump made it , warning that it would worsen tensions , let Iran off the hook to restart its nuclear program , and make conflict more likely with a country of 80 million people .
Unfortunately , he was right.
” Trump has been subjecting Iran to a “ maximum pressure ” campaign that includes wide-ranging , painful sanctions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ratcheting up the activities of its proxy militias in Iraq , including a violent mob attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad on Dec. 31 .
“ The haphazard decision-making process that led up to it , the failure to consult our allies or Congress , and the reckless disregard for the consequences that would surely follow — was dangerously incompetent , ” Biden said in a speech in New York on Jan. 7 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential campaign is using stark imagery in an Iowa mailer that appears to pitch him as a bulwark against the Iranian government, including Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, with whom former President Barack Obama negotiated the Iran nuclear agreement.
HuffPost obtained a four-page piece of campaign literature that the Biden campaign sent to voters in Des Moines.
Advertisement
Former Vice President Joe Biden has emphasized his foreign policy experience, including at the Democratic presidential debate in Des Moines, Iowa, last week. Scott Olson/Getty Images
The mailer’s front features a dark, red-hued drawing of an Iranian tank in the foreground. A soldier standing atop the tank is saluting a row of Iranian military officials led by President Rouhani. A framed photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, is in the background alongside them.
“We live in the most dangerous moment in a generation,” the mailer says in bold white font at the bottom. “Who is ready to lead us?”
HuffPost
Advertisement
The back of the pamphlet repeats the same lines, but overlays them on a black-and-white photo of the Oval Office.
HuffPost
Inside, the pamphlet contains information and images promoting Biden’s foreign policy experience ― fairly typical campaign material. A headline in large, navy-blue letters across the top of the two-page spread says, “Joe Biden: Strong, Steady Leadership.” A photo on the third page shows Biden speaking at a lectern with U.S. military service-members and an American flag arrayed behind him.
HuffPost
Still, the message on the mailer’s front evokes an unusual degree of foreign-policy alarmism for a Democratic presidential candidate, particularly concerning Iran.
Advertisement
It suggests that Iran ― rather than, say, the so-called Islamic State, Russia, or China ― represents the greatest threat to the U.S. And it frames the relationship between the two countries as fundamentally belligerent.
The campaign’s inclusion of Rouhani ― a political moderate in the Iranian context, especially given his role in the historic U.S.-Iran nuclear deal in 2015 ― is especially puzzling. Biden is fond of touting the role he played in Obama’s negotiation of the accord with Iran and has vowed, as recently as last week’s Democratic debate in Des Moines, that he would reinstate it if elected president.
Tensions between the U.S. and Iran have escalated significantly since President Donald Trump announced in May 2018 that his administration would be withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal.
Andrew Bates, a spokesman for Biden’s presidential campaign, responded with incredulity at the notion that the mailer was in any way at odds with Biden’s support for the Iran nuclear deal and opposition to Trump’s march to war with Iran. The threat of war that the mailer presents reflects Biden’s concern about Trump’s erratic leadership and how it brought the country to the brink of war with Iran, Bates said.
“I’m not a doctor or theologian, but I can’t understand how sounding the alarm about Donald Trump rushing toward war was anything but called for after the events of this month,” he said. “The Obama-Biden administration used diplomacy to mobilize a global effort and cut off Iran’s pathways to nuclear weapons.
Advertisement
“Donald Trump walked away from an agreement that was working and unleashed a cycle that brought us to the brink of war,” he continued. “Vice President Biden has blasted that decision ever since Trump made it, warning that it would worsen tensions, let Iran off the hook to restart its nuclear program, and make conflict more likely with a country of 80 million people. Unfortunately, he was right.”
Trump has been subjecting Iran to a “maximum pressure” campaign that includes wide-ranging, painful sanctions. The Iranian government has responded by ratcheting up the activities of its proxy militias in Iraq, including a violent mob attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad on Dec. 31.
Two days later, Trump ordered the killing of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani. Iran responded by firing missiles at two U.S. military bases in Iraq.
Biden, like other national-security hawks in the Democratic Party, shares some of Trump’s suspicion of the Iranian government. But he was critical of Trump’s handling of Soleimani’s killing.
“The haphazard decision-making process that led up to it, the failure to consult our allies or Congress, and the reckless disregard for the consequences that would surely follow — was dangerously incompetent,” Biden said in a speech in New York on Jan. 7.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-20--Mitch McConnell Makes Last-Minute Concessions On Trial Rules After GOP Objections

Should the resolution pass as expected , each side will be given 24 hours to present its arguments over a three-day — not two-day , as initially proposed — period .
This reduces the likelihood that the Senate will be making arguments in the middle of the night .
The new proposal from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) will also admit the House ’ s impeachment record into evidence automatically ; previously , doing so would have required a vote .
The resolution , which McConnell ’ s office sent to HuffPost on Monday , will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate on Tuesday and is expected to pass .
The rules , which Republicans authored on their own , mean that Democrats will need to convince at least four GOP senators to vote with them to subpoena their desired witnesses and other evidence ― a tough but not impossible task .
“ Senator McConnell repeatedly promised Senators , the public and the press that his rules for the trial would be the same as the rules for President Clinton ’ s trial , ” he said in a statement .
“ After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear Senator McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses and documents and intent on rushing the trial through .
On something as important as impeachment , Senator McConnell ’ s resolution is nothing short of a national disgrace.
” While most Republicans maintain they ’ ve seen enough , several moderate GOP senators have expressed openness to new witness testimony in the trial after the presentation of evidence by both the House impeachment managers and Trump ’ s defense team .
“ While I need to hear the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I tend to believe having additional information would be helpful .
It is likely that I would support a motion to call witnesses at that point in the trial just as I did in 1999 , ” Sen. Susan Collins ( R-Maine ) said in a statement last week .
Democrats wanted Republicans to agree upfront to hear from witnesses who refused to appear during House impeachment hearings , including acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security adviser John Bolton .
Bolton has offered to testify in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every Republican senator has sided with McConnell , who argued for following the framework for the 1999 impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton .
In that proceeding , the decision on calling witnesses was postponed until after the initial arguments and senatorial questioning had been completed .
A key difference between the two cases is that in Clinton ’ s trial , the three witnesses who were subpoenaed had already testified prior to the start of the proceedings , as did Clinton himself .
Trump has blocked key witness testimony in the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the House late last year center on Trump ’ s dealings with Ukraine and its president , Volodymyr Zelensky .
They charge Trump with using the power of his office to further his political ambitions and block congressional investigations .
Given GOP control of the chamber , the Senate ’ s votes on the impeachment articles are widely expected to fall far short of the required two-thirds of the chamber for removal from office .
The Senate trial ― the third involving a president in American history ―kicked off officially last week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the upper chamber .
The first few days featured made-for-TV moments : the swearing-in of all senators and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts , who will preside over the proceedings , as well as the reading of the articles .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
UPDATE: Jan. 21 — The resolution that will govern the Senate impeachment trial will give a longer period for arguments than initially suggested and automatically allow certain evidence.
Should the resolution pass as expected, each side will be given 24 hours to present its arguments over a three-day — not two-day, as initially proposed — period. This reduces the likelihood that the Senate will be making arguments in the middle of the night. The new proposal from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) will also admit the House’s impeachment record into evidence automatically; previously, doing so would have required a vote.
Advertisement
The last-minute revisions are a concession to critics of the initial proposed rules, although they doesn’t address concerns over certain issues, including witnesses.
PREVIOUSLY:
WASHINGTON ― Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has begun circulating proposed rules for President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial that would give each side just 24 hours over two days to present their arguments and wouldn’t guarantee any witness testimonies.
The resolution, which McConnell’s office sent to HuffPost on Monday, will be up for debate and a vote in the Senate on Tuesday and is expected to pass.
Senators will be able to call for witnesses in Trump’s impeachment trial but ensuring they actually testify will require at least 51 votes.
Advertisement
The rules, which Republicans authored on their own, mean that Democrats will need to convince at least four GOP senators to vote with them to subpoena their desired witnesses and other evidence ― a tough but not impossible task.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) blasted McConnell for breaking from President Bill Clinton’s impeachment arguments, which were spread out over several days for each side.
“Senator McConnell repeatedly promised Senators, the public and the press that his rules for the trial would be the same as the rules for President Clinton’s trial,” he said in a statement. “After reading his resolution, it’s clear Senator McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses and documents and intent on rushing the trial through. On something as important as impeachment, Senator McConnell’s resolution is nothing short of a national disgrace.”
While most Republicans maintain they’ve seen enough, several moderate GOP senators have expressed openness to new witness testimony in the trial after the presentation of evidence by both the House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team.
“While I need to hear the case argued and the questions answered, I tend to believe having additional information would be helpful. It is likely that I would support a motion to call witnesses at that point in the trial just as I did in 1999,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said in a statement last week.
Advertisement
Democrats wanted Republicans to agree upfront to hear from witnesses who refused to appear during House impeachment hearings, including acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security adviser John Bolton. Bolton has offered to testify in the Senate trial if subpoenaed.
But nearly every Republican senator has sided with McConnell, who argued for following the framework for the 1999 impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton. In that proceeding, the decision on calling witnesses was postponed until after the initial arguments and senatorial questioning had been completed.
A key difference between the two cases is that in Clinton’s trial, the three witnesses who were subpoenaed had already testified prior to the start of the proceedings, as did Clinton himself. Trump has blocked key witness testimony in the House.
The two articles of impeachment passed by the House late last year center on Trump’s dealings with Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky. They charge Trump with using the power of his office to further his political ambitions and block congressional investigations.
Given GOP control of the chamber, the Senate’s votes on the impeachment articles are widely expected to fall far short of the required two-thirds of the chamber for removal from office.
Advertisement
The Senate trial ― the third involving a president in American history ―kicked off officially last week after the House sent the articles to the upper chamber. The first few days featured made-for-TV moments: the swearing-in of all senators and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who will preside over the proceedings, as well as the reading of the articles.
Schumer has vowed to force votes on motions to compel new evidence and witness testimony in the trial ― part of a Democratic effort to pressure vulnerable Republican senators up for re-election in November.
“If every Republican senator votes for a rigged trial that hides the truth, the American people will see that the Republican Senate is part of a large and awful cover-up,” Schumer said last week.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Donald Trump's Impeachment Defense Is That Democrats Are Bad

WASHINGTON ― As the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump began on Tuesday , his lawyers offered a bombastic and truth-challenged defense of the president that insisted the real bad actors in all of this are the Democrats .
During a debate over a resolution laying out the trial procedures , the initial argument from White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump ’ s private lawyer Jay Sekulow boiled down to a series of complaints about the process during the House impeachment inquiry ― most of which were false or misleading .
On his now-famous July 2019 call with Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look into Biden and his son Hunter .
He later said publicly that he wanted Ukraine to start “ a major investigation into the Bidens ” ― which is essentially the heart of the Democrats ’ abuse of power case .
But that isn ’ t really what happened .
The Judiciary Committee invited the president to participate in its hearings and the White House said no .
There is also no constitutional provision requiring the House to allow the president to cross-examine witnesses , access evidence or have counsel present during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ― which was written by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) ― would not guarantee any witness testimony in the Senate trial .
Despite their public fury over the lack of witnesses in the House inquiry , Trump ’ s team supports the resolution , saying that if Democrats think their case was good enough to impeach the president , they shouldn ’ t need more witnesses at trial .
The resolution calls for 24 hours of arguments from each side , starting Wednesday and spread out over three days each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by senators .
Only then will the Senate vote on whether to subpoena witness testimony , which a handful of Republicans have said they would support doing .
Democrats would need only four Republicans to join them to get witnesses .
“ There ’ s a reason we keep executive privilege , and we assert it when necessary , ” Sekulow said .
“ And that is to protect ― to protect the Constitution and the separation of powers.
” In fact , Trump has not once asserted executive privilege throughout the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aides and Cabinet officials to not comply with congressional subpoenas .
He has refused to hand over documents from the State Department and the Office of Management and Budget .
But in none of these instances did he officially assert executive privilege .
“ The president ’ s opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for complete judicial review , ” Sekulow said , adding , “ We ’ re acting as if the courts are an improper venue to determine constitutional issues of this magnitude .
That is why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration is making the exact opposite argument in court to prevent former White House Counsel Don McGahn from testifying before a congressional committee .
Trump ’ s Justice Department lawyers argue that Congress has no constitutional right to enforce a subpoena and the federal judiciary has no constitutional ability to rule on a congressional subpoena .
Perhaps the most glaring falsehood asserted came from Cipollone when he alleged that Schiff did not allow Republican members of the House investigating committees to enter the sensitive compartmented information facility , or SCIF , originally used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the three investigating committees ― the House Intelligence Committee , House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Oversight and Reform Committee ― were allowed equal access , regardless of party , to the witness depositions held in the SCIF .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― As the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump began on Tuesday, his lawyers offered a bombastic and truth-challenged defense of the president that insisted the real bad actors in all of this are the Democrats.
During a debate over a resolution laying out the trial procedures, the initial argument from White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump’s private lawyer Jay Sekulow boiled down to a series of complaints about the process during the House impeachment inquiry ― most of which were false or misleading.
Advertisement
House Democrats presenting the case for impeachment explained how Trump abused his power by withholding military assistance from Ukraine, an ally effectively at war with Russia, while demanding a sham investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump’s highest-polling political rival in the 2020 election.
Cipollone said House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who now serves as the House impeachment manager, “made false allegations about a telephone call,” but he didn’t specify what was false.
On his now-famous July 2019 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump asked Zelensky to look into Biden and his son Hunter. He later said publicly that he wanted Ukraine to start “a major investigation into the Bidens” ― which is essentially the heart of the Democrats’ abuse of power case.
For the rest of the afternoon, Trump’s team complained about process. Sekulow claimed that Trump “was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses,” access evidence or have counsel present during impeachment proceedings before the House Judiciary Committee.
Advertisement
These alleged refusals amount to “a trifecta that violates the Constitution of the United States,” Sekulow added.
But that isn’t really what happened. The Judiciary Committee invited the president to participate in its hearings and the White House said no. There is also no constitutional provision requiring the House to allow the president to cross-examine witnesses, access evidence or have counsel present during impeachment hearings.
The resolution being debated ― which was written by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) ― would not guarantee any witness testimony in the Senate trial. Despite their public fury over the lack of witnesses in the House inquiry, Trump’s team supports the resolution, saying that if Democrats think their case was good enough to impeach the president, they shouldn’t need more witnesses at trial.
The resolution calls for 24 hours of arguments from each side, starting Wednesday and spread out over three days each, followed by a period of questioning by senators. Only then will the Senate vote on whether to subpoena witness testimony, which a handful of Republicans have said they would support doing. Democrats would need only four Republicans to join them to get witnesses.
Both Sekulow and Cipollone claimed the impeachment of Trump threatened the constitutional order by attacking executive privilege.
Advertisement
“There’s a reason we keep executive privilege, and we assert it when necessary,” Sekulow said. “And that is to protect ― to protect the Constitution and the separation of powers.”
Cipollone attacked the “notion that invoking your constitutional rights to protect the executive branch” could be an impeachable act of obstruction.
In fact, Trump has not once asserted executive privilege throughout the entire impeachment inquiry. He has directed his aides and Cabinet officials to not comply with congressional subpoenas. He has refused to hand over documents from the State Department and the Office of Management and Budget. But in none of these instances did he officially assert executive privilege.
“They never claimed executive privilege!” Schiff said in a rebuttal to Trump’s lawyers. “In order to claim privilege, you have to specify which document, which line, which conversation.”
Trump’s lawyers also complained that the House never went to court to enforce its subpoenas for testimony from the administration officials whom Trump prevented from testifying.
Advertisement
“The president’s opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for complete judicial review,” Sekulow said, adding, “We’re acting as if the courts are an improper venue to determine constitutional issues of this magnitude. That is why we have courts.”
But the Trump administration is making the exact opposite argument in court to prevent former White House Counsel Don McGahn from testifying before a congressional committee. Trump’s Justice Department lawyers argue that Congress has no constitutional right to enforce a subpoena and the federal judiciary has no constitutional ability to rule on a congressional subpoena.
Perhaps the most glaring falsehood asserted came from Cipollone when he alleged that Schiff did not allow Republican members of the House investigating committees to enter the sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF, originally used for witness depositions. All members of the three investigating committees ― the House Intelligence Committee, House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Oversight and Reform Committee ― were allowed equal access, regardless of party, to the witness depositions held in the SCIF.
In response to these false allegations, Schiff in his rebuttal declined to say that Trump’s lawyers were purposefully lying in the president’s defense. He carefully said that Cipollone was simply “mistaken” or “just plain wrong.”
Schiff did offer a theory on why Trump’s defense rested on a series of false attacks on the House’s impeachment inquiry: “When you hear them attack the House managers, what you’re really hearing is, ‘We don’t want to talk about the president’s guilt.’”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Mitch McConnell Reverses Restrictive Impeachment Trial Limits

The trial quickly burst into a partisan fight at the Capitol as the president ’ s lawyers opened arguments Tuesday in support of McConnell ’ s plan .
Democrats objected loudly to McConnell ’ s initially proposed rules , and some Republicans made their concerns known in private at a GOP lunch .
Without comment , the Republican leader quietly submitted an amended proposal after meeting behind closed doors with his senators as the trial opened .
The handwritten changes would add the extra day and allow House evidence to be included in the record .
There is still deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice John Roberts gaveled open the session , senators having taken an oath last week to do “ impartial justice ” as jurors .
House House prosecutors were on one side , Trump ’ s team on the other , in the well of the Senatem as senators sat silent at their desks .
The turnaround was a swift lesson as the White House ’ s wishes run into the reality of the Senate .
The White House wanted a session crammed into a shorter period to both expedite the trial and shift @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to a person familiar with the matter but unauthorized to discuss it in public .
“ READ THE TRANSCRIPTS !
” the president tweeted from miles away , as he returned to his hotel at a global leaders conference in Davos , Switzerland .
That ’ s the transcript of his phone call in which he asked new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiya for “ a favor.
” The Democrats cite that transcript as solid evidence against Trump , though he repeatedly describes it as “ perfect.
” The rare impeachment trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is testing whether Trump ’ s actions toward Ukraine warrant removal at the same time that voters are forming their own verdict on his White House .
“ My focus is going to be on impeachment , ” Sen. Bernie Sanders , the Vermont independent running for the Democratic nomination , told reporters .
He said his supporters would keep working “ to defeat the most dangerous president in American history.
” The Democrats say the prospect of middle-of-the-night proceedings , without allowing new witnesses or even the voluminous House records of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crucial information about Trump ’ s political pressure campaign on Ukraine and the White House ’ s obstruction of the House impeachment probe .
Trump ’ s legal team doesn ’ t dispute Trump ’ s actions — that he called the Ukraine president and asked for a “ favor ” during a July 25 phone call .
In fact , the lawyers included the rough transcript of Trump ’ s conversation as part of its 110-page trial brief submitted ahead of the proceedings .
Democrats in prosecuting the case against the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Office report that found the White House violated federal law by stalling money to Ukraine that had been approved by Congress .
They wrote , “ President Trump ’ s lengthy brief to the Senate is heavy on rhetoric and procedural grievances , but entirely lacks a legitimate defense of his misconduct.
” The president would “ rather discuss anything other than what he actually did , ” the Democrats wrote .
Also Tuesday , the House Democratic managers overseeing the impeachment case asked Cipollone , the president ’ s lead lawyer at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first-hand knowledge ” he has of the charges against Trump .
They said evidence gathered so far indicates that Cipollone is a “ material witness ” to the allegations at hand .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell abruptly eased his restrictive proposed rules for President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, backing off the condensed two-day schedule to add a third for opening arguments after protests from senators, including Republicans.
The trial quickly burst into a partisan fight at the Capitol as the president’s lawyers opened arguments Tuesday in support of McConnell’s plan. Democrats objected loudly to McConnell’s initially proposed rules, and some Republicans made their concerns known in private at a GOP lunch.
Advertisement
Without comment, the Republican leader quietly submitted an amended proposal after meeting behind closed doors with his senators as the trial opened. The handwritten changes would add the extra day and allow House evidence to be included in the record. There is still deep disagreement about calling additional witnesses.
“It’s time to start with this trial,” said White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, the president’s lead lawyer in brief remarks as the proceedings opened in public.
“It’s a fair process,” he said. “There is absolutely no case.”
Chief Justice John Roberts gaveled open the session, senators having taken an oath last week to do “impartial justice” as jurors. House House prosecutors were on one side, Trump’s team on the other, in the well of the Senatem as senators sat silent at their desks.
Senators were stunned by McConnell’s shift, and aides offered no immediate answers.
But a spokeswoman for Republican Sen. Susan Collins said that she and others had raised concerns. The Maine senator sees the changes as significant improvements, said spokeswoman Annie Clark.
Advertisement
The turnaround was a swift lesson as the White House’s wishes run into the reality of the Senate. The White House wanted a session crammed into a shorter period to both expedite the trial and shift more of the proceedings into late night, according to a person familiar with the matter but unauthorized to discuss it in public.
“READ THE TRANSCRIPTS!” the president tweeted from miles away, as he returned to his hotel at a global leaders conference in Davos, Switzerland. That’s the transcript of his phone call in which he asked new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiya for “a favor.” The Democrats cite that transcript as solid evidence against Trump, though he repeatedly describes it as “perfect.”
Democrats had warned that the rules package from Trump’s ally, the Senate GOP leader, could force midnight sessions that would keep most Americans in the dark and create a sham proceeding.
“This is not a process for a fair trial, this is the process for a rigged trial” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Ca., the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee leading the prosecution, told reporters. He called it a “cover-up.”
Schiff opened his arguments before the Senate playing a video of Trump calling for more witnesses to testify. Schiff noted the sudden change in proposed rules, made moments before he spoke.
Advertisement
“The facts will come out in the end,” Schiff said. “The question is, will it come out in time? ”
McConnell said, “The president’s lawyers will finally receive a level playing field,” contrasting it with the House impeachment inquiry.
The rare impeachment trial, unfolding in an election year, is testing whether Trump’s actions toward Ukraine warrant removal at the same time that voters are forming their own verdict on his White House.
Just weeks before the first Democratic primary contests, four senators who are also presidential candidates were off the campaign trail, seated as jurors.
“My focus is going to be on impeachment,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent running for the Democratic nomination, told reporters. He said his supporters would keep working “to defeat the most dangerous president in American history.”
The Democrats say the prospect of middle-of-the-night proceedings, without allowing new witnesses or even the voluminous House records of the trial, would leave the public without crucial information about Trump’s political pressure campaign on Ukraine and the White House’s obstruction of the House impeachment probe.
Advertisement
Rep. Jerry Nadler, the Judiciary Committee Chairman also leading the House team, said: “There’s no trial in this country where you wouldn’t admit relative witnesses.”
Trump’s legal team doesn’t dispute Trump’s actions — that he called the Ukraine president and asked for a “favor” during a July 25 phone call. In fact, the lawyers included the rough transcript of Trump’s conversation as part of its 110-page trial brief submitted ahead of the proceedings.
Instead the lawyers for the president, led Cipollone and a TV-famous legal team including Alan Dershowitz, say the two charges against the president don’t amount to impeachable offenses and Trump committed no crime.
Legal scholars have long insisted the framers of the Constitution provided impeachment as a remedy for “other high crimes and misdemeanors,” a particularly broad definition that doesn’t mean simply specific criminal acts.
Democrats in prosecuting the case against the president point in particular to a General Accountability Office report that found the White House violated federal law by stalling money to Ukraine that had been approved by Congress.
Advertisement
House Democrats, responding Tuesday to arguments by Trump’s legal team, said the president’s legal filing confirmed that “his misconduct is indefensible.”
They wrote, “President Trump’s lengthy brief to the Senate is heavy on rhetoric and procedural grievances, but entirely lacks a legitimate defense of his misconduct.” The president would “rather discuss anything other than what he actually did,” the Democrats wrote.
Roberts administered the oath to one remaining senator, James Inhofe, who was attending a family medical issue in Oklahoma last week when the other senators vowed the oath and signed the oath book.
Also Tuesday, the House Democratic managers overseeing the impeachment case asked Cipollone, the president’s lead lawyer at the trial, to disclose any “first-hand knowledge” he has of the charges against Trump. They said evidence gathered so far indicates that Cipollone is a “material witness” to the allegations at hand.
House Democrats impeached the Republican president last month on two charges: abuse of power by withholding U.S. military aid to Ukraine as he pressed the country to investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden, and obstruction of Congress by refusing to cooperate with their investigation.
Advertisement
No president has ever been removed from office by the Senate. With its 53-47 Republican majority, the Senate is not expected to mount the two-thirds voted needed for conviction. Even if it did, the White House team argues it would be an ”’unconstitutional conviction″ because the articles of impeachment were too broad.
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Alan Dershowitz 'Retracts' 1998 Impeachment Remarks After Facing 'Bullies' On CNN

Alan Dershowitz , an attorney on Donald Trump ’ s legal team , has “ retracted ” his old views on impeachment now that he ’ s defending the president in the Senate impeachment trial .
Dershowitz ’ s retraction on Tuesday follows a feisty exchange with CNN ’ s Anderson Cooper and Jeffery Toobin over resurfaced footage that highlighted the difference between Dershowitz ’ s arguments at the time of former President Bill Clinton ’ s impeachment and his arguments now as he defends Trump .
“ To the extent there are inconsistencies between my current position and what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am correct today , ” Dershowitz began his four-part Twitter thread .
“ During the Clinton impeachment , the issue was not whether a technical crime was required , because he was charged with perjury.
” “ To the extent therefore that my 1998 off-the-cuff interview statement suggested the opposite , I retract it , ” he concluded .
“ Scholars learn to adapt and even change old views as they do more research.
” ( 2of 3 Therefore , I didn ’ t research the issue ; I relied on the academic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In Trump impeachment , on the other hand , that is the critical issue , because abuse of power and obstruction of congress are neither crimes nor criminal- like behavior .
— Alan Dershowitz ( @ AlanDersh ) January 21 , 2020 ( 3 of 3 ) So I have now thoroughly researched the issue and concluded that although a technical crime with all the elements may not be required , criminal like behavior akin to treason and bribery is required .
— Alan Dershowitz ( @ AlanDersh ) January 21 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ footage from 1998 of the defense lawyer and Harvard Law professor emeritus weighing in on the Clinton impeachment process .
“ It certainly doesn ’ t have to be a crime , ” he said on CNN at the time .
“ If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty , you don ’ t need a technical crime.
” Now his view is quite different .
Once Dershowitz joined Trump ’ s legal team last week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abuse of power is not an impeachable offense because it ’ s not “ within the constitutional criteria for impeachment.
” On CNN ’ s “ State of the Union ” Sunday , he argued that “ without a crime , there can be no impeachment , ” giving a glimpse into Trump ’ s defense team ’ s arguments .
In the testy exchange with Cooper and Toobin on Monday evening , Dershowitz accused the pair of being “ bullies ” trying to “ nitpick ” what he said when they repeatedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dershowitz claimed in the interview that while he “ wasn ’ t wrong ” back then , he is “ much more correct right now , having done more research.
” Trump is charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for his dealings with Ukraine and subsequent efforts to block investigations by Congress .
On day one of the Senate impeachment trial , Trump ’ s legal team offered a number of defenses based on often inaccurate or misleading claims , largely attacking Democrats for how they had conducted impeachment proceedings @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Dershowitz’s retraction on Tuesday follows a feisty exchange with CNN’s Anderson Cooper and Jeffery Toobin over resurfaced footage that highlighted the difference between Dershowitz’s arguments at the time of former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment and his arguments now as he defends Trump.
Advertisement
“To the extent there are inconsistencies between my current position and what I said 22 years ago, I am correct today,” Dershowitz began his four-part Twitter thread. “During the Clinton impeachment, the issue was not whether a technical crime was required, because he was charged with perjury.”
“To the extent therefore that my 1998 off-the-cuff interview statement suggested the opposite, I retract it,” he concluded. “Scholars learn to adapt and even change old views as they do more research.”
(2of 3
Therefore, I didn’t research the issue; I relied on the academic consensus that a crime was not required. In Trump impeachment, on the other hand, that is the critical issue, because abuse of power and obstruction of congress are neither crimes nor criminal- like behavior. — Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 21, 2020
(3 of 3)So I have now thoroughly researched the issue and concluded that although a technical crime with all the elements may not be required, criminal like behavior akin to treason and bribery is required. — Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
Over the weekend, CNN uncovered footage from 1998 of the defense lawyer and Harvard Law professor emeritus weighing in on the Clinton impeachment process.
“It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime,” he said on CNN at the time. “If you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty, you don’t need a technical crime.”
Now his view is quite different. Once Dershowitz joined Trump’s legal team last week, he said he planned to argue that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense because it’s not “within the constitutional criteria for impeachment.”
On CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday, he argued that “without a crime, there can be no impeachment,” giving a glimpse into Trump’s defense team’s arguments.
In the testy exchange with Cooper and Toobin on Monday evening, Dershowitz accused the pair of being “bullies” trying to “nitpick” what he said when they repeatedly pressed him to explain his flip-flop.
Advertisement
"No, I wasn't wrong. I have a more sophisticated basis for my argument now."
Harvard Law Professor @AlanDersh, who is part of the President's impeachment trial legal team, addresses a historical inconsistency in his position on impeachment requirements.https://t.co/BDC7UXAD6x pic.twitter.com/815e91uze4 — Anderson Cooper 360° (@AC360) January 21, 2020
Dershowitz claimed in the interview that while he “wasn’t wrong” back then, he is “much more correct right now, having done more research.”
Trump is charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for his dealings with Ukraine and subsequent efforts to block investigations by Congress.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-22--‘Mic Drop Moment’: Hakeem Jeffries Breaks Out Notorious B.I.G. In Viral Trump Takedown

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries ( D-N.Y. ) , one of the House impeachment managers , went viral on Tuesday night for quoting rap legend Notorious B.I.G.
, a.k.a .
Biggie Smalls , in response to a comment made by President Donald Trump ’ s attorney .
During his opening statement , Trump attorney Jay Sekulow asked : “ Why are we here ?
” That prompted Jeffries to deliver a concise point-by-point explanation of the allegations against Trump .
“ We are here , sir , because President Trump pressured a foreign government to target an American citizen for political and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We are here , sir , because President Trump solicited foreign interference in the 2020 election and corrupted our democracy.
” '' If you do n't know , now you know . ''
Impeachment manager Rep. Jeffries quotes The Notorious B.I.G .
in concluding his answer to a Trump lawyer 's question about why the US Senate is gathered for the trial .
https : //t.co/qDB70fNNbp pic.twitter.com/Q7Jqe5Hukl — MSNBC ( @ MSNBC ) January 22 , 2020 At the end of his speech , Jeffries vowed to “ follow the facts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Constitution and present the truth to the American people.
” “ That is why we are here , Mr. Sekulow , ” Jeffries added , then he broke out a line from Biggie ’ s “ Juicy ” for his finishing touch .
“ And if you don ’ t know , now you know.
” The line was also used in the Broadway hit “ Hamilton.
” Jeffries represents the district where the rapper was raised .
In 2017 , the 20th anniversary of Biggie ’ s slaying , Jeffries paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ included a few lines from “ Juicy.
” On Twitter , Trump critics praised how Jeffries summed up the case against the president , right down to the “ mic drop moment ” at the end : Hakeem Jeffries - “ If you don ’ t know , now you know.
” Biggie ( Juicy ) breaks into the trial .
Brooklyn in the house ( Senate ) .
— Eric Holder ( @ EricHolder ) January 22 , 2020 Brilliant rebuttal by Brooklyn ( and Queens ) US Congressman Hakeem Jeffies who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a # Biggie line , “ If you don ’ t know , now you know.
” — Karine Jean-Pierre ( @ K_JeanPierre ) January 22 , 2020 Rep. Hakeem Jeffries just clapped back at that doofus Jay Sekulow with `` and if you do n't know , now you know . ''
And I am here , Sir , for it .
That speech was BRILLIANT .
pic.twitter.com/PFdIN4azKd — BrooklynDad_Defiant !
( @ mmpadellan ) January 22 , 2020 To close @ RepJeffries quoted Notorious B.I.G .
's Juicy ( `` And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you know '' ) , and honestly I would n't mind 2 more hours of this if it required Jeffries explaining who the Notorious B.I.G .
was to the United States Senate .
— Susan Davis ( @ DaviSusan ) January 22 , 2020 My man @ RepJeffries offered a rousing , pithy summary of the case against @ POTUS with a fact-based roll call of his grievous errors and impeccable offenses .
He eloquently indicted those complicit with Trump , & hit em with the Biggie finish : “ And if you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know !
” — Michael Eric Dyson ( @ MichaelEDyson ) January 22 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), one of the House impeachment managers, went viral on Tuesday night for quoting rap legend Notorious B.I.G., aka Biggie Smalls, in response to a comment made by President Donald Trump’s attorney.
During his opening statement, Trump attorney Jay Sekulow asked: “Why are we here?”
That prompted Jeffries to deliver a concise point-by-point explanation of the allegations against Trump.
Advertisement
“We are here, Sir, because President Trump pressured a foreign government to target an American citizen for political and personal gain,” Jeffries said. “We are here, Sir, because President Trump solicited foreign interference in the 2020 election and corrupted our democracy.”
Watch:
"If you don't know, now you know."
Impeachment manager Rep. Jeffries quotes The Notorious B.I.G. in concluding his answer to a Trump lawyer's question about why the US Senate is gathered for the trial. https://t.co/qDB70fNNbp pic.twitter.com/Q7Jqe5Hukl — MSNBC (@MSNBC) January 22, 2020
At the end of his speech, Jeffries vowed to “follow the facts, apply the law, be guided by the Constitution and present the truth to the American people.”
“That is why we are here, Mr. Sekulow,” Jeffries added, then he broke out a line from Biggie’s “Juicy” for his finishing touch. “And if you don’t know, now you know.”
Advertisement
The line was also used in the Broadway hit “Hamilton.”
Jeffries represents the congressional district where the rapper was raised. In 2017, the 20th anniversary of Biggie’s slaying, Jeffries paid tribute to him with a speech that included a few lines from “Juicy.”
On Twitter, Trump critics praised how Jeffries summed up the case against the president, right down to the “mic drop moment” at the end:
Hakeem Jeffries - “If you don’t know, now you know.” Biggie (Juicy) breaks into the trial. Brooklyn in the house (Senate). — Eric Holder (@EricHolder) January 22, 2020
Brilliant rebuttal by Brooklyn (and Queens) US Congressman Hakeem Jeffies who at the end of his presentation dropped a #Biggie line,
“If you don’t know, now you know.” — Karine Jean-Pierre (@K_JeanPierre) January 22, 2020
I'm here for Rep Hakeem Jeffries's oratory and the inclusion of #biggiesmalls for the mic drop. #ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/eJOMrugV57 — Pat Brown (@PatBrownShow) January 22, 2020
Advertisement
Just a great rebuttal right now by Hakeem Jeffries. — David Jolly (@DavidJollyFL) January 22, 2020
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries just clapped back at that doofus Jay Sekulow with "and if you don't know, now you know."
And I am here, Sir, for it.
That speech was BRILLIANT. pic.twitter.com/PFdIN4azKd — BrooklynDad_Defiant! (@mmpadellan) January 22, 2020
To close @RepJeffries quoted Notorious B.I.G.'s Juicy ("And if you don't know, now you know"), and honestly I wouldn't mind 2 more hours of this if it required Jeffries explaining who the Notorious B.I.G. was to the United States Senate. — Susan Davis (@DaviSusan) January 22, 2020
My man @RepJeffries offered a rousing, pithy summary of the case against @POTUS with a fact-based roll call of his grievous errors and impeccable offenses. He eloquently indicted those complicit with Trump, & hit em with the Biggie finish: “And if you don’t know, now you know!” — Michael Eric Dyson (@MichaelEDyson) January 22, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-22--Mitch McConnell’s Impeachment Witness Comments Come Back To Haunt Him

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) has made every effort to block witnesses from the impeachment proceedings in the Senate to protect President Donald Trump .
But newly resurfaced comments from the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton show that McConnell once favored calling witnesses .
“ Had my vote prevailed , there would ’ ve been live witnesses , ” he said in 1999 footage resurfaced by CNN .
NEW : In a clip we found in the CNN archives , Mitch McConnell in Feb. 1999 said on Crossfire he supported `` whatever the House managers wanted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including `` live witnesses . ''
`` I voted for live witnesses myself , '' he added.https : //t.co/LX9MMH9jjv pic.twitter.com/FNB3mqZMbx — andrew kaczynski🤔 ( @ KFILE ) January 22 , 2020 Making the footage even more awkward in retrospect , McConnell slammed Democrats by saying they had decided to clear Clinton before the proceedings even began .
“ There were no open minds on the Democratic side in this trial , ” he said .
But now , McConnell is guilty of doing just that himself .
“ I ’ m not an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month .
McConnell also seemed quite deferential to the wishes of House impeachment managers in 1999 , offering to give them what they wanted to put on the trial : '' I would have been prepared to vote for whatever the House managers wanted in terms of putting on their trial , '' McConnell said ... '' My view was that we were entitled to witnesses .
`` https : //t.co/LX9MMH9jjv pic.twitter.com/OXuPvcVIE6 — andrew kaczynski🤔 ( @ KFILE ) January 22 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has made every effort to block witnesses from the impeachment proceedings in the Senate to protect President Donald Trump.
But newly resurfaced comments from the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton show that McConnell once favored calling witnesses.
Advertisement
“Had my vote prevailed, there would’ve been live witnesses,” he said in 1999 footage resurfaced by CNN.
NEW: In a clip we found in the CNN archives, Mitch McConnell in Feb. 1999 said on Crossfire he supported "whatever the House managers wanted in terms of putting on their trial" including "live witnesses."
"I voted for live witnesses myself," he added.https://t.co/LX9MMH9jjv pic.twitter.com/FNB3mqZMbx — andrew kaczynski🤔 (@KFILE) January 22, 2020
Making the footage even more awkward in retrospect, McConnell slammed Democrats by saying they had decided to clear Clinton before the proceedings even began.
“There were no open minds on the Democratic side in this trial,” he said.
But now, McConnell is guilty of doing just that himself.
“I’m not an impartial juror,” he declared last month.
McConnell also seemed quite deferential to the wishes of House impeachment managers in 1999, offering to give them what they wanted to put on the trial:
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-22--Washington Post Predicts ‘Most Damaging Legacy’ Of Donald Trump’s Impeachment Trial

The Washington Post editorial board on Tuesday predicted what could be “ the most damaging legacy ” if the GOP-controlled Senate votes to acquit President Donald Trump for his Ukraine misconduct .
And it ’ s not “ the rigging of the trial process ” it said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) is “ orchestrating in full collaboration with the White House.
” Instead , the newspaper ’ s board wrote in a new editorial that it “ might flow from the brazen case being laid out ” by Trump ’ s defense team that he “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pressure Ukraine ’ s president to announce an investigation into his possible Democratic 2020 rival Joe Biden .
“ By asking senators to ratify those positions , Mr. Trump and his lawyers are , in effect , seeking consent for an extraordinary expansion of his powers , ” the editorial argued .
“ An acquittal vote would confirm to Mr. Trump that he is free to solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election and to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to induce such interference.
” “ It would suggest that he can press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of any American citizen he designates , even in the absence of a preexisting U.S. probe , or any evidence , ” it added .
“ If Republican senators go along with it , they will not only be excusing behavior that many of them believe to be improper .
They will be enabling further assaults by Mr. Trump on the foundations of American democracy , ” the editorial concluded .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Washington Post editorial board on Tuesday predicted what could be “the most damaging legacy” if the GOP-controlled Senate votes to acquit President Donald Trump for his Ukraine misconduct.
And it’s not “the rigging of the trial process” it said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is “orchestrating in full collaboration with the White House.”
Advertisement
Instead, the newspaper’s board wrote in a new editorial that it “might flow from the brazen case being laid out” by Trump’s defense team that he “did absolutely nothing wrong” when attempting to pressure Ukraine’s president to announce an investigation into his possible Democratic 2020 rival Joe Biden.
“By asking senators to ratify those positions, Mr. Trump and his lawyers are, in effect, seeking consent for an extraordinary expansion of his powers,” the editorial argued. “An acquittal vote would confirm to Mr. Trump that he is free to solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election and to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to induce such interference.”
“It would suggest that he can press foreign leaders to launch a criminal investigation of any American citizen he designates, even in the absence of a preexisting U.S. probe, or any evidence,” it added.
“If Republican senators go along with it, they will not only be excusing behavior that many of them believe to be improper. They will be enabling further assaults by Mr. Trump on the foundations of American democracy,” the editorial concluded.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-22--Fed-Up John Roberts Delivers A Stark Warning To Both Sides Of Impeachment

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts warned the attorneys for President Donald Trump and the House impeachment managers to watch their tone as the first day of the proceedings wound down .
Roberts told both sides to “ remember that they are addressing the world ’ s greatest deliberative body ” : “ One reason it has earned that title is because its members avoid speaking in a manner and using language that is not conducive to civil discourse.
” His comments came after some late-night fireworks between Rep. Jerry Nadler ( D-N.Y. ) , who is one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pat Cipollone .
Nadler called Trump ’ s legal strategy “ embarrassing ” and took the Senate to task after a series of party-line votes that will not allow for witnesses or new evidence : “ The president is on trial in the Senate , but the Senate is on trial in the eyes of the American people .
Will you vote to allow all the relevant evidence to be presented here ?
Or will you betray your pledge to be an impartial juror ?
” “ So far , I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of senators voting for a cover-up , voting to deny witnesses , an absolutely indefensible vote , obviously a treacherous vote , ” Nadler said .
He also called it a “ vote against the United States.
” Cipollone fired back : “ The only one who should be embarrassed , Mr. Nadler , is you .
For the way you addressed this body .
This is the United States Senate .
You ’ re not in charge here.
” Roberts told both of them to back off and warned others to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 1905 impeachment trial of federal judge Charles Swayne , a senator objected to the use of the word “ pettifogging ” ( which means “ worrying too much about details that are minor or not important , ” per Merriam-Webster ) .
“ I don ’ t think we need to aspire to that high a standard , ” Roberts said .
“ But I do think those addressing the Senate should remember where they are .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts warned the attorneys for President Donald Trump and the House impeachment managers to watch their tone as the first day of the proceedings wound down.
Roberts told both sides to “remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body”:
Advertisement
One reason it has earned that title is because its members avoid speaking in a manner and using language that is not conducive to civil discourse.
His comments came after some late-night fireworks between Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), who is one of the House impeachment managers, and Trump attorney Pat Cipollone.
Nadler called Trump’s legal strategy “embarrassing” and took the Senate to task after a series of party-line votes that will not allow for witnesses or new evidence:
The president is on trial in the Senate, but the Senate is on trial in the eyes of the American people. Will you vote to allow all the relevant evidence to be presented here? Or will you betray your pledge to be an impartial juror?
“So far, I’m sad to say I see a lot of senators voting for a cover-up, voting to deny witnesses, an absolutely indefensible vote, obviously a treacherous vote,” Nadler said. He also called it a “vote against the United States.”
Cipollone fired back: “The only one who should be embarrassed, Mr. Nadler, is you. For the way you addressed this body. This is the United States Senate. You’re not in charge here.”
Roberts told both of them to back off and warned others to do the same. He noted that during the 1905 impeachment trial of federal judge Charles Swayne, a senator objected to the use of the word “pettifogging” (which means “worrying too much about details that are minor or not important,” per Merriam-Webster).


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-21--Hillary Clinton Vows To ‘Do Whatever I Can To Support Our Nominee,' Even If It's Sanders

Hillary Clinton appeared to backtrack on a series of disparaging comments about her onetime rival and current presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) on Tuesday , saying that regardless of her opinions , she ’ ll “ do whatever ” she can to support the person who secures the Democratic nomination .
Clinton , who won the popular vote but ultimately lost the presidency to Donald Trump in 2016 , gave an unvarnished interview about Sanders in a Hulu documentary that will air in March .
The Hollywood Reporter published details of Clinton ’ s comments this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likes ” Sanders , whom she called a “ career politician ” who “ got nothing done.
” While the former secretary of state didn ’ t apologize for her frankness , she did attempt to make it clear that she would ultimately throw her weight behind any candidate running to unseat President Trump .
“ I thought everyone wanted my authentic , unvarnished views !
” Clinton wrote on Twitter Tuesday evening .
“ But to be serious , the number one priority for our country and world is retiring Trump , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I will do whatever I can to support our nominee.
” I thought everyone wanted my authentic , unvarnished views !
But to be serious , the number one priority for our country and world is retiring Trump , and , as I always have , I will do whatever I can to support our nominee .
— Hillary Clinton ( @ HillaryClinton ) January 22 , 2020 THR asked Clinton this week whether her criticism of Sanders still stands .
She replied : “ Yes , it does.
” She declined to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the senator .
In a statement Tuesday , Sanders brushed off Clinton ’ s remarks and instead moved to turn the discussion toward Trump .
“ My focus today is on a monumental moment in American history : the impeachment trial of Donald Trump , ” he said in a statement .
“ Together , we are going to go forward and defeat the most dangerous president in American history.
” Clinton also told THR she has spoken to almost all of the 2020 candidates , including the two women who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
and Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) .
She elaborated on the difficulties women have running for office , saying it was still “ very hard ” to tackle the double standard applied to female candidates .
“ It ’ s really hard ever to score 100 when you ’ re trying to navigate gender expectations and barriers , ” Clinton said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Hillary Clinton appeared to backtrack on a series of disparaging comments about her onetime rival and current presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Tuesday, saying that regardless of her opinions, she’ll “do whatever” she can to support the person who secures the Democratic nomination.
Clinton, who won the popular vote but ultimately lost the presidency to Donald Trump in 2016, gave an unvarnished interview about Sanders in a Hulu documentary that will air in March.
Advertisement
The Hollywood Reporter published details of Clinton’s comments this week, including her claim that “nobody likes” Sanders, whom she called a “career politician” who “got nothing done.”
While the former secretary of state didn’t apologize for her frankness, she did attempt to make it clear that she would ultimately throw her weight behind any candidate running to unseat President Trump.
“I thought everyone wanted my authentic, unvarnished views!” Clinton wrote on Twitter Tuesday evening. “But to be serious, the number one priority for our country and world is retiring Trump, and, as I always have, I will do whatever I can to support our nominee.”
I thought everyone wanted my authentic, unvarnished views!
But to be serious, the number one priority for our country and world is retiring Trump, and, as I always have, I will do whatever I can to support our nominee. — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) January 22, 2020
Advertisement
THR asked Clinton this week whether her criticism of Sanders still stands. She replied: “Yes, it does.” She declined to say if she would endorse or campaign for the senator.
In a statement Tuesday, Sanders brushed off Clinton’s remarks and instead moved to turn the discussion toward Trump.
“My focus today is on a monumental moment in American history: the impeachment trial of Donald Trump,” he said in a statement. “Together, we are going to go forward and defeat the most dangerous president in American history.”
Clinton also told THR she has spoken to almost all of the 2020 candidates, including the two women who are still in the race: Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.). She elaborated on the difficulties women have running for office, saying it was still “very hard” to tackle the double standard applied to female candidates.
“It’s really hard ever to score 100 when you’re trying to navigate gender expectations and barriers,” Clinton said.
Advertisement