thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Prosecutors Withdraw From Roger Stone Case After DOJ Walks Back Sentencing

The Department of Justice is walking back its sentencing recommendation for President Donald Trump ’ s longtime adviser Roger Stone , according to a Fox News report citing an unnamed senior DOJ official .
Federal prosecutors Aaron S.J .
Zelinsky , Adam C. Jed , Jonathan Kravis and Michael Marando withdrew as government counsels in the case following the report .
The more lenient recommendation would be a rapid turnaround after federal prosecutors said on Monday that Stone should face seven to nine years for witness tampering and lying to Congress .
But that was before Trump publicly raged against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ miscarriage of justice ” can not be allowed .
A jury convicted Stone in November on seven counts , including witness tampering , lying to Congress and obstructing an official proceeding .
He was one of the highest-profile Trump allies to face prosecution as a result of special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election .
Prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Columbia had intensely debated what sentence to recommend for Stone , according to The Washington Post , ultimately settling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the severity of his crimes .
They cited federal guidelines that call for longer sentences if the offender has threatened physical harm or property damage , which Stone did when he told prosecution witness Randy Credico that he should “ prepare to die.
” The prosecutors also wrote that a longer sentence would send the message that Stone ’ s crimes , which took place “ in the context of a congressional investigation on matters of critical national importance , ” should not be taken lightly .
But following Trump ’ s overnight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 a.m. on Tuesday morning , prosecutors have reportedly decided to change their recommendation .
The Fox News story did not outline what the new version may be or when it would be announced .
Higher-ups at the Justice Department were not accurately briefed on the initial recommendation , the Fox News source claimed .
Zelinsky ’ s resignation as a prosecutor on the Stone case Tuesday afternoon was a dramatic addition to the reports of DOJ walking back the sentencing request .
He was one of Mueller ’ s top prosecutors during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court clerk for both liberal and conservative justices .
As part of his withdrawal from the Stone case , Zelinsky also resigned as a special assistant U.S. attorney on loan to the U.S. attorney ’ s office in D.C. , but he retained his position with the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Maryland .
Kravis included in his withdrawal filing that he was resigning as an assistant U.S. attorney serving in the D.C. office .
Jed is another former member of Mueller ’ s team who , like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s office in D.C. for the Stone trial .
“ The American people must have confidence that justice in this country is dispensed impartially , ” Schumer said .
“ That confidence can not be sustained if the president or his political appointees are permitted to interfere in prosecution and sentencing recommendations in order to protect their friends and associates.
” DOJ spokesperson Kerri Kupec earlier told Fox News that the decision to make a new sentencing recommendation was reached before Trump ’ s tweet and that DOJ has had no contact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump has repeatedly claimed he was exonerated in the special counsel ’ s investigation and has lashed out at anyone or anything that implicated him in wrongdoing .
In his early Tuesday tweet , he claimed that “ the real crimes were on the other side.
” The Mueller investigation led to numerous indictments , guilty pleas and convictions of Trump world figures such as the president ’ s former attorney Michael Cohen , former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Stone .
Trump has not ruled out pardoning Stone , a Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who has affiliations with conspiracy theorists and far-right extremists and who was one of Trump ’ s most loyal advocates during the Russia probe .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
All four federal prosecutors who ran the Roger Stone trial abruptly dropped out of the case on Tuesday after senior Department of Justice leadership intervened to take the rare step of walking back the prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation. The extraordinary series of events marks the latest sign of President Donald Trump and his appointees politicizing DOJ.
On Tuesday afternoon, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia filed a new recommendation asking that Stone, a longtime Trump adviser, be sentenced to prison but not suggesting any particular length of time.
Advertisement
The more lenient recommendation was a rapid turnaround after federal prosecutors Aaron S.J. Zelinsky, Adam C. Jed, Jonathan Kravis and Michael Marando told the court on Monday that Stone should face seven to nine years behind bars for witness tampering and lying to Congress. But that was before Trump publicly raged against the proposed sentence, tweeting that “this miscarriage of justice” cannot be allowed.
This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020
A jury convicted Stone in November on seven counts, including witness tampering, lying to Congress and obstructing an official proceeding. He was one of the highest-profile Trump allies to face prosecution as a result of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office had intensely debated what sentence to recommend for Stone, according to The Washington Post, ultimately settling on 87 to 108 months to reflect the severity of his crimes. They cited federal guidelines that call for longer sentences if the offender has threatened physical harm or property damage, which Stone did when he told prosecution witness Randy Credico that he should “prepare to die.”
Advertisement
The prosecutors also wrote that a longer sentence would send the message that Stone’s crimes, which took place “in the context of a congressional investigation on matters of critical national importance,” should not be taken lightly.
But following Trump’s overnight tweet, which he sent just before 2 a.m. on Tuesday morning, the Justice Department reportedly decided to overrule the career prosecutors. Higher-ups at DOJ were not accurately briefed on the initial recommendation, a Fox News source claimed. (DOJ spokesperson Kerri Kupec told Fox News that the decision to make a new sentencing recommendation was reached before Trump’s tweet and that DOJ has had no contact with the White House on the matter.)
Zelinsky’s resignation as a prosecutor on the Stone case Tuesday afternoon was the first dramatic response to the reports of DOJ walking back the sentencing request. He was one of Mueller’s top prosecutors during the Russia investigation and had been a Supreme Court clerk for both liberal and conservative justices. As part of his withdrawal from the Stone case, Zelinsky also resigned as a special assistant U.S. attorney on loan to the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C., but he retained his position with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland.
Kravis included in his withdrawal filing that he was resigning as an assistant U.S. attorney serving in the D.C. office. Jed is another former member of Mueller’s team who, like Zelinsky, moved to the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C. for the Stone trial.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called for an investigation into the reduced sentencing recommendation in a letter to the DOJ’s Inspector General.
Advertisement
“The American people must have confidence that justice in this country is dispensed impartially,” Schumer said. “That confidence cannot be sustained if the president or his political appointees are permitted to interfere in prosecution and sentencing recommendations in order to protect their friends and associates.”
Trump has repeatedly claimed he was exonerated in the special counsel’s investigation and has lashed out at anyone or anything that implicated him in wrongdoing. In his early Tuesday tweet, he claimed that “the real crimes were on the other side.” The Mueller investigation led to numerous indictments, guilty pleas and convictions of Trump world figures such as the president’s former attorney Michael Cohen, former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Stone.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Michael Bloomberg Slammed After Audio Of Him Defending Stop-And-Frisk Resurfaces

In the clip shared on Twitter by podcast host Benjamin Dixon , the now-Democratic presidential candidate can be heard saying during a Q & A at The Aspen Institute that kids in minority neighborhoods need to be “ thrown up against the wall ” and frisked in order to reduce crime rates .
He continued : “ One of the unintended consequences is people say , ‘ Oh , my God , you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities.
’ Yes , that ’ s true .
Why ?
Because we put all the cops in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why did we do it ?
Because that ’ s where all the crime is.
” Bloomberg , who served three terms as mayor from 2002 to 2013 , was a vocal proponent of stop-and-frisk , which allowed police officers to temporarily detain , question and search members of the public on the street for potential weapons and illegal contraband if the officer had a reasonable suspicion of a threat .
The policy , which disproportionally affected Black and Latino people , was condemned by many Democrats and civil rights activists as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruled in 2013 that stop-and-frisk was unconstitutional .
Bloomberg appealed the ruling , but the city dropped the appeal after Bill de Blasio , a staunch critic of stop-and-frisk , was elected mayor later that year .
He announced a settlement in the case in 2014 .
“ I inherited the police practice of stop-and-frisk , and as part of our effort to stop gun violence it was overused , ” he said .
“ By the time I left office , I cut it back by 95 % , but I should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I regret that and I have apologized — and I have taken responsibility for taking too long to understand the impact it had on Black and Latino communities.
” “ I was wrong and I am sorry , ” he told the crowd at the time .
“ The fact is , far too many people were being stopped while we tried to [ reduce crime ] and the overwhelming majority of them were Black and Latino .
That may have included , I ’ m sorry to say , some of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just take the description and Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops , ” he said .
“ They are male minorities , 15-25 .
That ’ s true in New York .
It ’ s true in virtually every city .
And that ’ s where the real crime is.
” “ You ’ ve got to get the guns out of the hands of the people that are getting killed , ” he added .
“ Kids think they ’ re going to get killed anyway because all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they just don ’ t have any long-term focus .
It ’ s a joke to have a gun .
It ’ s a joke to pull the trigger.
” Nobody in New York gets murdered ― if you get murdered , first thing we want to do is , what were you selling or who are your family members ?
Because it just has to be you ’ re a drug dealer or you have ... a family quarrel .
There ’ s just no other , no other kind of verdict @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where they haven ’ t gone after scaring the kids to get guns out ... a lot of people don ’ t like the fact that what they do , but that ’ s what stop-and-frisk is all about .
The way you get the guns out of the kids ’ hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk ’ em .
And then they say , “ Well , I don ’ t want to get caught.
” So they don ’ t bring the gun .
They still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it at home .
Bloomberg , who has poured millions of dollars into advertising his candidacy , has seen his support from Black voters rise in recent weeks .
A Quinnipiac University poll released on Monday showed Bloomberg trailing only behind former Vice President Joe Biden in support from the Black community .
Among Black Democratic-leaning voters , 27 % said they support Biden in the primaries , compared to 22 % for Bloomberg and 19 % for Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is facing backlash after an audio clip of him defending the controversial “stop-and-frisk” policing strategy in 2015 resurfaced Monday.
In the clip shared on Twitter by podcast host Benjamin Dixon, the now-Democratic presidential candidate can be heard saying during a Q&A at The Aspen Institute that kids in minority neighborhoods need to be “thrown up against the wall” and frisked in order to reduce crime rates.
Advertisement
“Put a lot of cops in the street,” Bloomberg said while discussing what other cities can learn from New York City’s policing model. “Put those cops where the crime is, which means in minority neighborhoods.”
He continued: “One of the unintended consequences is people say, ‘Oh, my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities.’ Yes, that’s true. Why? Because we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods. That’s true. Why did we do it? Because that’s where all the crime is.”
Audio of @MikeBloomberg’s 2015 @AspenInstitute speech where he explains that “you can just Xerox (copy)” the description of male, minorities 16-25 and hand to cops.
Bloomberg had video of speech blocked.
Perhaps because of the problematic explanation he gives for #StopAndFrisk pic.twitter.com/Fm0YCi4ZRy — Benjamin Dixon (@BenjaminPDixon) February 10, 2020
Bloomberg, who served three terms as mayor from 2002 to 2013, was a vocal proponent of stop-and-frisk, which allowed police officers to temporarily detain, question and search members of the public on the street for potential weapons and illegal contraband if the officer had a reasonable suspicion of a threat.
Advertisement
The policy, which disproportionally affected Black and Latino people, was condemned by many Democrats and civil rights activists as racist and ineffective. A federal judge ruled in 2013 that stop-and-frisk was unconstitutional. Bloomberg appealed the ruling, but the city dropped the appeal after Bill de Blasio, a staunch critic of stop-and-frisk, was elected mayor later that year. He announced a settlement in the case in 2014.
In a statement on Tuesday, Bloomberg said his past comments about the policy “do not reflect my commitment to criminal justice reform and racial equity.”
“I inherited the police practice of stop-and-frisk, and as part of our effort to stop gun violence it was overused,” he said. “By the time I left office, I cut it back by 95%, but I should’ve done it faster and sooner. I regret that and I have apologized — and I have taken responsibility for taking too long to understand the impact it had on Black and Latino communities.”
Bloomberg failed to mention in his statement that the New York Police Department only began scaling back stop-and-frisks in 2012 in response to public pressure and negative media attention.
He first apologized for supporting stop-and-frisk at a Black megachurch in Brooklyn just days before formally announcing his 2020 Democratic presidential bid.
Advertisement
“I was wrong and I am sorry,” he told the crowd at the time. “The fact is, far too many people were being stopped while we tried to [reduce crime] and the overwhelming majority of them were Black and Latino. That may have included, I’m sorry to say, some of you here today.”
While some accepted Bloomberg’s apology at face value, others questioned the sincerity of his reversal on the policy.
“For years, he has defended ‘stop-and-frisk,’ the racially discriminatory and ineffective police tactic that he backed and expanded as NYC’s mayor,” Rolling Stone writer Jamil Smith tweeted at the time. “Now that he is running for president and needs black votes, he’s sorry.”
Bloomberg, who blocked The Aspen Institute from releasing footage of his remarks at the time, said at the 2015 event that 95% of murderers and murder victims “fit one M.O.”
“You can just take the description and Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops,” he said. “They are male minorities, 15-25. That’s true in New York. It’s true in virtually every city. And that’s where the real crime is.”
Advertisement
“You’ve got to get the guns out of the hands of the people that are getting killed,” he added. “Kids think they’re going to get killed anyway because all their friends are getting killed. So they just don’t have any long-term focus. It’s a joke to have a gun. It’s a joke to pull the trigger.”
He continued:
Nobody in New York gets murdered ― if you get murdered, first thing we want to do is, what were you selling or who are your family members? Because it just has to be you’re a drug dealer or you have ... a family quarrel. There’s just no other, no other kind of verdict whatsoever. In the other cities, where they haven’t gone after scaring the kids to get guns out ... a lot of people don’t like the fact that what they do, but that’s what stop-and-frisk is all about. ... The way you get the guns out of the kids’ hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk ’em. And then they say, “Well, I don’t want to get caught.” So they don’t bring the gun. They still have a gun, but they leave it at home.
Bloomberg’s campaign did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.
Dixon’s tweet of the 2015 audio had garnered over 3.5 million views as of Tuesday morning. Though audio of the event has been online since 2015, Bloomberg’s run for president sparked renewed interest in his comments.
“I am staunchly against Michael Bloomberg buying his way into the campaign,” Dixon told HuffPost of the billionaire businessman’s presidential bid. “And this [audio] was hiding in plain sight. ... People need to hear it.”
“For Black and brown boys in New York, he’s not much better for them than [President Donald] Trump is,” he added.
Advertisement
Bloomberg, who has poured millions of dollars into advertising his candidacy, has seen his support from Black voters rise in recent weeks. A Quinnipiac University poll released on Monday showed Bloomberg trailing only behind former Vice President Joe Biden in support from the Black community. Among Black Democratic-leaning voters, 27% said they support Biden in the primaries, compared to 22% for Bloomberg and 19% for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Asked why he believes Bloomberg’s support among Black voters has been climbing, Dixon offered two theories: “desperation” to beat Trump and “manufactured consent” through Bloomberg’s huge ad campaign.
“If all you see and all you hear all day long is Bloomberg, then you start believing that maybe he is the guy to beat Donald Trump,” Dixon said.
“I don’t believe it’s going to stop his campaign,” he said of the resurfaced audio. “But I think it will at least give him a little indigestion this morning.”
Twitter lit up in response to Dixon’s tweet, with some accusing Bloomberg of being “vile” and “racist.”
Advertisement
This is disgusting. Every cable news show should be leading with and discussing this today. https://t.co/KCnA3EHq2U — Bakari Sellers (@Bakari_Sellers) February 11, 2020
This is one of the most vile things you'll ever hear any mainstream figure say, and if you think you're going to bully or coerce or insult people into voting for him if he's the nominee, I think you're living in a very warped dream land. https://t.co/tKOMNAZWsv — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) February 11, 2020
This should be playing on mainstream news channels as frequently as the ads with which billionaire Bloomberg has saturated the market. #integritybeatstrump https://t.co/45fkMMfM84 — Briahna Solidarity Gray (@briebriejoy) February 10, 2020
Trump, who encouraged Chicago police in 2018 to implement stop-and-frisk, shared the audio clip of Bloomberg’s comments on Tuesday morning.
“WOW, BLOOMBERG IS A TOTAL RACIST!” the president said in a since deleted tweet.
Trump later shared a tweet with the hashtag #BloombergIsRacist and appeared to mock his Democratic rival’s height and golf skills.
Advertisement
“Mini Mike is a short ball (very) hitter,” the president wrote.
The Twitter user whom Trump retweeted, @CANCEL_SAM, appeared to be a progressive commentator who frequently criticizes the president.
Ladies and gentlemen, we got him pic.twitter.com/bcCdtluxky — BERNIE BEATS TRUMP (@CANCEL_SAM) February 11, 2020
In his statement Tuesday, Bloomberg decried Trump’s tweets responding to the resurfaced audio clip as the “latest example of his endless efforts to divide Americans.”
“The President’s attack on me clearly reflects his fear over the growing strength of my campaign,” he said. “Make no mistake Mr. President: I am not afraid of you and I will not let you bully me or anyone else in America.”
The White House declined to comment. A representative for Trump’s reelection campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--The Long-Predicted Amy Klobuchar Surge May Finally Be Happening

Brendan McDermid / Reuters Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar is greeted by supporters during a campaign event in Salem , New Hampshire on Feb. 9 .
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar had gone to all 99 counties in the Hawkeye State , the only top-tier candidate to do so .
The good people of Iowa would appreciate her corny Midwestern humor , and Klobuchar ’ s surge ― the one pundits wouldn ’ t stop predicting , often in the face of all available evidence ― would finally happen .
Instead , Klobuchar finished fifth , receiving just 12 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegate in the state .
She had spent much of the run-up to Iowa trapped in Washington , serving as a juror in President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial .
But that fifth-place finish ― only a few points behind former Vice President Joe Biden , the national front-runner at the time ― was just good enough to claim a bit of momentum heading into New Hampshire .
The evidence of a surge for Klobuchar , who drew a similarly sized crowd in Nashua earlier in the day Sunday , is mounting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her jumping into the double digits in the Granite State , directly challenging Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Biden for third place and greatly complicating South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg ’ s path to both a victory here and a potential presidential nomination .
For Klobuchar to become a threat that could actually triumph at the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee this summer , she will need to drastically boost her performance with Black voters .
A Quinnipiac University poll released Monday found her polling at 0 % ― yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Unless she quickly improves on that end , she ’ ll mostly serve as yet another moderate candidate dividing the vote and making it easier for progressive Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders to win .
At events in the Granite State , voter after voter said they were deciding between her and Buttigieg , with many citing her debate performance as the reason they decided to give her candidacy a second look .
Rich Sigel , an attorney from Manchester who attended her event in Salem , was among her few dedicated supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to back her not long after she entered the race last February . )
But he said he ’ s been bombarded by friends interested in supporting her .
“ I ’ ve been getting texts all day from friends who saw her at the debate , who saw her at a [ New Hampshire Democratic Party ] dinner , who are heading in her direction , ” Sigel said .
“ She ’ s the little engine that could.
” Dennis Chmiel and Mary Ann Santilippo , a husband-and-wife team of veterinarians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nashua , said they were deciding between Klobuchar and Buttigieg .
They liked her ability to bring people together and win in red areas , but they also admired Buttigieg ’ s military service and thought Trump would find “ less to dig up on him , ” in the words of Santilippo .
Both , they hoped , could “ bring back normalcy to America.
” In other words , for the Klobuchar surge to happen , Klobuchar might need to convince voters that the Klobuchar surge is happening .
And she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates eschew basically any process talk , a portion of Klobuchar ’ s stump speech was about how well she is doing : She was in third place in a new poll , she ’ s raised $ 3 million since the debate and her last rally was standing room only .
Much of Klobuchar ’ s stump speech is unchanged : She talks about how she ’ s been able to win , even in Minnesota ’ s most conservative areas .
She lays out a center-left platform , including a public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election will serve as a “ decency check , ” laying out a litany of Trump ’ s most unhinged moments , like when the president blamed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ’ s decision to cut him out of some broadcasts of “ Home Alone 2 : Lost In New York.
” Like she did in Iowa , Klobuchar peppered her speech with local references ― her numerous references to Sens .
Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen have become a running joke among Democratic operatives here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit New Hampshire cultural touchstones , such as making a visit to the restaurant Chez Vachon and having a bite of poutine .
“ It ’ s not shared prosperity when we don ’ t get the kind of infrastructure we want , like [ a long-discussed passenger rail line from Boston ] to Southern New Hampshire , ” she said in Salem .
“ It ’ s not shared prosperity when I literally went to Iceland , where they ’ ve got all those volcanoes , right , and they have better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than they do in Franconia Notch.
” Klobuchar ’ s frequent local touchstones aren ’ t the only thing she might struggle to replicate when the race goes to bigger and more diverse states starting with Nevada , then South Carolina and then Super Tuesday .
While Klobuchar has had online fundraising bursts after debates , she has typically not kept pace with Warren , Sanders or Buttigieg , never mind the hundreds of millions that former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has at his disposal .

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar is greeted by supporters during a campaign event in Salem, New Hampshire, on Feb. 9. Brendan McDermid / Reuters
SALEM, N.H. ― This was supposed to happen in Iowa.
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar had gone to all 99 counties in the Hawkeye State, the only top-tier candidate to do so. The good people of Iowa would appreciate her corny Midwestern humor, and Klobuchar’s surge ― the one pundits wouldn’t stop predicting, often in the face of all available evidence ― would finally happen.
Instead, Klobuchar finished fifth, receiving just 12% of the vote and a single national delegate in the state. She had spent much of the run-up to Iowa trapped in Washington, serving as a juror in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial. But that fifth-place finish ― only a few points behind former Vice President Joe Biden, the national front-runner at the time ― was just good enough to claim a bit of momentum heading into New Hampshire.
Advertisement
Following a strong performance at Friday’s Democratic primary debate in Manchester, Klobuchar seems to be having her moment. At a rally in the Republican-leaning town on the Massachusetts border on Sunday night, she was ebullient.
“I have been bolted down on my desk in the Senate,” Klobuchar said to a crowd of roughly 1,000 that broke out into sporadic “Amy, Amy” chants. “And I am finally unleashed.”
The evidence of a surge for Klobuchar, who drew a similarly sized crowd in Nashua earlier in the day Sunday, is mounting. A spate of polls have found her jumping into the double digits in the Granite State, directly challenging Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Biden for third place and greatly complicating former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s path to both a victory here and a potential presidential nomination.
For Klobuchar to become a threat that could actually triumph at the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee this summer, she will need to drastically boost her performance with Black voters. A Quinnipiac University poll released Monday found her polling at 0% ― yes, 0% ― among African Americans. Unless she quickly improves on that end, she’ll mostly serve as yet another moderate candidate dividing the vote and making it easier for progressive Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders to win.
Advertisement
At events in the Granite State, voter after voter said they were deciding between her and Buttigieg, with many citing her debate performance as the reason they decided to give her candidacy a second look.
Rich Sigel, an attorney from Manchester who attended her event in Salem, was among her few dedicated supporters in the state. (He decided to back her not long after she entered the race last February.) But he said he’s been bombarded by friends interested in supporting her.
“I’ve been getting texts all day from friends who saw her at the debate, who saw her at a [New Hampshire Democratic Party] dinner, who are heading in her direction,” Sigel said. “She’s the little engine that could.”
Gerry Frazier, a retired electrical engineer from Atkinson, said he was leaning toward Klobuchar over Buttigieg because of the latter’s relative lack of experience.
“I like her experience in Washington,” he said. “I wish he could be Amy’s vice president for eight years and then slide into the White House.”
Advertisement
Dennis Chmiel and Mary Ann Santilippo, a husband-and-wife team of veterinarians who attended Klobuchar’s rally in Nashua, said they were deciding between Klobuchar and Buttigieg. They liked her ability to bring people together and win in red areas, but they also admired Buttigieg’s military service and thought Trump would find “less to dig up on him,” in the words of Santilippo. Both, they hoped, could “bring back normalcy to America.”
One factor they were weighing: Can Klobuchar surpass Buttigieg and become the moderate front-runner?
“We really don’t want Bernie to become the nominee,” said Santilippo, explaining that they didn’t think his left-wing politics can win over the moderates necessary to defeat Trump.
In other words, for the Klobuchar surge to happen, Klobuchar might need to convince voters that the Klobuchar surge is happening. And she’s certainly trying. While other candidates eschew basically any process talk, a portion of Klobuchar’s stump speech was about how well she is doing: She was in third place in a new poll, she’s raised $3 million since the debate and her last rally was standing room only.
“They didn’t predict I’d make it through the summer,” she said in Salem, leaving the “they” unnamed. “They didn’t predict I’d make it to the debate stage. But I sure made it to the debate stage on Friday night!”
Much of Klobuchar’s stump speech is unchanged: She talks about how she’s been able to win, even in Minnesota’s most conservative areas. She lays out a center-left platform, including a public option for health care. She says the election will serve as a “decency check,” laying out a litany of Trump’s most unhinged moments, like when the president blamed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s decision to cut him out of some broadcasts of “Home Alone 2: Lost In New York.”
Advertisement
Like she did in Iowa, Klobuchar peppered her speech with local references ― her numerous references to Sens. Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen have become a running joke among Democratic operatives here. She’s also tried to hit New Hampshire cultural touchstones, such as making a visit to the restaurant Chez Vachon and having a bite of poutine.
“It’s not shared prosperity when we don’t get the kind of infrastructure we want, like [a long-discussed passenger rail line from Boston] to Southern New Hampshire,” she said in Salem. “It’s not shared prosperity when I literally went to Iceland, where they’ve got all those volcanoes, right, and they have better cellphone service and better high-speed internet than they do in Franconia Notch.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Joe Biden Is Getting Out Of New Hampshire As Quickly As He Can

Sending a clear signal that he doesn ’ t think the results of the New Hampshire primary will go his way , former Vice President Joe Biden will be in South Carolina when the results come in on Tuesday night .
As New Hampshire voters headed to the polls Tuesday morning , Biden ’ s campaign announced that he and his wife , Jill , would be holding an event in Columbia , South Carolina , a few hours later .
In other words , Biden is skipping his own party in New Hampshire .
Since his fourth-place showing in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ downbeat on his chances of a strong finish in New Hampshire .
“ I took a hit in Iowa and I ’ ll probably take a hit here , ” Biden said Friday at the Democratic debate in Manchester , New Hampshire .
His team has tried to clean up those remarks , insisting that he is competing hard in the state ― but also saying it ’ s important to view the first four primary states together , rather than focusing too much on Iowa and New Hampshire .
Nevada is next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caucuses on Feb. 22 .
Biden ’ s trip on Tuesday shows that his team is placing more of its focus , however , on South Carolina , which has its primary on Feb. 29 .
Biden expects to perform better there than his competitors , due in large part to the state ’ s large Black population .
The appearance of Biden essentially giving up on New Hampshire rankled some of his supporters in the state .
“ I was kind of discouraged when I saw him writing off New Hampshire , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaning toward Biden , said at one of his rallies on Saturday .
“ He needs to keep campaigning , keep meeting voters and keep trying to get his message out.
” “ This is a race .
You want to be upbeat , ” said Barry Nestor , a Milford resident who is a Biden backer .
“ You don ’ t want to be ― he ’ s the leader .
He ’ s the one .
He needs to put on a brave face for all of us .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sending a clear signal that he doesn’t think the results of the New Hampshire primary will go his way, former Vice President Joe Biden will be in South Carolina when the results come in on Tuesday night.
As New Hampshire voters headed to the polls Tuesday morning, Biden’s campaign announced that he and his wife, Jill, would be holding an event in Columbia, South Carolina, a few hours later.
Advertisement
In other words, Biden is skipping his own party in New Hampshire.
Since his fourth-place showing in the Iowa caucuses, Biden has been downbeat on his chances of a strong finish in New Hampshire.
“I took a hit in Iowa and I’ll probably take a hit here,” Biden said Friday at the Democratic debate in Manchester, New Hampshire.
His team has tried to clean up those remarks, insisting that he is competing hard in the state ― but also saying it’s important to view the first four primary states together, rather than focusing too much on Iowa and New Hampshire.
Nevada is next in line after New Hampshire, with caucuses on Feb. 22. Biden’s trip on Tuesday shows that his team is placing more of its focus, however, on South Carolina, which has its primary on Feb. 29. Biden expects to perform better there than his competitors, due in large part to the state’s large Black population.
Advertisement
The appearance of Biden essentially giving up on New Hampshire rankled some of his supporters in the state.
“I was kind of discouraged when I saw him writing off New Hampshire,” Alexandra Argasinsky, a Windham resident leaning toward Biden, said at one of his rallies on Saturday. “He needs to keep campaigning, keep meeting voters and keep trying to get his message out.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Michael Bloomberg Isn’t Running In New Hampshire, But He’s In Everyone’s Head

MANCHESTER , N.H. ― Michael Bloomberg , the former New York mayor and multibillionaire media mogul who has already poured hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money into a presidential bid , spent the weekend thousands of miles away , campaigning with television ’ s Judge Judy in Oklahoma City .
He ’ s not on Tuesday ’ s Democratic presidential primary ballot in New Hampshire , and won ’ t appear on the ballot in any state for nearly a month .
As the leading campaigns for the nomination to challenge GOP President Donald Trump prepare to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more diverse states over the next three weeks , Bloomberg ’ s late arrival in the Democratic race ― and likely appearance in next week ’ s debate in Nevada ― presents an opportunity for some candidates and challenges for others .
Bloomberg ’ s money erases the small-dollar dominance of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ campaign , while also playing into Sanders ’ rhetoric about how billionaires have corrupted the political system .
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , whose campaign is looking for a game-changing moment , has long sought political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s gains among Black voters threaten the core of former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s firewall .
( The campaigns of former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar both remain focused on the four early states , and are less immediately impacted by Bloomberg . )
There ’ s good reason for the campaigns to fear him : Bloomberg has spent more than $ 350 million on ads ― nearly twice as much as Tom Steyer , a fellow billionaire and the second-largest spender in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 times what Sanders ’ campaign has spent on advertising .
He ’ s hired 2,100 staffers in just months , dwarfing the extensive operations that Warren and Sanders took nearly a full year to assemble .
All this money has been aimed at the states voting on March 3 ― Super Tuesday ― when about one-third of the delegates to the Democratic National Convention will be awarded .
“ Since Iowa last week , it is clear that the candidate field , while narrowing and perhaps becoming less clear on some aspects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can truly take on Donald Trump , and defeat him in the fall , ” Dan Kanninen , a Bloomberg campaign adviser , said on a conference call with reporters on Monday .
“ It really is absurd that we have a guy who is prepared to spend — already — many hundreds of millions of dollars on TV ads , ” Sanders said Sunday night in an interview on “ The Dean Obeidallah Show ” on SiriusXM .
“ Meanwhile , he did not do what all of the other Democratic candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ town meetings in Iowa , or New Hampshire , or Nevada , or South Carolina .
Those were not important enough for him .
He could simply buy the election with hundreds of millions of dollars of ads .
That is wrong .
That is the basic , fundamental problem of American society — is that billionaires have extraordinary wealth and power over the economic and political life of this country.
” If Bloomberg does go after Sanders , it ’ s likely he ’ ll try to contrast their records on gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary voters .
Since the Newtown school massacre in 2012 , Bloomberg has emerged as the key funder of gun control efforts in the United States , while moderates in the Democratic Party ― including most recently Biden ― have long attacked Sanders for accepting the endorsement of the National Rifle Association and holding pro-gun stances in the early 1990s .
“ I will point it out every single day that billionaires are trying to buy this election , ” Warren told reporters on a campaign bus on Monday .
“ And whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a billionaire who is financing a super PAC , or a billionaire who is creating the opportunities for a candidate who is going to be beholden to that billionaire .
If we stay on this path , our democracy fundamentally changes.
” The Progressive Change Campaign Committee , which has endorsed Warren , confronted the Democratic National Committee in December to alter the rules to potentially bring Bloomberg onto the primary debate stage , arguing he should have to defend his ideas in front of the American public .
The group is hopeful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mostly stagnant standing in the polls ahead of the Super Tuesday states , where Warren has made extensive investments in field operations .
( Bloomberg is likely , but not yet guaranteed , to make the stage for the Jan. 19 debate in Las Vegas . )
“ In the end , based on Biden ’ s inability to raise money , based on the fact that even Pete ’ s going to have trouble in Super Tuesday , and the fact that Amy who ’ s like the perfect candidate can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to , then we have no choice but to support Bloomberg .
He ’ s a great man , he was a great mayor , ” said Lenny Airsch , an attorney from New York who came to Buttigieg ’ s town hall in Nashua on Sunday .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
MANCHESTER, N.H. ― Michael Bloomberg, the former New York mayor and multibillionaire media mogul who has already poured hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money into a presidential bid, spent the weekend thousands of miles away, campaigning with television’s Judge Judy in Oklahoma City. He’s not on Tuesday’s Democratic presidential primary ballot in New Hampshire, and won’t appear on the ballot in any state for nearly a month.
But that hasn’t prevented him from looming over the first primary voting, and his forthcoming showdown with the rest of the Democratic field is a constant source of conversation and speculation for voters, operatives and political tourists.
Advertisement
As the leading campaigns for the nomination to challenge GOP President Donald Trump prepare to exit New Hampshire and head to bigger and more diverse states over the next three weeks, Bloomberg’s late arrival in the Democratic race ― and likely appearance in next week’s debate in Nevada ― presents an opportunity for some candidates and challenges for others.
Bloomberg’s money erases the small-dollar dominance of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign, while also playing into Sanders’ rhetoric about how billionaires have corrupted the political system. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, whose campaign is looking for a game-changing moment, has long sought political combat with Bloomberg. And Bloomberg’s gains among Black voters threaten the core of former Vice President Joe Biden’s firewall. (The campaigns of former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar both remain focused on the four early states, and are less immediately impacted by Bloomberg.)
There’s good reason for the campaigns to fear him: Bloomberg has spent more than $350 million on ads ― nearly twice as much as Tom Steyer, a fellow billionaire and the second-largest spender in the race. That’s nearly 10 times what Sanders’ campaign has spent on advertising. He’s hired 2,100 staffers in just months, dwarfing the extensive operations that Warren and Sanders took nearly a full year to assemble. All this money has been aimed at the states voting on March 3 ― Super Tuesday ― when about one-third of the delegates to the Democratic National Convention will be awarded.
And that heavy spending is leading to a rise in the polls. A national Quinnipiac University poll of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents released Monday found Bloomberg earning 15% of the vote in the primary, essentially tied for third with Warren. (Sanders led with 25%, followed by Biden with 17%.)
Advertisement
The ultimate sign of how much the conversation has seemed to revolve around Bloomberg came shortly after midnight Tuesday, where Bloomberg won the tiny town of Dixville Notch, which traditionally votes before the rest of the state, hijacking a New Hampshire political tradition without ever setting foot here.
“Since Iowa last week, it is clear that the candidate field, while narrowing and perhaps becoming less clear on some aspects, is not producing a candidate that can truly take on Donald Trump, and defeat him in the fall,” Dan Kanninen, a Bloomberg campaign adviser, said on a conference call with reporters on Monday.
Some allies of Sanders, who leads in the polls here and has become the national front-runner since Biden’s stumble in Iowa, fear Bloomberg’s massive television and digital ad spends could soon target the democratic socialist. (So far, all of Bloomberg’s spending has been aimed at Trump.)
While Sanders continues to shatter small-dollar fundraising records ― his campaign banked $25 million in January alone ― the amount he’ll be able to spend in expensive Super Tuesday states, including California, Texas, Virginia and Massachusetts, pales in comparison to Bloomberg’s fortune.
Advertisement
“It really is absurd that we have a guy who is prepared to spend — already — many hundreds of millions of dollars on TV ads,” Sanders said Sunday night in an interview on “The Dean Obeidallah Show” on SiriusXM. “Meanwhile, he did not do what all of the other Democratic candidates do. He wasn’t holding town meetings in Iowa, or New Hampshire, or Nevada, or South Carolina. Those were not important enough for him. He could simply buy the election with hundreds of millions of dollars of ads. That is wrong. That is the basic, fundamental problem of American society — is that billionaires have extraordinary wealth and power over the economic and political life of this country.”
If Bloomberg does go after Sanders, it’s likely he’ll try to contrast their records on gun control, a top issue for Democratic primary voters. Since the Newtown school massacre in 2012, Bloomberg has emerged as the key funder of gun control efforts in the United States, while moderates in the Democratic Party ― including most recently Biden ― have long attacked Sanders for accepting the endorsement of the National Rifle Association and holding pro-gun stances in the early 1990s.
On Saturday, the Sanders campaign announced the hire of Matt Deitsch, a co-founder of the March For Our Lives gun-control advocacy movement, as a policy adviser on gun violence prevention. Deitsch could help Sanders fight back against any Bloomberg attacks.
Warren, whose rhetoric on billionaires and corruption closely matches Sanders’, has long looked forward to a showdown with Bloomberg. While she typically shies away from criticisms of other Democrats in the 2020 race, she is eager to launch attacks on the highest-profile billionaire in the race,
“I will point it out every single day that billionaires are trying to buy this election,” Warren told reporters on a campaign bus on Monday. “And whether it’s a billionaire running or a billionaire who is financing a super PAC, or a billionaire who is creating the opportunities for a candidate who is going to be beholden to that billionaire. If we stay on this path, our democracy fundamentally changes.”
Advertisement
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which has endorsed Warren, confronted the Democratic National Committee in December to open up the rules, potentially allowing Bloomberg, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro onto the debate stage. The group is hopeful the contrast can boost Warren’s mostly stagnant standing in the polls ahead of the Super Tuesday states, where Warren has made extensive investments in field operations. (Bloomberg is likely, but not yet guaranteed, to make the stage for the Jan. 19 debate in Las Vegas.)
“Michael Bloomberg is the personification of Elizabeth Warren’s argument that billionaires are buying and corrupting our political system,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “The fact that he’s so arrogant that he doesn’t feel the need to engage voters shows how out of touch a government run by billionaires would be.”
Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg isn't running in Tuesday's New Hampshire primary, but he and his fortune loom over upcoming big-state contests. MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
Bloomberg seems to pose the most direct threat to Biden, who shares his broad ideological outlook and policy priorities, but not his personal fortune. While Biden’s campaign thinks the former vice president can contrast his “Middle Class Joe” persona with Bloomberg’s billions, the Quinnipiac University poll already shows Bloomberg eating into Biden’s vote share.
Most crucially, Bloomberg is gaining with Black voters, who are crucial to Biden’s plans to rack up delegates in South Carolina and the Southern states that cast ballots on Super Tuesday. The Quinnipiac poll found Bloomberg’s share of the Black vote jumping from 8% to 22% since January, while Biden’s declined from 52% to 27%.
Advertisement
Bloomberg’s strength with Black voters alarmed the other campaigns. By the end of the day Monday, multiple operatives were quietly circulating an audio clip of Bloomberg defending the controversial New York Police Department stop and frisk program he expanded as mayor. Critics have long argued the program was unconstitutional and involved unfair racial profiling of Blacks and Latinos.
Interviews with moderate Democratic voters ― including some who drove up from either Bloomberg’s home state of Massachusetts or New York ― show many were prepared to see him as a savior who could block a Sanders nomination and defeat Trump in the fall.
“In the end, based on Biden’s inability to raise money, based on the fact that even Pete’s going to have trouble in Super Tuesday, and the fact that Amy who’s like the perfect candidate can’t get gain the traction she has to, then we have no choice but to support Bloomberg. He’s a great man, he was a great mayor,” said Lenny Airsch, an attorney from New York who came to Buttigieg’s town hall in Nashua on Sunday.
Is Bloomberg trying to buy the nomination?
“We have no choice. You gotta beat Trump,” said Richard Aurbach, another attorney from New York. “He’s going to spend all this money, and give it all these down-ballot candidates. What’s wrong with that? All Mike has to do is say let’s both stand on our wallets and say who’s taller now?”
Airsch added: “Stop-and-frisk, while controversial, worked.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Ted Cruz Inadvertently Creates Very Effective Bernie Sanders Campaign Ad

Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-Texas ) is turning out to be a very effective campaigner ― for Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , that is .
The Texas Republican may have inadvertently made the case for a Sanders presidency on the latest episode of his podcast , “ Verdict with Ted Cruz.
” It happened when the senator attempted to claim without evidence that if Sanders were elected , conservative podcasts such as his own would be censored .
“ As bad as [ Big Tech is ] now , in a Democratic administration , in a Bernie Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not exaggerating when I say this podcast could very well be off the air , ” Cruz said .
Sen Ted Cruz warns that if Bernie Sanders is elected president , his new podcast could be forced off the air pic.twitter.com/OpHEW47H8s — Jason Campbell ( @ JasonSCampbell ) February 11 , 2020 Turns out , that could be a selling point based on the cheeky reactions of Twitter users .
why is Cruz doing get out the vote work for Sanders ?
?
?
https : //t.co/aaBzaeGXCv — 𝚒 ' 𝚖 𝚊 𝚑𝚒𝚐𝚑𝚠𝚊𝚢 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2020 If Bernie 's people ca n't cut this into an ad , he does n't deserve the nomination .
https : //t.co/OT9Ve21V2M — Christopher Orr ( @ OrrChris ) February 11 , 2020 Of course , some “ killjoys ” had to point out just how ludicrous Cruz ’ s claim was .
This is so divorced from reality .
`` Big tech '' companies are not harming conservatives .
Cruz 's podcast is hanging at # 1 .
Almost all the top political podcasts are conservative hosts .
The right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ platforms `` big tech '' created than the left .
https : //t.co/GCQDB0Uxlt — Isaac Saul ( @ Ike_Saul ) February 11 , 2020 First - Podcasts are n't `` on the air . ''
smdh .
Second - how many times has Trump floated the idea of jailing reporters or suing news outlets ?
stop .
https : //t.co/aSWBGVqOoV — Brady Goodman ( @ bradygoodman ) February 11 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is turning out to be a very effective campaigner ― for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), that is.
The Texas Republican may have inadvertently made the case for a Sanders presidency on the latest episode of his podcast, “Verdict with Ted Cruz.”
Advertisement
It happened when the senator attempted to claim without evidence that if Sanders were elected, conservative podcasts such as his own would be censored.
“As bad as [Big Tech is] now, in a Democratic administration, in a Bernie Sanders administration, they would — I am not exaggerating when I say this podcast could very well be off the air,” Cruz said.
Sen Ted Cruz warns that if Bernie Sanders is elected president, his new podcast could be forced off the air pic.twitter.com/OpHEW47H8s — Jason Campbell (@JasonSCampbell) February 11, 2020
Turns out, that could be a selling point based on the cheeky reactions of Twitter users.
Advertisement
Did Bernie pay him to say this https://t.co/J0SqJQ8Gm4 — ian bremmer (@ianbremmer) February 11, 2020
Cruz now whipping votes for Sanders.https://t.co/cutJQ6S9Ej — andrew kaczynski🤔 (@KFILE) February 11, 2020
why is Cruz doing get out the vote work for Sanders??? https://t.co/aaBzaeGXCv — 𝚒'𝚖 𝚊 𝚑𝚒𝚐𝚑𝚠𝚊𝚢 𝚝𝚜𝚊𝚛 (@BecketAdams) February 11, 2020
If Bernie's people can't cut this into an ad, he doesn't deserve the nomination. https://t.co/OT9Ve21V2M — Christopher Orr (@OrrChris) February 11, 2020
Of course, some “killjoys” had to point out just how ludicrous Cruz’s claim was.
This is so divorced from reality. "Big tech" companies are not harming conservatives. Cruz's podcast is hanging at #1. Almost all the top political podcasts are conservative hosts. The right has benefit far more from alternate media platforms "big tech" created than the left. https://t.co/GCQDB0Uxlt — Isaac Saul (@Ike_Saul) February 11, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Texas Sues California Over Ban On State Employee Travel To States With Anti-LGBTQ Laws

Texas filed a lawsuit on Monday against the state of California over its ban on official employee travel to states with laws it considers anti-LGBTQ — including Texas .
In the suit , filed in the U.S. Supreme Court , Texas claims California has “ targeted ” the state because “ Texas protects the religious freedom of faith-based child welfare providers , ” adding that California ’ s ban on state-sponsored travel amounts to “ economic sanctions ” against Texas .
“ California is attempting to punish Texans for respecting the right of conscience for foster care and adoption providers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said in a new release .
California ’ s ban on state-funded travel for employees began in 2017 with four states — North Carolina , Mississippi , Tennessee and Kansas — which the Golden State considered as having anti-LGBTQ legislation on the books .
The ban notably followed North Carolina ’ s notorious HB2 law , which blocked many transgender people from using restrooms corresponding with their gender identity .
( HB2 was later repealed , but the compromise bill kept much of its discriminatory thrust . )
California later added several more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 11 to date — including Texas , which has a law allowing adoption providers to reject potential parents who conflict with their religious beliefs , meaning they can prevent same-sex couples from adopting or fostering children .
“ In California , we have chosen not to use taxpayer money to support laws discriminating against the LGBTQ community , ” the AG ’ s office said .
California ’ s legislation says that bans on official travel will continue against states as long as these have laws on the books that discriminate “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gender identity , or gender expression.
” The outcome of Monday ’ s lawsuit could determine whether the Golden State ’ s ban can remain in effect .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Texas filed a lawsuit on Monday against the state of California over its ban on official employee travel to states with laws it considers anti-LGBTQ — including Texas.
In the suit, filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, Texas claims California has “targeted” the state because “Texas protects the religious freedom of faith-based child welfare providers,” adding that California’s ban on state-sponsored travel amounts to “economic sanctions” against Texas.
Advertisement
“California is attempting to punish Texans for respecting the right of conscience for foster care and adoption providers,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a new release.
California’s ban on state-funded travel for employees began in 2017 with four states — North Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee and Kansas — which the Golden State considered as having anti-LGBTQ legislation on the books. The ban notably followed North Carolina’s notorious HB2 law, which blocked many transgender people from using restrooms corresponding with their gender identity. (HB2 was later repealed, but the compromise bill kept much of its discriminatory thrust.)
California later added several more states to its ban — a total of 11 to date — including Texas, which has a law allowing adoption providers to reject potential parents who conflict with their religious beliefs, meaning they can prevent same-sex couples from adopting or fostering children.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s office said it was reviewing Texas’ complaint.
“In California, we have chosen not to use taxpayer money to support laws discriminating against the LGBTQ community,” the AG’s office said.
Advertisement
California’s legislation says that bans on official travel will continue against states as long as these have laws on the books that discriminate “on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Lou Dobbs Inexplicably Calls Out Former GOP House Speakers For Silence On Nancy Pelosi

Lou Dobbs went after retired Republican House Speakers Paul Ryan and John Boehner on Monday night , bizarrely calling them out for not commenting on current Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) ripping up her copy of President Donald Trump ’ s State of the Union address last week .
“ A stunning silence from two of the biggest RINO House speakers the country ever had , ” the Fox Business host said on his show , using shorthand for the phrase “ Republican in name only.
” “ It ’ s a silence that ’ s raising more questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually the speaker herself , ” Dobbs added .
Both Boehner , who served as the speaker from 2011 to 2015 , and Ryan , who served from 2015 to 2019 , have retired from elective politics .
Boehner sits on the board of a cannabis company , and Ryan joined the board of directors at Fox Corporation last March .
Although neither man has indicated a break from the Republican Party , both have had their criticisms of the president .
Ryan has openly unleashed on Trump since his departure from office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he regretted acquiescing to the Trump administration before his retirement .
Boehner , a longtime friend of the president , said in 2018 that the Republican Party he knew had been replaced by the “ Trump Party.
” “ The Republican Party is kind of taking a nap somewhere , ” he said at the time .
Dobbs has also criticized other Republicans who haven ’ t shown unwavering support for the president .
Watch Dobbs unleash on the former House speakers in the video below , courtesy of Media Matters .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Lou Dobbs went after retired Republican House Speakers Paul Ryan and John Boehner on Monday night, bizarrely calling them out for not commenting on current Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ripping up her copy of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address last week.
“A stunning silence from two of the biggest RINO House speakers the country ever had,” the Fox Business host said on his show, using shorthand for the phrase “Republican in name only.”
Advertisement
“It’s a silence that’s raising more questions about both Ryan and Boehner than about actually the speaker herself,” Dobbs added.
Both Boehner, who served as the speaker from 2011 to 2015, and Ryan, who served from 2015 to 2019, have retired from elective politics. Boehner sits on the board of a cannabis company, and Ryan joined the board of directors at Fox Corporation last March.
Although neither man has indicated a break from the Republican Party, both have had their criticisms of the president.
Ryan has openly unleashed on Trump since his departure from office, and told Politico last year that he regretted acquiescing to the Trump administration before his retirement. Boehner, a longtime friend of the president, said in 2018 that the Republican Party he knew had been replaced by the “Trump Party.”
Advertisement
“The Republican Party is kind of taking a nap somewhere,” he said at the time.
Dobbs has also criticized other Republicans who haven’t shown unwavering support for the president.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Senators Slam Amazon Over 'Intolerable' Warehouse Conditions

A coalition of senators called on Amazon ’ s Jeff Bezos to address high rates of work-related injuries at the company ’ s massive warehouse facilities , saying they were concerned the tech giant had focused more on profits than its “ own workers ’ safety and health.
” In a letter sent Monday to Bezos , the group of 15 Democratic and independent lawmakers said they were troubled by reports of bleak conditions inside Amazon facilities .
In November , The Atlantic and the Center for Investigative Reporting published an investigation documenting high injury rates at Amazon fulfillment centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than double the national average for the warehousing industry .
“ Any practice that puts profits before worker safety is unacceptable , ” the group , led by Sens .
Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , Sherrod Brown ( D-Ohio ) and Tammy Baldwin ( D-Wis. ) , wrote .
The letter included signatures from two current presidential candidates : Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass. )
.
Jeff Bezos is the richest man in the world and Amazon is worth more than a trillion dollars .
Workers there should not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ injured on the job .
Bathroom breaks should not be considered `` time off task . ''
Amazon 's warehouse conditions are intolerable .
pic.twitter.com/zzQjiRkT1a — Bernie Sanders ( @ SenSanders ) February 10 , 2020 The call comes amid ongoing reports of bleak conditions inside Amazon facilities .
The Atlantic and Reveal ’ s story detailed accounts of workers being discouraged from leaving a facility during a gas leak and another where an employee that was crushed to death at a warehouse in Indiana wasn ’ t found for nearly two hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were three times more likely to get injured at work than at other private employers .
“ These reports make clear that by placing such a priority on speed and quota fulfillment , your company requires employees to risk their safety and health to perform and keep their jobs , ” the Senators wrote .
“ The safety of workers should come first.
” Amazon said in a statement Monday that “ nothing is more important to us than the safety and well-being of our employees.
” It said the high figures were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for any injury , and it urged lawmakers to tour its facilities .
“ OSHA is on the record as saying that underreporting of injuries is an industry-wide problem , and companies do this to keep their rates low — a former assistant secretary of OSHA estimated that 50 percent or more of severe injuries go unreported , ” the company said in a statement to Recode .
“ Amazon does the opposite ; we take an aggressive stance on recording injuries no matter how big or small.
” Despite the assurances , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come as Amazon continues to grow , enriching Bezos and driving the company ’ s value to more than $ 1 trillion dollars .
“ Workers there should not be 3 times more likely to be injured on the job , ” Sanders wrote on Twitter .
“ Bathroom breaks should not be considered ‘ time off task.
’ Amazon ’ s warehouse conditions are intolerable.
” The lawmakers urged Bezos to address a bevy of concerns , including lower workers ’ quotas and speed requirements , allowing employees to use the bathroom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warehouse employees to raise safety and health concerns .
The also urged the company to publish a record of serious injuries .
“ We urge you to overhaul this profit-at-all costs culture at your company and take the immediate steps identified in this letter to ensure Amazon ’ s managers treat your workers fairly and do not require them to risk their own health and safety in the course of doing their jobs , ” they concluded .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A coalition of senators called on Amazon’s Jeff Bezos to address high rates of work-related injuries at the company’s massive warehouse facilities, saying they were concerned the tech giant had focused more on profits than its “own workers’ safety and health.”
In a letter sent Monday to Bezos, the group of 15 Democratic and independent lawmakers said they were troubled by reports of bleak conditions inside Amazon facilities. In November, The Atlantic and the Center for Investigative Reporting published an investigation documenting high injury rates at Amazon fulfillment centers around the country — in some locations more than double the national average for the warehousing industry.
Advertisement
“Any practice that puts profits before worker safety is unacceptable,” the group, led by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), wrote. The letter included signatures from two current presidential candidates: Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
Amazon has long cultivated a profit-at-all-costs culture at the expense of workers. @SenatorBaldwin, @SenSanders and I are demanding answers on their dismal safety record. https://t.co/Nysp76c2ET — Sherrod Brown (@SenSherrodBrown) February 10, 2020
Jeff Bezos is the richest man in the world and Amazon is worth more than a trillion dollars.
Workers there should not be 3 times more likely to be injured on the job. Bathroom breaks should not be considered "time off task." Amazon's warehouse conditions are intolerable. pic.twitter.com/zzQjiRkT1a — Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) February 10, 2020
The call comes amid ongoing reports of bleak conditions inside Amazon facilities. The Atlantic and Reveal’s story detailed accounts of workers being discouraged from leaving a facility during a gas leak and another where an employee that was crushed to death at a warehouse in Indiana wasn’t found for nearly two hours. A separate report found Amazon employees were three times more likely to get injured at work than at other private employers.
Advertisement
“These reports make clear that by placing such a priority on speed and quota fulfillment, your company requires employees to risk their safety and health to perform and keep their jobs,” the Senators wrote. “The safety of workers should come first.”
Amazon said in a statement Monday that “nothing is more important to us than the safety and well-being of our employees.” It said the high figures were the result of an aggressive reporting policy for any injury, and it urged lawmakers to tour its facilities.
“OSHA is on the record as saying that underreporting of injuries is an industry-wide problem, and companies do this to keep their rates low — a former assistant secretary of OSHA estimated that 50 percent or more of severe injuries go unreported,” the company said in a statement to Recode. “Amazon does the opposite; we take an aggressive stance on recording injuries no matter how big or small.”
Despite the assurances, Sanders noted Monday that the troubling conditions come as Amazon continues to grow, enriching Bezos and driving the company’s value to more than $1 trillion dollars.
“Workers there should not be 3 times more likely to be injured on the job,” Sanders wrote on Twitter. “Bathroom breaks should not be considered ‘time off task.’ Amazon’s warehouse conditions are intolerable.”
Advertisement
The lawmakers urged Bezos to address a bevy of concerns, including lower workers’ quotas and speed requirements, allowing employees to use the bathroom as needed and crafting programs that allow warehouse employees to raise safety and health concerns. The also urged the company to publish a record of serious injuries.
“We urge you to overhaul this profit-at-all costs culture at your company and take the immediate steps identified in this letter to ensure Amazon’s managers treat your workers fairly and do not require them to risk their own health and safety in the course of doing their jobs,” they concluded.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Mike Bloomberg Spent Millions To Put Them In Congress. Now, They're Endorsing Him.

MediaNews Group/Torrance Daily Breeze via Getty Images via Getty Images A protester holds up a sign as presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg speaks at a campaign rally in Compton , California , on Feb. 3 .
But Rouda has another reason to feel an affinity for the 77-year-old billionaire .
In the 2018 midterms , when Rouda was locked in one of the most contested elections in the country , Bloomberg spent $ 4.5 million of his vast personal fortune on ads thrumming Rouda ’ s Republican opponent .
Now , Rouda is in Congress — and one of three members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financed by Bloomberg spent millions of dollars to help elect them , records reviewed by HuffPost show .
Rep. Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey and Rep. Haley Stevens of Michigan each received $ 2.2 million in support from Bloomberg ’ s super PAC in 2018 ; in the past week , each has given him a glowing endorsement .
“ Some of the candidates Mike has supported over the years have supported his presidential campaign , many have not , ” said Stu Loeser , a longtime Bloomberg spokesperson .
“ But Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates who later supported him ― other 2020 Democrats have gone out of their way to show that they were doing the same thing.
” His estimated net worth is more than $ 50 billion , making him one of the richest people on the planet .
Since entering the presidential race less than three months ago , Bloomberg has spent north of $ 300 million of his wealth playing catch-up to candidates who have been campaigning for a year or more .
It ’ s working : Bloomberg has amassed more TV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than some candidates have accrued over more than a year of arduous campaigning .
And he is polling high enough in some national polls to meet one of the qualifications for the Democratic debate stage .
Many of those throwing Bloomberg their support are mayors whose cities have benefited from seven- and eight-figure donations from Bloomberg ’ s vast network of philanthropies .
Others have personally attended an elite , Bloomberg-financed boot camp for mayors .
Stevens cited her past work as a fellow with Bloomberg Philanthropies as one of the reasons for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sherrill and Stevens stand out because House Democrats are being unusually slow this cycle to make endorsements .
More members of Congress had endorsed Hillary Clinton by this point in 2016 than have endorsed any of the candidates running in 2020 thus far .
Of the 232 Democrats in the U.S. House , more than 100 remain undeclared .
Nine are currently endorsing Bloomberg .
In the past , Bloomberg has used the PAC to support Republicans and Democrats .
But in 2018 , he spent $ 38.1 million supporting only Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Rouda , Sherrill and Stevens were the second- , sixth- and seventh-largest beneficiaries , respectively , and their races accounted for 23 % of what the super PAC spent .
The spending against Rouda ’ s opponent accounted for an astonishing 12 % of what all candidates , parties and interest groups spent on the race .
Bloomberg ’ s spending pushed Rouda ’ s race into the 10 most expensive in the country that year .
Sherrill , who supported Sen. Cory Booker until he dropped out of the presidential race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun control and infrastructure projects in making her endorsement .
A spokeswoman for Sherrill said the congresswoman and Bloomberg have met and had “ productive ” interactions but did not give specifics .

A protester holds up a sign as presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg speaks at a campaign rally in Compton, California, on Feb. 3. MediaNews Group/Torrance Daily Breeze via Getty Images via Getty Images
When Rep. Harley Rouda became one of the first members of Congress to endorse Mike Bloomberg for president, the California Democrat billed it as a marriage of moderates.
“He has been a fiscal conservative and a social progressive, which is where I believe most Americans are,” Rouda said. “That’s exactly what I ran on.”
Advertisement
But Rouda has another reason to feel an affinity for the 77-year-old billionaire. In the 2018 midterms, when Rouda was locked in one of the most contested elections in the country, Bloomberg spent $4.5 million of his vast personal fortune on ads thrumming Rouda’s Republican opponent.
Now, Rouda is in Congress — and one of three members who endorsed Bloomberg after a super PAC financed by Bloomberg spent millions of dollars to help elect them, records reviewed by HuffPost show.
Rep. Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey and Rep. Haley Stevens of Michigan each received $2.2 million in support from Bloomberg’s super PAC in 2018; in the past week, each has given him a glowing endorsement.
All told, Bloomberg spent $8.9 million supporting Rouda, Sherrill and Stevens — nearly a quarter of his total spending in the midterms.
Advertisement
Rouda, Sherrill and Stevens all denied that their endorsements were tied to Bloomberg’s political largesse. “Using today’s vernacular, there was no quid pro quo,” Rouda told McClatchy when pressed about the connection.
“Some of the candidates Mike has supported over the years have supported his presidential campaign, many have not,” said Stu Loeser, a longtime Bloomberg spokesperson. “But Mike is hardly alone in building relationships with candidates who later supported him ― other 2020 Democrats have gone out of their way to show that they were doing the same thing.”
The correlation highlights the power of Bloomberg’s extraordinary personal fortune to warp the Democratic presidential primary.
His estimated net worth is more than $50 billion, making him one of the richest people on the planet. Since entering the presidential race less than three months ago, Bloomberg has spent north of $300 million of his wealth playing catch-up to candidates who have been campaigning for a year or more. It’s working: Bloomberg has amassed more TV airtime, polling support and prominent endorsements than some candidates have accrued over more than a year of arduous campaigning. And he is polling high enough in some national polls to meet one of the qualifications for the Democratic debate stage.
A former Republican, Bloomberg has also secured roughly as many endorsements from party leaders as two of the current front-runners, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Advertisement
Many of those throwing Bloomberg their support are mayors whose cities have benefited from seven- and eight-figure donations from Bloomberg’s vast network of philanthropies. Others have personally attended an elite, Bloomberg-financed boot camp for mayors. Stevens cited her past work as a fellow with Bloomberg Philanthropies as one of the reasons for her endorsement.
The endorsements from Rouda, Sherrill and Stevens stand out because House Democrats are being unusually slow this cycle to make endorsements. More members of Congress had endorsed Hillary Clinton by this point in 2016 than have endorsed any of the candidates running in 2020 thus far. Of the 232 Democrats in the U.S. House, more than 100 remain undeclared. Nine are currently endorsing Bloomberg.
Rouda, Sherrill and Stevens received Bloomberg’s support in the form of TV ads bought by a super PAC, Independence USA PAC, which receives all of its money from Bloomberg and his gun control advocacy group.
Some 23% of Bloomberg's electoral spending in 2018 went to three House Democrats who are now endorsing him for president. Isabella Carapella/HuffPost
In the past, Bloomberg has used the PAC to support Republicans and Democrats. But in 2018, he spent $38.1 million supporting only Democratic candidates in 33 House and Senate races. Rouda, Sherrill and Stevens were the second-, sixth- and seventh-largest beneficiaries, respectively, and their races accounted for 23% of what the super PAC spent.
Advertisement
The spending against Rouda’s opponent accounted for an astonishing 12% of what all candidates, parties and interest groups spent on the race. Bloomberg’s spending pushed Rouda’s race into the 10 most expensive in the country that year.
Like Rouda, Sherrill and Stevens are moderate, suburban Democrats who peeled off traditionally Republican districts in the 2018 blue wave.
Sherrill, who supported Sen. Cory Booker until he dropped out of the presidential race, cited Bloomberg’s support for gun control and infrastructure projects in making her endorsement. A spokeswoman for Sherrill said the congresswoman and Bloomberg have met and had “productive” interactions but did not give specifics.
Stevens’ office said her two-year fellowship with the city of Louisville, Kentucky, which was sponsored by Bloomberg Philanthropies, figured into her endorsement.
“I have seen him build a strong team to tackle tough problems,” Stevens said in a statement, “and I think his unique combination of public and private sector leadership make him the best candidate to unite the country and defeat Donald Trump.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Trump Administration Ramps Up Fight Against 'Sanctuary Cities'

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) - The U.S. Department of Justice ramped up its fight against states and municipalities that adopt “ sanctuary ” policies to protect unauthorized immigrants from deportation , with new lawsuits against the state of New Jersey and King County , Washington .
The moves on Monday follow a freeze on new enrollment and renewals in certain “ trusted traveler ” programs for New York state residents , which was announced last week .
“ Today is a significant escalation in the federal government ’ s efforts to confront the resistance of ‘ sanctuary cities ’ , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prepared remarks to a National Sheriffs ’ Association conference .
President Donald Trump has made harsher immigration policies a focus of his presidency and 2020 re-election campaign .
He has repeatedly called out “ sanctuary ” jurisdictions for not cooperating with federal immigration enforcement , including during his State of the Union speech last week .
The lawsuit against New Jersey asks a court to block a directive that limits cooperation by New Jersey law enforcement officers with federal immigration enforcement .
The lawsuit against King County , where Seattle is located , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use of the county airport for the deportation of immigration detainees .
“ It ’ s no surprise that the president , facing re-election , has suddenly decided to challenge a policy we first announced in 2018 , ” Grewal said .
King County Executive Dow Constantine said Trump and Barr were “ bullying King County for being a welcoming community that respects the rights of all people.
” Barr said the Justice Department would support the Department of Homeland Security in its attempts to obtain information it needs , including using federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the actions of certain district attorneys whom he accused of “ charging foreign nationals with lesser offenses for the express purpose of avoiding the federal immigration consequences.
” Earlier , New York state sued the Trump administration to void the ‘ trusted traveler ’ enrollment freeze , which blocks hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers from enrolling in federal programs that help travelers speed through airport security lines and borders , describing the ban as political punishment .
The administration put in place the suspension last week in response to New York ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Green Light law that allows unauthorized immigrants to apply for driver ’ s licenses and limits federal immigration authorities from accessing records from the state ’ s Department of Motor Vehicles .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice ramped up its fight against states and municipalities that adopt “sanctuary” policies to protect unauthorized immigrants from deportation, with new lawsuits against the state of New Jersey and King County, Washington.
The moves on Monday follow a freeze on new enrollment and renewals in certain “trusted traveler” programs for New York state residents, which was announced last week.
Advertisement
“Today is a significant escalation in the federal government’s efforts to confront the resistance of ‘sanctuary cities’,” Attorney General William Barr said in prepared remarks to a National Sheriffs’ Association conference.
President Donald Trump has made harsher immigration policies a focus of his presidency and 2020 re-election campaign. He has repeatedly called out “sanctuary” jurisdictions for not cooperating with federal immigration enforcement, including during his State of the Union speech last week.
The lawsuit against New Jersey asks a court to block a directive that limits cooperation by New Jersey law enforcement officers with federal immigration enforcement.
The lawsuit against King County, where Seattle is located, targets an executive order that restricts the use of the county airport for the deportation of immigration detainees.
Advertisement
New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal criticized the lawsuit, calling it an “election year stunt.”
“It’s no surprise that the president, facing re-election, has suddenly decided to challenge a policy we first announced in 2018,” Grewal said.
King County Executive Dow Constantine said Trump and Barr were “bullying King County for being a welcoming community that respects the rights of all people.”
Barr said the Justice Department would support the Department of Homeland Security in its attempts to obtain information it needs, including using federal subpoenas.
His department is also reviewing the actions of certain district attorneys whom he accused of “charging foreign nationals with lesser offenses for the express purpose of avoiding the federal immigration consequences.”
Advertisement
Earlier, New York state sued the Trump administration to void the ‘trusted traveler’ enrollment freeze, which blocks hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers from enrolling in federal programs that help travelers speed through airport security lines and borders, describing the ban as political punishment.
The administration put in place the suspension last week in response to New York’s passage last year of a so-called Green Light law that allows unauthorized immigrants to apply for driver’s licenses and limits federal immigration authorities from accessing records from the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles.
State officials said the ban would undermine public safety and cause economic harm by slowing travel.
(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch, Makini Brice, Ted Hesson and Kristina Cooke; Editing by Leslie Adler, Dan Grebler and Himani Sarkar)


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--New Hampshire And The Forgotten Opioid Promises Of 2016

Pierce is grateful for the help that has come in the last four years , especially the federal grants that enabled New Hampshire to broaden access to addiction treatments .
But she doesn ’ t have a lot of faith in the things people say when they ’ re trying to win votes .
She hasn ’ t seen evidence that the high-minded rhetoric from 2016 translated into the kind of bold action still needed .
Four years ago , candidates from now-President Donald Trump to Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) toured the state with promises that they had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ along gravely as voters shared tales of their own struggles with substance use disorder or of the friends and loved ones they ’ d lost .
The candidates explained how policies they favored for other reasons were also the solutions to the opioid epidemic .
“ All of the problems ― the single biggest problem is heroin that pours across our southern border .
It ’ s just pouring and destroying their youth .
It ’ s poisoning the blood of their youth and plenty of other people , ” he said of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton in October 2016 .
“ We have to have strong borders .
We have to keep the drugs out of our country .
We are ― right now , we ’ re getting the drugs , they ’ re getting the cash .
We need strong borders.
” During a Democratic primary debate in December 2015 , he said , “ The reason I believe in a health-care-for-all program ― we need to understand that addiction is a disease , not a criminal activity .
And that means radically changing the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues .
When somebody is addicted and seeking help , they should not have to wait three , four months in order to get that help.
” “ Every four years , we have a slew of presidential candidates that descend on New Hampshire and Iowa and other early states in these contests , and they offer a lot of platitudes in terms of how they are going to address the addiction crisis .
And not much happens .
The problem seems to get worse , ” said Las Vegas-based activist Ryan Hampton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who is in long-term recovery from addiction .
More critically , Trump is asking the courts to eliminate the Affordable Care Act , which would end that law ’ s expansion of Medicaid to millions of poor adults .
And he is attacking the program through executive authority by proposing to allow states to curtail its benefits .
Trump ’ s new budget request to Congress includes additional Medicaid cuts .
Yet 38 % of people addicted to opioids are covered by Medicaid , according to federal data analyzed by the Henry J.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence that Medicaid expansion prevented overdose deaths .
“ It ’ s still like a drop in the bucket , ” he said .
“ What other public health crisis in this country could we ever have , with the level of attention that this has gotten , and still be so significantly underfunded and not dealt with , given the devastation it has on families ?
”

This story is part of Pain in America, a nine-part series looking at some of the underlying causes of the opioid addiction crisis and how we treat pain.
Daisy Pierce has heard all the promises that politicians who want to be president make when they come to New Hampshire, including their vows to combat the state’s opioid addiction crisis.
Advertisement
As executive director of Navigating Recovery in Laconia, Pierce works with people striving to control their substance use disorder. She knows the toll that opioids and other drugs have taken in her state, one of the hardest-hit by the epidemic.
After several years of intensified federal, state and local efforts, there are some promising signs. Opioid overdose deaths are down here, as they are nationwide. Last year, 364 people died from opioid overdoses in New Hampshire, a drop from 471 the prior year and 490 in 2017, after rising consistently in the previous five years.
Doctors in the U.S. are writing fewer opioid prescriptions, and federal funding has enabled states to improve the infrastructure for treating people with substance use disorder. Pharmaceutical companies and drug distributors face hundreds of billions of dollars in payouts to states that sued them over the proliferation of opioids, and the federal government is conducting a criminal investigation into the drug industry.
Pierce is grateful for the help that has come in the last four years, especially the federal grants that enabled New Hampshire to broaden access to addiction treatments. But she doesn’t have a lot of faith in the things people say when they’re trying to win votes. She hasn’t seen evidence that the high-minded rhetoric from 2016 translated into the kind of bold action still needed.
Advertisement
“Oftentimes, when something’s promised, I don’t put much stock in it,” Pierce said. “I was skeptical because [while] I appreciate that people were talking about it as an issue that needed to be addressed, I wasn’t always convinced that the person talking about it understood exactly what it would take.”
An Ongoing Emergency
Whatever their shortcomings, government efforts to tackle the opioid epidemic have shown some success, Pierce said. New Hampshire had zero peer recovery centers like Navigating Recovery five years ago and today, there are 17, she said. These nonprofit operations offer counseling, usually provided by people in long-term recovery themselves, and connect patients to other aid such as housing, transportation, health care and employment services as well as medications to treat addiction.
And yet addiction remains a serious problem here and across the country
Thirty-four people died from opioid overdoses for every 100,000 residents of New Hampshire in 2017, more than double the national rate according to the most recent statistics from the National Institutes of Health. Nationwide, some 1.7 million Americans were addicted to pain medication in 2017, and other statistics suggested a resurgence of addiction to methamphetamine and cocaine as well.
Treatment is still out of reach for too many people, Pierce said. There aren’t enough addiction counselors and other mental and behavioral health providers to meet the demand, she said. Although the number of people dying from opioid overdoses has been lower recently, these drugs remain responsible for more deaths than car crashes.
Politicians’ Promises
Because New Hampshire is an early presidential primary state, its opioid epidemic got a lot of attention in 2016. Then, as now, New Hampshirites rank drugs as the top issue facing the state, according to polling from the University of New Hampshire.
Advertisement
Four years ago, candidates from now-President Donald Trump to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) toured the state with promises that they had a plan to help. They nodded along gravely as voters shared tales of their own struggles with substance use disorder or of the friends and loved ones they’d lost. The candidates explained how policies they favored for other reasons were also the solutions to the opioid epidemic.
President Donald Trump delivers a speech on his administration's plans to combat the opioid crisis at Manchester Community College in Manchester, New Hampshire, on March 19, 2018. Keith Bedford/The Boston Globe/Getty Images
Trump cited the availability of heroin and smuggled prescription pills as arguments for the border wall he wanted to build between the United States and Mexico.
“All of the problems ― the single biggest problem is heroin that pours across our southern border. It’s just pouring and destroying their youth. It’s poisoning the blood of their youth and plenty of other people,” he said of New Hampshire during a debate with Hillary Clinton in October 2016. “We have to have strong borders. We have to keep the drugs out of our country. We are ― right now, we’re getting the drugs, they’re getting the cash. We need strong borders.”
The future president also infamously referred to New Hampshire as a “drug-infested den” during the 2016 campaign.
Advertisement
Sanders, meanwhile, often responded to questions from voters about addiction by touting his proposal to create a national health care system.
During a Democratic primary debate in December 2015, he said, “The reason I believe in a health-care-for-all program ― we need to understand that addiction is a disease, not a criminal activity. And that means radically changing the way we deal with mental health and addiction issues. When somebody is addicted and seeking help, they should not have to wait three, four months in order to get that help.”
In 2018, Congress passed the bipartisan SUPPORT Act which included a slew of new policies to address the opioid epidemic, including federal money for states,
But now, advocates are concerned that policymakers, especially at the federal level, have moved on and that the presidential candidates aren’t as focused this year as they were in 2016.
To be sure, all the Democrats running in the presidential primary this year have plans. Sanders still sees his “Medicare for All” program and proposed prosecution of pharmaceutical manufacturers as central to his opioids policy. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) authored legislation, the CARE Act, that would set aside $100 billion over 10 years for substance abuse initiatives, and most of that money would go to states and local authorities.
Advertisement
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg have $100 billion plans of their own, and former Vice President Joe Biden and the other Democrats have floated proposals, too. These Democratic plans tend to have key elements in common, such as promotion of medication-assisted treatment and funding for community-based programs.
Grassroots Demand For Action
Politicians paid attention in 2016 because voters demanded it, said John Burns, director of SOS Recovery Community Organization, which has locations in Dover, Hampton and Rochester, New Hampshire.
“You’d be hard-pressed not to say that the majority of the influence came from the grassroots, the recovery community, family members who have been impacted and lost loved ones,” said Burns, who is in long-term recovery and has a daughter who struggles with mental health problems and substance use.
Now another presidential election has come around. Not as much has changed as advocates and New Hampshirites had hoped, including the rhetoric from White House hopefuls.
“Every four years, we have a slew of presidential candidates that descend on New Hampshire and Iowa and other early states in these contests, and they offer a lot of platitudes in terms of how they are going to address the addiction crisis. And not much happens. The problem seems to get worse,” said Las Vegas-based activist Ryan Hampton, a former Clinton White House aide who is in long-term recovery from addiction.
Advertisement
“That type of stuff is frustrating to me because it makes me feel like our community ― my friends who I’ve lost, people who are struggling right now ― we’re being used as political footballs,” Hampton said.
Demonstrators, including one with a sign comparing Trump to Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, protest across the street as the U.S. president visits a firehouse in Manchester, New Hampshire, during a trip devoted to the issue of combating the opioid crisis on March 19, 2018. Jonathan Ernst/Reuters
In office, the Trump administration’s anti-opioid efforts haven’t been limited to border security measures. The president declared a public health state of emergency about the crisis in 2017. And he signed the SUPPORT Act, which set aside $1.8 billion in grants for states to implement addiction treatment programs ― New Hampshire got $40 million for 2019 and 2020.
Trump also called for executing all drug dealers during a White House summit on the opioids crisis in 2018.
“The problem with the Trump administration is: There is some good policy going on, but I think that the president reverses a lot of it when he makes statements like that,” said Hampton, who was present at the summit.
Advertisement
More critically, Trump is asking the courts to eliminate the Affordable Care Act, which would end that law’s expansion of Medicaid to millions of poor adults. And he is attacking the program through executive authority by proposing to allow states to curtail its benefits. Trump’s new budget request to Congress includes additional Medicaid cuts. Yet 38% of people addicted to opioids are covered by Medicaid, according to federal data analyzed by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, and there is evidence that Medicaid expansion prevented overdose deaths.
“Medicaid and Medicaid expansion have been lifesavers. Without it, we could not do the work that we do,” Pierce said.
Unfinished Business
Even as New Hampshirites prepare to go to the polls in the 2020 presidential primary on Tuesday, the opioid crisis has barely appeared on the candidates’ radar, bolstering worries that politicians have become less attentive to the issue.
“One of the fears that we had around the SUPPORT Act being passed was that Congress would then kind of push pause on real, substantial funding to combat the addiction crisis until after the election, that they would kind of wave, take a victory lap, and say, ‘We’ve dealt with it,’” Hampton said.
But he said, “This isn’t something that can be solved with one mediocre legislative package. This is something that needs to be ongoing.”
Advertisement
Hampton noted that opioid addiction is a “decades-old problem.”
“All of a sudden it’s become a political hot topic, so everybody wants to talk about solutions. Politicians, presidential candidates want to get on the front page of the paper. They all say the right things,” he said. “But what progress are we actually making? It’s a failure of the government.”
Since the SUPPORT Act became law two years ago, Congress has mostly ignored addiction, Hampton said, noting that the House version of Warren’s CARE Act hasn’t received a committee hearing even though Democrats have a majority.
He sees the same inaction and inattention among the 2020 presidential contenders. “Very few candidates have been getting ahead of the issue,” Hampton said.
The policies put in place since 2016 to fight the opioid epidemic have helped, but only marginally, and more needs to be done, Burns said.
“It’s still like a drop in the bucket,” he said. “What other public health crisis in this country could we ever have, with the level of attention that this has gotten, and still be so significantly underfunded and not dealt with, given the devastation it has on families?”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-11--Read Live Updates From The New Hampshire Primary

Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) led the race after @ @ @ @ @ Elizabeth Warren ( Mass . )
and Amy Klobuchar ( Minn. ) and former Vice @ @ @ @ @ hoping for a boost in New Hampshire .
Biden signaled he wasn ’ t hopeful @ @ @ @ @ announcing he ’ d be in South Carolina for an event Tuesday afternoon , before @ @ @ @ @ .
Other candidates who have campaigned in New Hampshire include entrepreneur Andrew Yang ; billionaire @ @ @ @ @ Tulsi Gabbard ( Hawaii ) ; former Massachusetts Gov .
Deval Patrick ; and Sen. @ @ @ @ @ .
Read live updates from the primary below :

Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) led the race after Iowa, while Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) and former Vice President Joe Biden are all hoping for a boost in New Hampshire. Biden signaled he wasn’t hopeful about the Granite State, announcing he’d be in South Carolina for an event Tuesday afternoon, before polls in New Hampshire closed.
Other candidates who have campaigned in New Hampshire include entrepreneur Andrew Yang; billionaire activist Tom Steyer; Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii); former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick; and Sen. Michael Bennet (Colo.).
Read live updates from the primary below: