thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Trump Grants Clemency To 11, Including Michael Milken And Rod Blagojevich

As part of his clemency blitz , Trump also commuted the sentence of former Illinois Gov .
Rod Blagojevich , who was convicted of federal corruption charges , including for an attempt to sell the U.S. Senate seat previously held by then-President Barack Obama .
Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik was one of the seven people granted presidential pardons on Tuesday .
He pleaded guilty in 2009 to felony tax fraud and lying to the government .
“ We have commuted the sentence of Rod Blagojevich , ” Trump told reporters on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t know him very well .
I ’ ve met him a couple times .
He was on for a short while on ‘ The Apprentice ’ years ago .
He seemed like a very nice person .
Don ’ t know him , but he served eight years in jail .
It was a long time to go.
” Blagojevich served as the state ’ s Democratic governor from 2003 to 2009 before he was given a 14-year prison sentence in 2012 .
Blagojevich was convicted a year earlier on 18 felony @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of campaign finances and attempts to exchange bribes for political favors .
The most brazen of his crimes , however , was his attempt to sell the U.S. Senate seat held by Obama when he was elected president .
In a 2008 phone conversation wiretapped by the FBI , Blagojevich joked about selling the seat to Chicago Rev .
Jeremiah Wright .
As the scale of his corruption became apparent , the Illinois House of Representatives voted in January 2009 to impeach Blagojevich .
The bipartisan measure passed 117-1 .
Later that month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 59-0 , to remove the governor and bar him from ever holding political office in the state again .
“ Eighteen years is , I think , really unfair , ” Trump said of Blagojevich ’ s sentence ( Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years , not 18 ) .
Trump added that Blagojevich was convicted “ for being stupid and saying things that every politician , you know that many other politicians say.
” Milken was known as the “ junk bond king ” in the 1980s .
He was indicted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fraud .
He pleaded guilty to fraudulent activities involving securities trading .
By taking the plea bargain , Milken likely avoided a harsher prison sentence had he been convicted on the racketeering and insider trading charges .
Trump on Tuesday praised Milken for doing “ an incredible job for the world ” through his funding of cancer research .
Milken was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1993 and , upon his release from prison that same year , founded the Prostate Cancer Foundation .
His cancer is currently in remission .
Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the past , commuting the sentence of Alice Johnson , who was serving a lifetime sentence for a nonviolent drug offense , after reality star Kim Kardashian West requested he do so in 2018 .
In November , Trump cleared Navy SEAL Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher — who was accused of committing several war crimes , including posing with the body of a dead teenage Islamic State captive he had just killed with a hunting knife — of all wrongdoing and gave him a promotion .
Navy SEALs who testified against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with one soldier saying Gallagher was “ perfectly OK with killing anybody .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced a wave of sentence commutations and pardons, including for disgraced financier Michael Milken, who was convicted in 1990 of securities fraud.
As part of his clemency blitz, Trump also commuted the sentence of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted of federal corruption charges, including for an attempt to sell the U.S. Senate seat previously held by then-President Barack Obama.
Advertisement
Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik was one of the seven people granted presidential pardons on Tuesday. He pleaded guilty in 2009 to felony tax fraud and lying to the government.
Former San Francisco 49ers owner Edward DeBartolo Jr., who was convicted in a gambling fraud scandal in 1998, was also pardoned. Trump also granted clemency to Ariel Friedler, Paul Pogue, David Safavian, Angela Stanton, Tynice Nichole Hall, Crystal Munoz and Judith Negron.
“We have commuted the sentence of Rod Blagojevich,” Trump told reporters on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland. “I don’t know him very well. I’ve met him a couple times. He was on for a short while on ‘The Apprentice’ years ago. He seemed like a very nice person. Don’t know him, but he served eight years in jail. It was a long time to go.”
Trump on commuting sentence for Blagojevich: "It was a prosecution by the same people -- Comey, Fitzpatrick -- the same group." pic.twitter.com/gXigT20Fdc — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 18, 2020
Advertisement
Blagojevich served as the state’s Democratic governor from 2003 to 2009 before he was given a 14-year prison sentence in 2012. Blagojevich was convicted a year earlier on 18 felony corruption charges related to his illegal use of campaign finances and attempts to exchange bribes for political favors.
The most brazen of his crimes, however, was his attempt to sell the U.S. Senate seat held by Obama when he was elected president. In a 2008 phone conversation wiretapped by the FBI, Blagojevich joked about selling the seat to Chicago Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
“How funny would it be sending Rev. Wright there?” Blagojevich said in the call. “I bet you he’d take it. Wouldn’t that be fucking funny?”
“Right there on the Senate floor, it wouldn’t be God Bless America it would be God Damn America!” Blagojevich added, laughing.
As the scale of his corruption became apparent, the Illinois House of Representatives voted in January 2009 to impeach Blagojevich. The bipartisan measure passed 117-1. Later that month, the Illinois Senate voted unanimously, 59-0, to remove the governor and bar him from ever holding political office in the state again.
Advertisement
In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied for a second time a request from the disgraced ex-governor to appeal the corruption charge convictions.
Last August, the president told reporters he thought Blagojevich was treated “unbelievably unfairly.”
Blagojevich filed clemency paperwork in 2018 officially asking Trump to commute his sentence. Trump had said one month prior he was “seriously thinking about” commuting the sentence.
“Eighteen years is, I think, really unfair,” Trump said of Blagojevich’s sentence (Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years, not 18). Trump added that Blagojevich was convicted “for being stupid and saying things that every politician, you know that many other politicians say.”
“I am seriously thinking about ― not pardoning ― but I am seriously thinking of a curtailment of Blagojevich,” Trump added.
Advertisement
Trump and Blagojevich previously worked together on “The Celebrity Apprentice” in 2010, which the future president was hosting at the time.
Milken was known as the “junk bond king” in the 1980s. He was indicted in 1989 on 98 counts of racketeering and fraud. He pleaded guilty to fraudulent activities involving securities trading. By taking the plea bargain, Milken likely avoided a harsher prison sentence had he been convicted on the racketeering and insider trading charges.
He was fined $600 million and sentenced to 10 years in prison, of which he ended up serving 22 months.
Trump on Tuesday praised Milken for doing “an incredible job for the world” through his funding of cancer research. Milken was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1993 and, upon his release from prison that same year, founded the Prostate Cancer Foundation. His cancer is currently in remission.
“He suffered greatly,” the president said of Milken. “He paid a big price ― paid a very tough price.”
Advertisement
Trump also announces that he pardoned Bernard Kerik and Michael Milken. Kerik pleaded guilty to tax fraud and other federal charges. Milken was indicted for racketeering and securities fraud in the late 1980s. pic.twitter.com/gxhSNNKCRq — Oliver Willis (@owillis) February 18, 2020
Trump has shown an affinity for his pardon powers in the past, commuting the sentence of Alice Johnson, who was serving a lifetime sentence for a nonviolent drug offense, after reality star Kim Kardashian West requested he do so in 2018.
In November, Trump cleared Navy SEAL Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher — who was accused of committing several war crimes, including posing with the body of a dead teenage Islamic State captive he had just killed with a hunting knife — of all wrongdoing and gave him a promotion. Navy SEALs who testified against Gallagher called him “evil,” with one soldier saying Gallagher was “perfectly OK with killing anybody.”
More recently, Trump alluded to pardoning his longtime political ally Roger Stone, who was convicted in November of lying to Congress and witness intimidation over his connection with Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
In the midst of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, which examined potential obstruction of justice committed by the president, Trump even claimed that he could pardon himself.
Advertisement
“As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong?” he tweeted in 2018.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Stephen Miller's Uncle Donates To Pro-Refugee Group As 'Wedding Gift' To Nephew

Stephen Miller , the senior White House adviser behind some of the Trump administration ’ s most hard-line immigration policies , tied the knot over the weekend , and his uncle chose the perfect “ wedding gift ” to honor the newlyweds : a donation to a refugee advocacy organization .
The site , “ MatchMadeInHate.com , ” contains wish-list items from U.S.-based charities that assist asylum-seekers and immigrants ― such as mittens , underwear and LED night lights .
Glosser , an outspoken critic of Miller ’ s anti-immigrant agenda , wrote on his Facebook post that he planned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American nonprofit organization that provides humanitarian aid and assistance to refugees .
“ [ HIAS ] helped to rescue my family from Czarist oppression in the Russian Empire in 1906 , ” wrote Glosser , who is Jewish .
“ Had our refugee forebears not been helped to emigrate to the USA , they and their children would have been murdered by the racial madness of Nazism ; as were the 74 of our relatives who were shut out of America by the race/religion based immigration exclusion act of 1925 enacted by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day.
” Glosser told HuffPost that he donated $ 100 to kick off the fundraiser on Monday .
As of Tuesday morning , more than 30 people had contributed over $ 1,700 to the cause , he said .
Miller ’ s controversial immigration policies , such as family separation at the U.S.-Mexico border and a travel ban affecting immigrants from several Muslim-majority countries — were the subject of a viral op-ed written by Glosser and published by Politico in 2018 .
Glosser said he was “ not at all surprised ” by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Law Center in November that found Miller peddled white supremacist talking points in hundreds of emails to right-wing media outlets in an effort to get them to publish anti-immigrant stories .
Democrats in the House and Senate called for his resignation following the report .
“ The advancement of policies which legitimize the use of racial , religious hatred and fear is a danger to everybody in our country , ” Glosser told HuffPost on Tuesday .
“ The Trump administration pushing hatred in pursuit of political power is the kind of moral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t invited to Miller ’ s wedding and hasn ’ t spoken to his nephew since 2015 .
He said his only communication with his sister , Miller ’ s mother , relates to the care of their elderly mother .
But it ’ s “ a big family , ” Glosser said , adding that many of his relatives support his decision to speak out against his nephew .
Miller and Waldman were married Sunday at the Trump International Hotel in Washington .
President Donald Trump and former White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ceremony , which was officiated by Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone , senior adviser to U.S .
Ambassador to Israel David Friedman .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Stephen Miller, the senior White House adviser behind some of the Trump administration’s most hard-line immigration policies, tied the knot over the weekend, and his uncle chose the perfect “wedding gift” to honor the newlyweds: a donation to a refugee advocacy organization.
David Glosser, a retired neuropsychologist and Miller’s maternal uncle, on Monday posted a link on Facebook to a spoof online wedding registry created by comedian Samantha Bee in December.
Advertisement
The site, “MatchMadeInHate.com,” contains wish-list items from U.S.-based charities that assist asylum-seekers and immigrants ― such as mittens, underwear and LED night lights.
Miller and now-wife Katie Waldman, press secretary for Vice President Mike Pence, are “partners in crimes against humanity,” Bee’s faux registry reads.
Glosser, an outspoken critic of Miller’s anti-immigrant agenda, wrote on his Facebook post that he planned to donate to HIAS, a Jewish American nonprofit organization that provides humanitarian aid and assistance to refugees.
“[HIAS] helped to rescue my family from Czarist oppression in the Russian Empire in 1906,” wrote Glosser, who is Jewish. “Had our refugee forebears not been helped to emigrate to the USA, they and their children would have been murdered by the racial madness of Nazism; as were the 74 of our relatives who were shut out of America by the race/religion based immigration exclusion act of 1925 enacted by the ‘America First’ populists of the day.”
Advertisement
“Protect the refugee and welcome the stranger,” he added, “they built America.”
David Glosser / Facebook
Glosser told HuffPost that he donated $100 to kick off the fundraiser on Monday. As of Tuesday morning, more than 30 people had contributed over $1,700 to the cause, he said.
Miller’s controversial immigration policies, such as family separation at the U.S.-Mexico border and a travel ban affecting immigrants from several Muslim-majority countries — were the subject of a viral op-ed written by Glosser and published by Politico in 2018.
Glosser said he was “not at all surprised” by a bombshell report from the Southern Poverty Law Center in November that found Miller peddled white supremacist talking points in hundreds of emails to right-wing media outlets in an effort to get them to publish anti-immigrant stories. Democrats in the House and Senate called for his resignation following the report.
“The advancement of policies which legitimize the use of racial, religious hatred and fear is a danger to everybody in our country,” Glosser told HuffPost on Tuesday. “The Trump administration pushing hatred in pursuit of political power is the kind of moral rot exploited by authoritarian regimes.”
Advertisement
Glosser wasn’t invited to Miller’s wedding and hasn’t spoken to his nephew since 2015. He said his only communication with his sister, Miller’s mother, relates to the care of their elderly mother.
But it’s “a big family,” Glosser said, adding that many of his relatives support his decision to speak out against his nephew.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Trump Says Roger Stone's Conviction 'Should Be Thrown Out'

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — Hours before a court session regarding his longtime ally Roger Stone , President Donald Trump is tweeting that Stone ’ s recent conviction for witness tampering and lying to Congress “ should be thrown out.
” The barrage of Tuesday morning tweets comes days after Trump earned a public rebuke from his own attorney general , William Barr , who had said the president ’ s tweets were “ making it impossible ” for Barr to do his job .
Trump tweeted Fox News commentator Andrew Napolitano ’ s comment that the jury appears to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out Judge Amy Berman Jackson by name , saying “ almost any judge in the country ” would throw out the conviction .
These were Mueller prosecutors , and the whole Mueller investigation was illegally set up based on a phony and now fully discredited Fake Dossier , lying and forging documents to the FISA Court , and many other things .
Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is ... — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) February 18 , 2020 ... .badly tainted and , in my opinion , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s statement to Congress that he did not see me to become the FBI Director ( again ) , has been proven false .
The whole deal was a total SCAM .
If I wasn ’ t President , I ’ d be suing everyone all over the place ... — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) February 18 , 2020 Trump added in a subsequent tweet .
“ Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is badly tainted and , in my opinion , should be thrown out.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seven-count indictment that accused him of lying to Congress , tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to tip the 2016 election .
He is scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Jackson on Thursday with a logistical hearing planned for today .
Prosecutors had recommended a tough sentence of between seven to nine years in federal prison .
But Barr reversed that decision and recommended a less harsh punishment , prompting the entire prosecution team to resign from the case .
Barr later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the sentencing recommendation had influenced his decision ; in an interview with ABC News , Barr said he had not been asked by Trump to look into the case .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Hours before a court session regarding his longtime ally Roger Stone, President Donald Trump is tweeting that Stone’s recent conviction for witness tampering and lying to Congress “should be thrown out.”
The barrage of Tuesday morning tweets comes days after Trump earned a public rebuke from his own attorney general, William Barr, who had said the president’s tweets were “making it impossible” for Barr to do his job.
Advertisement
Trump tweeted Fox News commentator Andrew Napolitano’s comment that the jury appears to have been biased against Trump and calling out Judge Amy Berman Jackson by name, saying “almost any judge in the country” would throw out the conviction.
These were Mueller prosecutors, and the whole Mueller investigation was illegally set up based on a phony and now fully discredited Fake Dossier, lying and forging documents to the FISA Court, and many other things. Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 18, 2020
....badly tainted and, in my opinion, should be thrown out. Even Mueller’s statement to Congress that he did not see me to become the FBI Director (again), has been proven false. The whole deal was a total SCAM. If I wasn’t President, I’d be suing everyone all over the place... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 18, 2020
Trump added in a subsequent tweet. “Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is badly tainted and, in my opinion, should be thrown out.”
Advertisement
Stone was convicted in November of a seven-count indictment that accused him of lying to Congress, tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to tip the 2016 election. He is scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Jackson on Thursday with a logistical hearing planned for today.
Prosecutors had recommended a tough sentence of between seven to nine years in federal prison. But Barr reversed that decision and recommended a less harsh punishment, prompting the entire prosecution team to resign from the case.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Former Ethics Chief Mocks Ivanka Trump's Taxpayer-Funded 'Corporate Trip' To Dubai

The former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics on Monday mocked White House senior adviser Ivanka Trump ’ s trip to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates as a taxpayer-funded “ corporate ” junket for the Trump Organization .
Trump ’ s trip to the city began Saturday , just days before Tuesday ’ s third anniversary of the Trump International Golf Club Dubai .
The first daughter participated in photo ops , meetings with Dubai officials — and even a video ( above ) showing her strolling languorously through the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque in Abu Dhabi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the federally funded Voice of America .
She gave the keynote address in the two-day Global Women ’ s Forum in Dubai on Sunday .
Publicity that draws attention to Dubai ’ s Trump-branded golf course financially benefits President Donald Trump and his family members .
The course was developed by major Dubai real estate developer Damac Properties , which pays to license the Trump name and pays the Trump Organization to run the course .
“ It was nice of you taxpayers to sponsor her corporate trip , ” former ethics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Yer the best.
” How convenient .
It was nice of you taxpayers to sponsor her corporate trip .
It was nice of you to fund the propaganda video VOA disseminated too .
Yer the best .
https : //t.co/2V2M5aPhHi — Walter Shaub ( @ waltshaub ) February 17 , 2020 Donald Trump was paid as much as $ 10 million by Damac in 2016 for Trump Organization golf properties in Dubai , according to his financial filings .
The president personally earned $ 141,433 in course management fees in 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president , he earned $ 12,984 in fees .
Trump promised to divest from his businesses , as previous presidents did , before his election , but he reneged .
He also vowed not to undertake any new international ventures .
He broke that promise as well .
Trump is the target of a lawsuit accusing him of violating the emoluments clause of the Constitution , which bars federal officials from accepting payments from foreign interests .
The clause is intended to guard against conflicts of interest for a president deciding between personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a nation .
Spending money at a president ’ s businesses can also effectively serve as a conduit for bribery by foreign interests seeking favors .
The Trump Organization is planning a second Dubai golf course with Damac and a Chinese company designed by golfer Tiger Woods .
Trump recently awarded Woods the prestigious Presidential Medal of Freedom , an unusual gift for a business associate .
The president frequently plays golf with Woods .
U.S. taxpayers fund those trips as well .
What exactly is her job ?
What was she doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Can anyone tell me what her job responsibilities are ?
🤔🙄 — I am me , call me Kami ( @ kamimagic ) February 17 , 2020

The former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics on Monday mocked White House senior adviser Ivanka Trump’s trip to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates as a taxpayer-funded “corporate” junket for the Trump Organization.
Trump’s trip to the city began Saturday, just days before Tuesday’s third anniversary of the Trump International Golf Club Dubai.
Advertisement
Trump International Golf Club in Dubai is promoting its anniversary celebration on Instagram during @IvankaTrump's United Arab Emirates trip. Eric & Don Jr.'s travel for its opening weeks after Trump's inauguration cost US taxpayers $250k on Secret Service https://t.co/QAlyouGxzq pic.twitter.com/MlzuOIi73S — Anna Massoglia (@annalecta) February 17, 2020
The first daughter participated in photo ops, meetings with Dubai officials — and even a video (above) showing her strolling languorously through the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque in Abu Dhabi in a flowing gown and hijab produced by the federally funded Voice of America. She gave the keynote address in the two-day Global Women’s Forum in Dubai on Sunday.
Publicity that draws attention to Dubai’s Trump-branded golf course financially benefits President Donald Trump and his family members. The course was developed by major Dubai real estate developer Damac Properties, which pays to license the Trump name and pays the Trump Organization to run the course.
“It was nice of you taxpayers to sponsor her corporate trip,” former ethics chief Walter Shaub quipped sarcastically on Twitter. “Yer the best.”
Advertisement
How convenient. It was nice of you taxpayers to sponsor her corporate trip. It was nice of you to fund the propaganda video VOA disseminated too. Yer the best. https://t.co/2V2M5aPhHi — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 17, 2020
Donald Trump was paid as much as $10 million by Damac in 2016 for Trump Organization golf properties in Dubai, according to his financial filings. The president personally earned $141,433 in course management fees in 2017. In 2016, before he became president, he earned $12,984 in fees.
Trump promised to divest from his businesses, as previous presidents did, before his election, but he reneged. He also vowed not to undertake any new international ventures. He broke that promise as well.
Trump is the target of a lawsuit accusing him of violating the emoluments clause of the Constitution, which bars federal officials from accepting payments from foreign interests. The clause is intended to guard against conflicts of interest for a president deciding between personal profits and what’s best for a nation. Spending money at a president’s businesses can also effectively serve as a conduit for bribery by foreign interests seeking favors.
Advertisement
The Trump Organization is planning a second Dubai golf course with Damac and a Chinese company designed by golfer Tiger Woods.
Trump recently awarded Woods the prestigious Presidential Medal of Freedom, an unusual gift for a business associate. The president frequently plays golf with Woods. U.S. taxpayers fund those trips as well.
Twitter followers had thoughts about the first daughter’s taxpayer-funded trip to Dubai.
What exactly is her job? What was she doing there? I'm so confused! Can anyone tell me what her job responsibilities are?🤔🙄 — I am me, call me Kami (@kamimagic) February 17, 2020
Someone explain to me how Ivanka’s mysteriously defined “job” would be materially different if she were a princess in a monarchy. pic.twitter.com/fBZB87KdcM — Schooley (@Rschooley) February 17, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Reality Winner, NSA Whistleblower Who Leaked Russia Report, Petitions Trump For Clemency

Reality Winner , the National Security Agency whistleblower who was imprisoned for leaking classified information on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to the press , is seeking clemency from President Donald Trump .
The former U.S. Air Force intelligence specialist and her supporters filed a petition on Monday to the Office of the Pardon Attorney , an arm of the Justice Department , requesting her early release from jail .
Winner , now 28 , was sentenced in 2018 to five years and three months behind bars .
She has since served about 30 months of her sentence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Espionage Act by smuggling a top-secret report about Russian hacking attacks out of an NSA office in her pantyhose , The New York Times reported .
She then shared the report with a news outlet , widely reported to be The Intercept .
“ I would like to apologize profusely for my actions , ” she told U.S. District Court Judge J. Randal Hall .
” My actions were a cruel betrayal of my nation ’ s trust in me.
” In her clemency petition , Winner ’ s incarceration was described as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public , burdensome to her health and wellbeing , and not commensurate with the severity of her offense.
” “ Our country was attacked by a hostile foreign power , ” Alison Grinter , Winner ’ s attorney , said at a Monday press conference in Dallas .
“ Our national healing process can not begin until we forgive our truth tellers and begin the job of rebuilding what was taken from us ― election security , accountability for those who endeavor to undermine our democracy , and safeguarding the American right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ None of this can begin in earnest while we are still punishing those who tell us the truth , ” Grinter added , noting that she ’ d submitted 4,500 letters of support for Winner as part of the clemency application .
As The Intercept noted this week , Winner ’ s prison sentence is the longest sentence ever imposed in federal court on a journalistic source under the Espionage Act .
Though the Trump administration has yet to respond publicly to Winner ’ s petition , the president has spoken of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past .
He said in a 2018 tweet that Winner ’ s sentence had been “ unfair ” for someone who was “ small potatoes ” compared to his earlier political rival Hillary Clinton .
Winner ’ s petition refers to Trump ’ s tweet .
“ This president has been willing to use his pardon power without regard to many of the conventions that have been put together to guide and advise a president on pardons and commutations , ” Grinter told the Times this week of Trump .
“ We know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media , and we are hoping that the president sees this for what it is and that is an opportunity to put right a great injustice , ” she continued .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Reality Winner, the National Security Agency whistleblower who was imprisoned for leaking classified information on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to the press, is seeking clemency from President Donald Trump.
The former U.S. Air Force intelligence specialist and her supporters filed a petition on Monday to the Office of the Pardon Attorney, an arm of the Justice Department, requesting her early release from jail.
Advertisement
Winner, now 28, was sentenced in 2018 to five years and three months behind bars. She has since served about 30 months of her sentence.
She pleaded guilty to breaching the Espionage Act by smuggling a top-secret report about Russian hacking attacks out of an NSA office in her pantyhose, The New York Times reported. She then shared the report with a news outlet, widely reported to be The Intercept.
Winner said in court in August 2018 that she took “full responsibility” for the “undeniable mistake I made.”
“I would like to apologize profusely for my actions,” she told U.S. District Court Judge J. Randal Hall. ”My actions were a cruel betrayal of my nation’s trust in me.”
Advertisement
Reality Winner outside the Augusta Courthouse on June 8, 2017, in Augusta, Georgia. Sean Rayford via Getty Images
In her clemency petition, Winner’s incarceration was described as “costly, unnecessary to protect the public, burdensome to her health and wellbeing, and not commensurate with the severity of her offense.”
“Our country was attacked by a hostile foreign power,” Alison Grinter, Winner’s attorney, said at a Monday press conference in Dallas. “Our national healing process cannot begin until we forgive our truth tellers and begin the job of rebuilding what was taken from us ― election security, accountability for those who endeavor to undermine our democracy, and safeguarding the American right to government by and for the people.”
“None of this can begin in earnest while we are still punishing those who tell us the truth,” Grinter added, noting that she’d submitted 4,500 letters of support for Winner as part of the clemency application.
As The Intercept noted this week, Winner’s prison sentence is the longest sentence ever imposed in federal court on a journalistic source under the Espionage Act.
Advertisement
Though the Trump administration has yet to respond publicly to Winner’s petition, the president has spoken of the whistleblower’s case in the past.
He said in a 2018 tweet that Winner’s sentence had been “unfair” for someone who was “small potatoes” compared to his earlier political rival Hillary Clinton. Winner’s petition refers to Trump’s tweet.
Ex-NSA contractor to spend 63 months in jail over “classified” information. Gee, this is “small potatoes” compared to what Hillary Clinton did! So unfair Jeff, Double Standard. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 24, 2018
“This president has been willing to use his pardon power without regard to many of the conventions that have been put together to guide and advise a president on pardons and commutations,” Grinter told the Times this week of Trump.
“We know the president pays attention to Twitter and media, and we are hoping that the president sees this for what it is and that is an opportunity to put right a great injustice,” she continued.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Bloomberg’s Billions Didn’t Just Build A Political Network. He Also Bought Silence.

It was a familiar situation to countless others who tried to oppose Bloomberg in the 12 years he ruled City Hall .
Bloomberg was simultaneously the city ’ s top elected official and its most outsized philanthropist .
Over more than a decade , his sprawling philanthropic network gave away approximately $ 3 billion , leaving almost no one in civic life who didn ’ t rely in ways large or small on his continued generosity .
“ We would find it very hard at times to get these other groups to stand up with us , ” Markee recalled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we were doing a press conference in front of City Hall , or engaged in a legal action , or whether we were doing rallies , I talked to my colleagues and pretty frankly they would say , ‘ Look , we agree with you , we ’ re on your side .
But he ’ s a critical donor .
We can ’ t afford to lose that kind of money.
’ ” “ People always feel when they ’ re challenging someone who has power and is that wealthy that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Norman Siegel , who led the New York Civil Liberties Union until the beginning of Bloomberg ’ s term .
Siegel has recalled the group having trouble finding allies when it challenged the New York Police Department ’ s harsh and often illegal policing methods .
“ When you have someone as wealthy as Michael Bloomberg , you can never dismiss the possibility.
” Today , Bloomberg ’ s gobsmacking personal fortune is fuel for an even bigger quest : to become the Democratic nominee for president .
His self-funded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just three months — in all likelihood , more than every other Democratic candidate combined — making his message omnipresent on radio , television and digital platforms , and giving his campaign the formidable staffing levels of a general-election operation .
A top deputy once issued angry rebukes to members of arts organizations Bloomberg had patronized after they attended fundraisers for his political opponents .
Reliable critics of the city ’ s neglectful treatment of Black and minority communities , such as Al Sharpton , grew quieter as their churches and charities received @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Butts III , pastor of the influential Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem , endorsed the mayor ’ s 2009 reelection campaign after Bloomberg donated approximately $ 1 million to Abyssinian ’ s nonprofit .
“ Some groups would say ‘ Well , you know we ’ re getting funding from Bloomberg , we like Bloomberg , ’ or toward the end people were more unprepared to take him on because they had this delusional thought that somehow when he ’ s in his foundation world , if they ’ re nice to him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get grants from his foundation , ” Siegel told BuzzFeed in 2013 .
Randi Weingarten , then the head of the formidable New York teacher ’ s union , recounted a similar dynamic .
When she clashed with City Hall on union contract negotiations and education reforms , longtime allies were “ silent because of the influence the mayor had .
We found out later that some of them were getting donations from him , ” she said recently .
“ You would notice it because people would whisper to us all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s money didn ’ t just muzzle nettlesome liberals .
It proved just as powerful at muting potential opposition from the grassroots of his own party , the journalist Ben Smith recalled from his days at The Observer : “ The various county Republican Parties , whose rank and file ( such as they are ) rankled at elements of Bloomberg ’ s muscular assertion of government power to ban smoking , trans fats , and giant sodas , were wholly owned subsidiaries of the mayor , who gave contributions than they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see again , ” he wrote .
All told , Bloomberg made an estimated $ 2.8 billion in charitable contributions during his 12 years as mayor .
Officially , many of those donations were made by an “ anonymous ” donor .
But Bloomberg ’ s identity was one of New York ’ s worst-kept secrets , especially given how many of his top deputies went through the revolving door from City Hall to executive philanthropy positions and back again .
As a writer for the frequently critical Manhattan Institute put it at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ There has never been a wall of separation between Bloomberg ’ s private patronage and his political machine.
” The ur-example came in 2008 , when Bloomberg rocked the city by announcing he would seek a third term as mayor .
To do so , he needed the city council to overturn New York ’ s term limits .
Aides to Bloomberg called on nonprofits that received millions in donations from Bloomberg ’ s private philanthropies to testify at public hearings .
Susan Freedman , the head of the Public Art @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canada of the Harlem Children ’ s Zone ; Bloomberg had recently gifted both organizations $ 500,000 .
“ The rooms at city hall were packed with people who had never taken an interest in municipal affairs before , but were now showing their support for extending term limits , ” a reporter who covered Bloomberg recently recalled .
“ Their bosses had told them to come.
” The Doe Fund , a nonprofit supporting the city ’ s homeless people , sent at least 11 employees .
It took in millions from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years , including $ 10 million after the hearings on term limits .
When employees of the Doe Fund testified , most didn ’ t hint at their affiliation : They presented themselves simply as involved citizens .
Bloomberg ’ s aides — his campaign did not respond to requests for comment — have long denied that the intention behind his philanthropy was to buy silence .
“ This presumes that Mike cared about being criticized and wanted to limit criticism , ” Stu Loeser , a longtime Bloomberg aide , once said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much about the politics.
” ( He preferred to step over them . )
Howard Wolfson , Bloomberg ’ s chief adviser , goes so far as to posit the billionaire ’ s fortune as what makes him incorruptible , not the other way around .
“ He has never taken a political contribution in his life , ” Wolfson frequently says .
“ He can not be bought.
” Outside admirers of Bloomberg have spun his largesse as not a corrosive to democracy but an asset to effective governance .
Kathy Wylde @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York , a civic group and frequent Bloomberg booster , in 2013 described his immense wealth almost as a necessity : “ There ’ s no doubt about it , it ’ s going to be much harder for someone who doesn ’ t have those resources to govern the city , ” she said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The plan was shocking even in Mike Bloomberg’s New York: At the height of the Great Recession, with the number of homeless people approaching record highs, the city had quietly begun charging rent from working families living in its rundown shelters.
“People were just outraged by that policy,” said Patrick Markee, then a senior policy analyst at the Coalition for the Homeless. Social services advocates had already found a lot to dislike about Bloomberg’s personal responsibility approach to homelessness, and Markee figured that organizing a swift and unified backlash would be no problem.
Advertisement
But almost immediately, reliable allies in the nonprofit world declined to take a public stand against Mayor Bloomberg, for fear of alienating their most important donor: Mayor Bloomberg.
It was a familiar situation to countless others who tried to oppose Bloomberg in the 12 years he ruled City Hall. Bloomberg was simultaneously the city’s top elected official and its most outsized philanthropist. Over more than a decade, his sprawling philanthropic network gave away approximately $3 billion, leaving almost no one in civic life who didn’t rely in ways large or small on his continued generosity.
“We would find it very hard at times to get these other groups to stand up with us,” Markee recalled in a recent interview. “When we were doing a press conference in front of City Hall, or engaged in a legal action, or whether we were doing rallies, I talked to my colleagues and pretty frankly they would say, ‘Look, we agree with you, we’re on your side. But he’s a critical donor. We can’t afford to lose that kind of money.’”
Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire former New York City mayor-turned-Democratic candidate, mounts the stage at a campaign rally in Miami, Florida. Maria Alejandra Cardona / Reuters
Advertisement
“People always feel when they’re challenging someone who has power and is that wealthy that there could be either explicit or implicit consequences,” said Norman Siegel, who led the New York Civil Liberties Union until the beginning of Bloomberg’s term. Siegel has recalled the group having trouble finding allies when it challenged the New York Police Department’s harsh and often illegal policing methods. “When you have someone as wealthy as Michael Bloomberg, you can never dismiss the possibility.”
Today, Bloomberg’s gobsmacking personal fortune is fuel for an even bigger quest: to become the Democratic nominee for president. His self-funded campaign has spent $400 million in just three months — in all likelihood, more than every other Democratic candidate combined — making his message omnipresent on radio, television and digital platforms, and giving his campaign the formidable staffing levels of a general-election operation.
Bloomberg has also lavished billions on Democratic candidates and left-of-center causes, which helps explain why an ex-Republican who entered the race in order to thwart the party’s progressive grassroots nevertheless enjoys broad goodwill and even endorsements among the party’s elite.
But Bloomberg’s awesome wealth can achieve something else besides extreme exposure. As Markee’s experience shows, Bloomberg’s vast extracurricular philanthropy bought him not only allies in key political moments, but the illusion of political consensus and a lack of serious opposition to the billionaire’s personal policy preferences.
In the months to come, Bloomberg’s rivals will have to contend equally with his ability to buy silence.
Advertisement
Never ‘A Wall Of Separation’
Bloomberg’s 12 years dominating New York City politics is rife with similar examples.
A top deputy once issued angry rebukes to members of arts organizations Bloomberg had patronized after they attended fundraisers for his political opponents. Reliable critics of the city’s neglectful treatment of Black and minority communities, such as Al Sharpton, grew quieter as their churches and charities received major grants. Rev. Calvin O. Butts III, pastor of the influential Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, endorsed the mayor’s 2009 reelection campaign after Bloomberg donated approximately $1 million to Abyssinian’s nonprofit.
Civil liberties advocates and the New York Civil Liberties Union struggled to recruit allies when they mounted lawsuits against the city, Siegel recalled. That was true even as the New York City Police Department increased its use of stop and frisk and its surveillance of Muslim communities.
“Some groups would say ‘Well, you know we’re getting funding from Bloomberg, we like Bloomberg,’ or toward the end people were more unprepared to take him on because they had this delusional thought that somehow when he’s in his foundation world, if they’re nice to him, they’ll get rewards and get grants from his foundation,” Siegel told BuzzFeed in 2013.
Randi Weingarten, then the head of the formidable New York teacher’s union, recounted a similar dynamic. When she clashed with City Hall on union contract negotiations and education reforms, longtime allies were “silent because of the influence the mayor had. We found out later that some of them were getting donations from him,” she said recently. “You would notice it because people would whisper to us all the time about it.”
And Bloomberg’s money didn’t just muzzle nettlesome liberals. It proved just as powerful at muting potential opposition from the grassroots of his own party, the journalist Ben Smith recalled from his days at The Observer: “The various county Republican Parties, whose rank and file (such as they are) rankled at elements of Bloomberg’s muscular assertion of government power to ban smoking, trans fats, and giant sodas, were wholly owned subsidiaries of the mayor, who gave contributions than they’d ever seen or were likely to see again,” he wrote.
Advertisement
All told, Bloomberg made an estimated $2.8 billion in charitable contributions during his 12 years as mayor. Officially, many of those donations were made by an “anonymous” donor. But Bloomberg’s identity was one of New York’s worst-kept secrets, especially given how many of his top deputies went through the revolving door from City Hall to executive philanthropy positions and back again. As a writer for the frequently critical Manhattan Institute put it at the close of Bloomberg’s mayoralty, “There has never been a wall of separation between Bloomberg’s private patronage and his political machine.”
The ur-example came in 2008, when Bloomberg rocked the city by announcing he would seek a third term as mayor. To do so, he needed the city council to overturn New York’s term limits. Aides to Bloomberg called on nonprofits that received millions in donations from Bloomberg’s private philanthropies to testify at public hearings. Susan Freedman, the head of the Public Art Fund, came, as did Geoffrey Canada of the Harlem Children’s Zone; Bloomberg had recently gifted both organizations $500,000.
“The rooms at city hall were packed with people who had never taken an interest in municipal affairs before, but were now showing their support for extending term limits,” a reporter who covered Bloomberg recently recalled. “Their bosses had told them to come.” The Doe Fund, a nonprofit supporting the city’s homeless people, sent at least 11 employees. It took in millions from Bloomberg’s philanthropies in the surrounding years, including $10 million after the hearings on term limits. When employees of the Doe Fund testified, most didn’t hint at their affiliation: They presented themselves simply as involved citizens.
An End-Run Around Politics
Bloomberg’s aides — his campaign did not respond to requests for comment — have long denied that the intention behind his philanthropy was to buy silence. “This presumes that Mike cared about being criticized and wanted to limit criticism,” Stu Loeser, a longtime Bloomberg aide, once said. “He didn’t care much about the politics.” (He preferred to step over them.) Howard Wolfson, Bloomberg’s chief adviser, goes so far as to posit the billionaire’s fortune as what makes him incorruptible, not the other way around. “He has never taken a political contribution in his life,” Wolfson frequently says. “He cannot be bought.”
Outside admirers of Bloomberg have spun his largesse as not a corrosive to democracy but an asset to effective governance. Kathy Wylde, who led the Partnership for New York, a civic group and frequent Bloomberg booster, in 2013 described his immense wealth almost as a necessity: “There’s no doubt about it, it’s going to be much harder for someone who doesn’t have those resources to govern the city,” she said.
Advertisement
Markee, the Coalition for the Homeless advocate, would run headlong into Bloomberg’s singular brand of governance many more times. Eventually, he printed out a long list of beneficiaries of Bloomberg’s charity networks and spent several afternoons scanning for familiar advocacy groups and service providers. By the end of this exercise, he could hardly think of a group that wasn’t on the list.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Kenan Thompson, Hasan Minhaj Named For White House Correspondents' Dinner

“ Saturday Night Live ” star Kenan Thompson will host , and Hasan Minhaj of the Netflix show “ Patriot Act ” will return as the featured entertainer at the annual media shindig on April 25 , the association announced on Twitter Tuesday : The announcement signals that this year ’ s dinner will return the annual event to its traditional comic format .
Last year , the association filled the featured speaker role with presidential historian Ron Chernow .
That followed conservative backlash to comedian Michelle Wolf ’ s 2018 set that poked fun at then-White House press secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attendance .
Trump , unlike previous presidents , has not attended the dinner during his time in office .
Last year , he ordered all his staff to boycott the event .
Trump was the subject of “ Late Night ” host Seth Meyers ’ savage jokes in 2011 , which some pundits have speculated prompted Trump to run for president .
White House Correspondents ’ Association President Jonathan Karl , who is ABC News ’ chief White House correspondent , hailed this year ’ s bookings of Thompson and Minhaj as “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entertainers in America.
” “ I ’ m thrilled they ’ ll help us celebrate the role of a free press in our democracy , ” Karl said in a statement .
“ We ’ re looking forward to a lively evening honoring the most important political journalism of the past year.
” Minhaj was the featured entertainer in 2017 , when he delivered multiple jokes about Trump and the media .
“ I would say it is an honor to be here , but that would be an alternative fact , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
No one wanted to do this , so of course it lands in the hands of an immigrant .
It ’ s how it always goes down .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Comedians are back in business for this year’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.
“Saturday Night Live” star Kenan Thompson will host, and Hasan Minhaj of the Netflix show “Patriot Act” will return as the featured entertainer at the annual media shindig on April 25, the association announced on Twitter Tuesday:
Advertisement
The announcement signals that this year’s dinner will return the annual event to its traditional comic format.
Last year, the association filled the featured speaker role with presidential historian Ron Chernow. That followed conservative backlash to comedian Michelle Wolf’s 2018 set that poked fun at then-White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who was in attendance.
Check out Wolf’s 2018 set here:
Trump, unlike previous presidents, has not attended the dinner during his time in office. Last year, he ordered all his staff to boycott the event.
Advertisement
Trump was the subject of “Late Night” host Seth Meyers’ savage jokes in 2011, which some pundits have speculated prompted Trump to run for president.
Check out Meyers’ 2011 set here:
White House Correspondents’ Association President Jonathan Karl, who is ABC News’ chief White House correspondent, hailed this year’s bookings of Thompson and Minhaj as “two of the most engaged and engaging entertainers in America.”
“I’m thrilled they’ll help us celebrate the role of a free press in our democracy,” Karl said in a statement. “We’re looking forward to a lively evening honoring the most important political journalism of the past year.”
Minhaj was the featured entertainer in 2017, when he delivered multiple jokes about Trump and the media. “I would say it is an honor to be here, but that would be an alternative fact,” he began. “It is not. No one wanted to do this, so of course it lands in the hands of an immigrant. It’s how it always goes down.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Trump Pardons Ex-San Francisco 49ers Owner Convicted In Gambling Fraud Scandal

DeBartolo Jr. , who built the San Francisco 49ers ’ 1980s- ’ 90s dynasty , was involved in one of the biggest owners ’ scandals in the sport ’ s history .
In 1998 , he pleaded guilty to failing to report a felony when he paid $ 400,000 to former Louisiana Gov .
Edwin Edwards in exchange for a riverboat gambling license .
The White House announced the surprise decision on Tuesday , along with NFL greats Jerry Rice , Jim Brown , Ronnie Lott and Charles Haley .
Former NFL player Charles Haley , right , poses with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , former San Francisco 49ers owner Edward DeBartolo Jr. , during inductions at the Pro Football Hall of Fame , Saturday , Aug. 8 2015 , in Canton , Ohio .
DeBartolo Jr. , whose San Francisco 49ers won five Super Bowls under his leadership , stepped down as owner in 1997 after two Louisiana newspapers reported he would be indicted for gambling fraud .
He avoided prison , was fined $ 1 million and was suspended for a year by the NFL .
But the episode effectively ended his NFL career .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ who played on three of DeBartolo ’ s Super Bowl-winning teams , said DeBartolo “ was like that 12th man ” of the great 49ers teams .
“ He ’ s the main reason why we won so many Super Bowls , ” Rice said .
“ So today is a great day for him .
I ’ m glad to be here and be a part of that .
It ’ s just something I will never forget .
This man , he has done so much in the community , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump has pardoned Edward DeBartolo Jr., the former San Francisco 49ers owner convicted in a gambling fraud scandal.
DeBartolo Jr., who built the San Francisco 49ers’ 1980s-’90s dynasty, was involved in one of the biggest owners’ scandals in the sport’s history. In 1998, he pleaded guilty to failing to report a felony when he paid $400,000 to former Louisiana Gov. Edwin Edwards in exchange for a riverboat gambling license.
Advertisement
The White House announced the surprise decision on Tuesday, along with NFL greats Jerry Rice, Jim Brown, Ronnie Lott and Charles Haley.
Former NFL player Charles Haley, right, poses with his bust, next to his present, former San Francisco 49ers owner Edward DeBartolo Jr., during inductions at the Pro Football Hall of Fame, Saturday, Aug. 8 2015, in Canton, Ohio. ASSOCIATED PRESS
DeBartolo Jr., whose San Francisco 49ers won five Super Bowls under his leadership, stepped down as owner in 1997 after two Louisiana newspapers reported he would be indicted for gambling fraud.
He avoided prison, was fined $1 million and was suspended for a year by the NFL. But the episode effectively ended his NFL career.
Advertisement
Rice, an NFL Hall of Famer who played on three of DeBartolo’s Super Bowl-winning teams, said DeBartolo “was like that 12th man” of the great 49ers teams.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Elizabeth Warren Has A Plan For Foreign Policy. You Just Probably Haven't Heard About It.

It ’ s a group of people who firmly believe the U.S. has made wrong turns but are also certain @ @ @ @ @ and its effect can be positive .
Many have government experience themselves , though the @ @ @ @ @ nearly all are familiar faces in the Washington circuit ― and would have been , @ @ @ @ @ America , “ highly welcome on the Biden campaign.
” They chose Warren for her @ @ @ @ @ just what she opposes but what she supports .
Some cite her expertise on specific @ @ @ @ @ former State Department official Alexandra Bell , the exhaustion of the armed forces for Bishop @ @ @ @ @ advocate for the community , and reforming the State Department for Robert Ford , a @ @ @ @ @ s even faith her common sense could lead her to reconsider some positions : Bonnie @ @ @ @ @ , hopes Warren may change her mind on the TPP trade deal .

On Jan. 2, President Donald Trump ordered the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani. For the next week, Sen. Elizabeth Warren repeatedly appeared on television to argue that Trump was failing at his job as commander in chief.
“This is not a moment when a president should be escalating tensions and moving us to war,” the Democratic presidential candidate said on CNN, a day after saying she would not have ordered the strike.
Advertisement
“Soleimani was a bad guy, but the question is: What’s the right response?… having killed Soleimani does not make America safer,” Warren said on ABC’s “The View.” On “Meet the Press,” she warned that Trump’s decision could expand costly U.S. military interventions and cause further suffering for millions of people in the Middle East.
As most other presidential aspirants responded with prewritten remarks, Warren’s team hoped live media appearances would prove she could handle both international upheaval and scrutiny of her foreign policy expertise.
But some on the left reacted by saying the Massachusetts senator was shoring up a problematic status quo. Warren “echoed Trump’s talking points,” wrote Jacobin, a socialist magazine, when she acknowledged Soleimani’s responsibility for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans.
Vice President Joe Biden, one of her rivals in the primary race, said the Soleimani strike showed the need for a Democratic presidential nominee with experience — a clear argument against candidates like Warren who haven’t worked on foreign policy as long. From the right, ABC host Meghan McCain forced Warren into a lengthy and tendentious exchange about whether Soleimani should be called a “terrorist.”
Advertisement
Warren’s vision of global affairs can be hard to pin down. To some extent, that’s by design. Conversations with more than a dozen Warren staffers and informal advisers reveal a strategy that doesn’t seek to make national security a point of major contention in the Democratic primary. She’s not competing with Biden in romanticizing the Barack Obama administration, nor trying to challenge Sen. Bernie Sanders’s image as a prescient critic of American power and international dominance.
It’s not that Warren lacks plans. She would approach the world like she would the U.S.: using the power of government to reshape the relationship between powerful wealthy interests and significantly less powerful communities. She wants to reduce America’s foreign military presence but increase Washington’s power to tackle problems such as the way global financial corruption and authoritarianism enable each other.
With Warren nearing a make-or-break point for her campaign, the story of how she built her profile on foreign policy reflects the way she’s approached her decade-old political career. She has demonstrated both liberal instincts and comfort with existing power structures, seeking to earn people’s trust that she is the right person to enact vital change. That means she’s still not seen as left enough in some quarters, nor viewed as a trusted executor of the establishment’s priorities. But Warren is convinced she’s done the work to succeed.
Entering The Foreign Policy Debate
By the time Warren first seriously engaged with foreign policy as she ran for the Senate in 2012, she was already seen as a liberal hero willing to push boundaries. She didn’t seek that kind of reputation on global affairs.
Advertisement
Challenging Army National Guard Col. Scott Brown for the Massachusetts seat, Warren primarily talked about domestic policy. But she was vocal in supporting the era’s hawkish line on Iran. Then-President Barack Obama was boasting about subjecting the Islamic Republic to expansive sanctions that would, he predicted, push it into a deal limiting its nuclear program. On her campaign website, Warren endorsed “strong sanctions” and went even further by saying Tehran was already pursuing nuclear weapons. Progressives pushed back, noting that Obama officials and U.S. allies rejected that claim.
At the time, there was no shortage of Democrats saying it was correct to get tough on Iran. But some voices warned against overly aggressive rhetoric that risked a rush to war. Warren’s fellow Senate candidate that cycle, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, produced a television ad decrying a potential conflict, and experts were already warning that the bipartisan drive for ever-broadening sanctions was taking a humanitarian toll and could backfire. Warren wasn’t saber-rattling, but she wasn’t in the liberal vanguard.
Once in Congress, Warren faced an early vote pitting skeptics of the national security establishment against the Obama administration: whether John Brennan should lead the CIA. Watchdogs like the ACLU, libertarian firebrand Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Senate progressives said Brennan’s confirmation should depend on Obama revealing more about his controversial and secretive targeted-killing program. Some worried Brennan’s past in the intelligence community meant he wouldn’t support reining in the power of its agencies. The coalition won a degree of new transparency from Obama, but members remained wary: Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Sanders (I-Vt.) voted against Brennan.
Warren held the White House line.
The new senator also maintained ties to the defense industry by protecting jobs related to it in her state. She had explained during her campaign that, although she opposed greater intervention abroad and wanted less defense spending, she would be thoughtful in reshaping the military, not oppositional.
But it was increasingly clear the mismatch between Warren’s assertive push for a more just domestic policy and her caution on foreign policy risked trouble with more liberal elements of the Democratic base who hoped she would be their champion.
Advertisement
The summer of 2014 brought a stark example: Asked about Israel’s conduct in its campaign in Gaza and her vote to send it $225 million in additional U.S. aid even as it engaged in alleged war crimes, Warren defended the funding and Israeli military behavior, saying Palestinian civilian deaths were because of Palestinian militants’ tactics ― a controversial assertion common among Israel hawks. “That, ladies and gentlemen, is your inspiring left-wing icon of the Democratic Party,” commentator Glenn Greenwald wrote in a critique.
Three months later, Warren visited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on her first official trip abroad.
Warren was willing to venture from tradition on sensitive Mideast issues ― when she had some degree of cover, especially from Obama. Five months after her Israel trip, Warren became one of eight Democratic senators to skip Netanyahu’s GOP-sponsored address to Congress criticizing the president’s negotiations with Iran, and when Obama unveiled his final nuclear deal, she was one of its early supporters in the Senate.
Her path reflected the larger Warren political playbook: maintaining institutional credibility and power while pressuring the establishment ― and the Democratic Party consensus ― in carefully chosen ways.
In the spring of 2014, she used her first major national security speech to describe how U.S. military actions harm foreign civilians, fueling anger abroad. Warren didn’t outright condemn Obama’s counterterrorism programs, which killed hundreds of non-militants despite the administration’s claims that they were “surgical,” but she used her platform as one of the best-known members of his party to argue that reforming the U.S. approach to global affairs was about more than just keeping Democrats in office.
Advertisement
“When we debate the costs and benefits of intervention ― when we discuss potential military action around the world ― the talk about collateral damage and civilian casualties too often seems quiet,” she said. “The failure to make civilian casualties a full and robust part of our national conversation over the use of force is dangerous.”
Warren was one of a minority of Democrats who rejected two military requests Obama made of Congress: She voted against funding for U.S.-aligned rebels in Syria in 2014 and against more weapons to Saudi Arabia for a bloody intervention in Yemen in 2016. And she joined a challenge to Obama’s top generals by supporting Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-N.Y.) proposal to change how the armed forces handle sexual assault.
“In 2014, Warren used her platform to argue that reforming the U.S. approach to global affairs was about more than just keeping Democrats in office.”
Warren picked her biggest fight with Obama and with decades-old foreign policy orthodoxy on behalf of the chief aim of her political career: keeping capitalism in check.
In 2015, she led congressional resistance to the president’s Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement.
Advertisement
Obama sold the accord as good for the U.S. economy and vital for rallying American partners against the rise of China, rallying influential supporters from both parties accustomed to bipartisan support for trade deals. Warren argued that the agreement would overwhelmingly benefit corporations. Her credentials shifted the dynamics of the fight, turning it from a traditional dispute between ideological leftists and technocratic neoliberals into a serious battle over the Democratic agenda in which both sides could claim credibility and policy chops, and attracting progressives eager for a leader.
Obama used Republican support to win the authority he wanted to secure the deal. Warren and her allies, however, won the war. They made the TPP politically toxic. Hillary Clinton disavowed it as a Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, and Obama chose not to push it through before Trump took office.
Auditioning For Commander In Chief
Warren entered the Trump era as one of his most likely Democratic challengers. Early on, she moved to ensure national security experience wouldn’t be a weakness in any potential match-up. She secured a spot on the Senate Armed Services Committee weeks after Trump’s victory and soon hired a new top adviser: Sasha Baker, a high-ranking aide to Obama’s last secretary of defense who peers say had a reputation as a savvy institutionalist with a sense of how to get things done in Washington.
Baker’s role was to be an operator in service of Warren’s goals — not to fill a blank slate.
“She ran for the Senate and talked about Pentagon reform as a candidate and then chose to get on Armed Services. It’s her interest in bringing a progressive perspective to the sources of American power that makes Sasha Baker possible rather than the other way around,” said Heather Hurlburt, an analyst at the think tank New America who has tracked how Democrats talk about foreign policy for years.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) speaks during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on nuclear policy on Feb. 29, 2019. Carolyn Kaster/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Advertisement
As a new fixture at national security hearings, Warren mixed skepticism ― asking why she should believe an incoming commander would “turn around” U.S. fortunes in Afghanistan and pressuring private military housing companies and Trump appointees with defense industry ties ― with cooperation, getting uniformed officers to affirm the importance of diplomacy and working with Republicans on pay raises and sexual harassment protections for troops.
Meanwhile, the senator pushed to inform herself, Baker said, pressing her new adviser with tasks like always providing the best argument against the position she’d recommend to the senator. Traveling to hotspots ― Afghanistan, Iraq, Ukraine, the demilitarized zone in the Koreas, China ― she sought out junior diplomats and military officials “because she wants to get the real story,” Baker told HuffPost.
Warren advanced her past concerns with civilian casualties by getting the Republican-led Senate to approve an amendment requiring the Pentagon to provide an annual report on the civilian toll of U.S. military operations. The Defense Department published the first of those in the summer of 2018, and lawmakers built on her work to increase the requirements even further the next year.
And Warren became one of the few lawmakers actively addressing the question of managing the U.S. nuclear arsenal, securing a spot on the subcommittee overseeing it, rallying opposition to Trump’s bid to arm submarines with low-yield warheads and pushing to extend the New START treaty, an agreement with Russia to reduce how many weapons Moscow and Washington hold. “She has been the most outspoken and supportive of what I would call the progressive arms control agenda,” said Tom Collina, the director of policy at the peace group Ploughshares Fund, noting that Warren led well-received proposals such as legislation committing the U.S. to not using nuclear weapons first in a war.
Though she was a junior member on a GOP-led committee whose members traditionally skew conservative, Warren took the panel seriously, said a former Senate aide who observed her work.
Advertisement
“I can’t say she was particularly helpful for the things we were pushing for” ― from the Republican leadership’s standpoint ― “but I at least appreciated that she was there,” the one-time staffer said. The specific aspect of cooperation they remembered was on limiting U.S. engagement with the repressive government of Myanmar: “That was a rare exception, and that’s because we were trying to cut something.”
But while Warren was demonstrating that she could forge national security policy, she wasn’t using the issue to grab headlines or rally left-leaning supporters.
As others opposed to the president highlighted his foreign policy ― think of former Obama administration officials flooding the airwaves to talk about Trump weakening U.S. alliances and his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin and other autocrats, or Sanders leading the push against Trump’s support for the Saudi war in Yemen (with help from Warren and others) ― Warren focused most of her energy elsewhere, on domestic issues.
Warren did make one significant public shift to assuage more liberal activists by offering a more balanced position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
She was one of the first Democrats to criticize Israel’s crackdown on protesters from Gaza in 2018 (seen as relatively controversial because of Hamas’s control of the strip) and she signed letters urging humanitarian improvement there and protection for vulnerable Palestinians in the West Bank. She distanced herself from the increasingly conservative pro-Israel group AIPAC and endorsed blocking aid to Israel to stop its settlements in territory key to a future Palestinian state.
Advertisement
“As she’s learned more about this issue, she has applied more of that civil rights, human rights, value-based approach,” said Hady Amr, an informal adviser to Warren’s campaign who served as the U.S. deputy special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations under Obama.
Warren’s move chiefly, however, aligned her with her ideological allies ― it didn’t represent her moving the needle. And it came as Trump was changing the conversation on the issue; talking about the importance of outreach to the Palestinians and Netanyahu’s excesses was no longer a left position as much it was a centrist response to the administration’s extreme pro-Israel turn.
Without much fanfare, Warren took her time to establish herself as ready to be commander in chief. Her delay may have cost her.
The Warren Doctrine
Warren is not the first presidential candidate to say the U.S. must be more restrained abroad after its post-9/11 wars. Obama and Trump both articulated that idea, albeit in very different ways, but neither managed a full break from the paradigm they had slammed on the campaign trail.
What’s different about Warren is that she ties skepticism about militaristic U.S. choices to a detailed vision of what the U.S. can achieve in the world if it uses its power in different ways.
Advertisement
Aligning her foreign policy approach with her better-known themes on domestic issues, she envisions assigning diplomats to focus specifically on battling corruption in foreign countries and more frequently punishing financial institutions used to launder the world’s dirty money. She would boost labor rights and policies to fight climate change at home and then make other nations’ access to the huge U.S. market contingent on their following suit.
“We need to end the fiction that our domestic and foreign policies are somehow separate,” Warren said in a major national security speech on Nov. 29, 2018. She wants to restrict defense spending to essentials, she noted, but she also believes the U.S. must be an international leader in the face of rivals like China and Russia by strengthening its nonmilitary influence.
“Authoritarianism is on the move around the world,” she said. “There is no time to waste.”
“Authoritarianism is on the move around the world. There is no time to waste.” - Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
In power, Warren would likely readjust America’s international relationships in line with American values ― moving away from partners who violate U.S. ideals, like Saudi Arabia, and reducing economic links to nations where autocracy has a big role in the market, like China, according to an essay that her longtime adviser Ganesh Sitaraman published last spring. And she would reject the old Washington idea that domestic costs ― like job losses or a strain on the families of service members ― are worth incurring for perceived foreign policy wins such as strategic trade deals or military demonstrations of U.S. credibility, he wrote. (Sitaraman has no formal role in her 2020 campaign.)
Warren is establishing a new, higher threshold for U.S. involvement abroad ― on purpose. Her advisers note that it would extend to war and peace. Should a terrorist attack or human rights crisis prompt lawmakers and the media to ask about the prospect of the U.S. getting involved, for instance, Warren would only consider military intervention if it was narrowly focused and approved by Congress, creating public buy-in and oversight.
Advertisement
“A president needs to be willing to say I’ll take an [authorization for the use of military force] that’s highly limited and also call Congress’s bluff and say, ‘If you don’t give it to me, I won’t do this,’” said Ilan Goldenberg, an informal Warren adviser.
Obama sought a specific authorization from Congress to fight the Islamic State. He failed to secure one, but he continued his war effort anyway on the basis of a 2001 authorization passed to approved fighting al Qaeda. Keeping that authorization alive meant leaving presidents with a vaguely worded approval that they have interpreted to justify a broad range of controversial military actions.
“Obama’s instincts were right, but there’s still the instinct inside the executive branch to hold on to as much power as possible,” said Goldenberg, who worked in the Pentagon and State Department in Obama’s administration. “You need a president who’s willing to say, ‘I’m willing to accept this limitation.’ I think she’ll be willing to do that.”
Warren’s narrative fits a moment when criticizing overly imperial U.S. policy has become a bipartisan sport.
But just because her diagnosis appeals to people doesn’t mean her solution will. Believing in it means having faith in U.S. institutions, particularly those most implicated in the country’s national security catastrophes.
Advertisement
Academics on the left are arguing a true progressive approach would reduce America’s sway, exploiting the current dominance of tools such as the U.S. financial system for goals like preventing tax evasion while shifting power to multilateral institutions in which other countries have more of a say ― ultimately creating a power structure that doesn’t have the U.S. on top and leave the world at the mercy of its shifts in policy.
Warren’s not talking about that degree of change. The thinking she’s associated with isn’t shy about its convictions or U.S. assertiveness. “When progressives use hawkish language, they are doing so with respect to economic challenges, not with an eye toward military buildups and war,” her adviser Sitaraman wrote.
And it’s coming from a candidate who still mostly considers foreign policy through the lens of her historic focus on what she sees as a rigged economy.
In her 2018 speech, Warren described the U.S. getting global affairs wrong starting in the 1980s because of deregulation and the increased power of corporations and the superrich. Before then, she said, “it wasn’t perfect ― we weren’t perfect ― but our foreign policy benefited a lot of people around the world.”
Though likely pleasing to some voters, that assessment oddly sidesteps the Vietnam War, which killed millions and forced a definitive reckoning for the national security establishment. It also doesn’t account for the dangerous nuclear arms race that Warren is now pledging to address. For all her domestic policy acumen and deep thinking about structural problems affecting Americans, it’s possible Warren still hasn’t thought as thoroughly about the awesome power she would wield over foreign policy as U.S. president.
Advertisement
“It Takes Guts”
Observing Warren’s formal foreign policy staff and her network of informal advisers offers clues about the kind of commander in chief she would be — one projecting responsibility, not revolution.
Consider Baker, the respected Pentagon hand, or Jarrett Blanc, who worked in international development before serving as a top State Department official under Obama and is now, he told HuffPost, the “traffic cop” for the advice coming in from Warren’s national security brain trust.
It’s a group of people who firmly believe the U.S. has made wrong turns but are also certain its institutions can be redeemed and its effect can be positive. Many have government experience themselves, though the team skews young, and nearly all are familiar faces in the Washington circuit ― and would have been, according to Hurlburt at New America, “highly welcome on the Biden campaign.” They chose Warren for her judgment and for explaining not just what she opposes but what she supports. Some cite her expertise on specific concerns: arms control for former State Department official Alexandra Bell, the exhaustion of the armed forces for Bishop Garrison, a veteran and advocate for the community, and reforming the State Department for Robert Ford, a retired diplomat. There’s even faith her common sense could lead her to reconsider some positions: Bonnie Glaser, a China expert, hopes Warren may change her mind on the TPP trade deal.
But in a Democratic primary often fought on the terrain of the left, Warren’s cautious reform isn’t always welcome. In particular, activists point to Warren’s 2017 vote for Trump’s first defense budget as a worrying sign she won’t sufficiently challenge the status quo.
Advertisement
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) leave the stage after a Democratic presidential primary debate in New Hampshire on Feb. 7. Her talk of carefully reforming U.S. foreign policy is being compared to Sanders's more combative rhetoric. Elise Amendola/ASSOCIATED PRESS
“That money just ends up going to war,” said Moumita Ahmed, a political activist based in Queens, New York. Ahmed sought to draft Warren against Clinton in 2016 and hoped she’d make up for her lack of national security experience. Ahmed believes Warren has failed to do so ― not because she’s personally hawkish but because she hasn’t learned enough to challenge national security establishment logic. (Warren said she backed the budget bill because of its provisions to support troops and for Massachusetts; she noted, “I do not support everything in this defense bill.” At a recent debate, Sanders boasted of never supporting a Trump military budget, though he did back defense spending bills under President George W. Bush.)
“If you’re going to stand up to the military-industrial complex, you can’t go in there with lukewarm policies or milquetoast stances,” Ahmed said. “It takes guts, and she hasn’t exhibited guts to me the way Bernie has.”
Warren also is vulnerable to attacks from the candidates perceived as more experienced, like Biden. He might warn that her proposed reforms and reduction of the U.S. role abroad risk security, a perennial concern for voters, or simply that it’s too ambitious at a point when the focus should just be undoing Trump’s damage to U.S. global leadership.
And Warren’s historic potential to be the first woman in the job might create additional exposure to those arguments. “There’s no question that there’s an extra commander in chief test that women face,” Hurlburt said. “One of the areas where that really comes up is, ‘Who do you trust to keep us safe?’”
Advertisement
Warren’s bet is that she can make voters comfortable with her approach to global affairs and in a general election chiefly present herself as more reasonable and less bellicose than Trump. National security doesn’t have to be a central issue when she has so many other plans to talk about.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Kamala Harris Endorses George Gascón In Heated LA District Attorney Race

Sen. Kamala Harris ( D-Calif. ) endorsed George Gascón on Tuesday in his campaign to be the next district attorney of Los Angeles County , which has become a major battleground for progressives with an eye toward prison reform .
“ George Gascón is a proven leader of national significance when it comes to reforming our criminal justice system , ” Harris , who ended her presidential bid in December , said in a statement .
Both she and Gascón have served as San Francisco DAs , with the latter stepping down in October to run in the county where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of San Francisco , George led fights to reform the Three Strikes Law , decrease the state prison population and get people convicted of nonviolent offenses greater opportunities to get their lives back on track , ” her endorsement continued .
“ As DA of LA County , I know George Gascón will work every day to keep our communities safe and demand real accountability from our justice system and real justice for every Angeleno.
” Gascón has also picked up key endorsements from Rep. Maxine Waters ( D-Calif. ) and the LA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his effort to unseat incumbent District Attorney Jackie Lacey , the tough-on-crime prosecutor who ’ s now found herself in the most competitive race of her career .
Lacey , who made history as the first woman and the first Black person to serve in the role , has opposed almost every reform measure that ’ s come up during her eight years in office and has come under fire with Black Lives Matter protesters for not prosecuting police officers who have killed members of the community .
Another challenger to Lacey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a progressive candidate who has firsthand experience seeing the harm prosecutors may cause when they imprison people who do not pose a public safety threat .
Both Rossi ’ s and Gascón ’ s campaigns have been fueled by the national movement to elect more progressive DAs .
The three will face off in California ’ s March 3 election .
Unless one of them earns more than 50 % of the vote , the top two finishers will go on to compete in November .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) endorsed George Gascón on Tuesday in his campaign to be the next district attorney of Los Angeles County, which has become a major battleground for progressives with an eye toward prison reform.
“George Gascón is a proven leader of national significance when it comes to reforming our criminal justice system,” Harris, who ended her presidential bid in December, said in a statement. Both she and Gascón have served as San Francisco DAs, with the latter stepping down in October to run in the county where he grew up.
Advertisement
“As DA of San Francisco, George led fights to reform the Three Strikes Law, decrease the state prison population and get people convicted of nonviolent offenses greater opportunities to get their lives back on track,” her endorsement continued. “As DA of LA County, I know George Gascón will work every day to keep our communities safe and demand real accountability from our justice system and real justice for every Angeleno.”
Gascón has also picked up key endorsements from Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and the LA County Democrats, giving him a boost in his effort to unseat incumbent District Attorney Jackie Lacey, the tough-on-crime prosecutor who’s now found herself in the most competitive race of her career.
Lacey, who made history as the first woman and the first Black person to serve in the role, has opposed almost every reform measure that’s come up during her eight years in office and has come under fire with Black Lives Matter protesters for not prosecuting police officers who have killed members of the community.
Another challenger to Lacey is former public defender Rachel Rossi, a progressive candidate who has firsthand experience seeing the harm prosecutors may cause when they imprison people who do not pose a public safety threat. Both Rossi’s and Gascón’s campaigns have been fueled by the national movement to elect more progressive DAs.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-18--Battle For California Heats Up Ahead Of March 3 Democratic Primary

With 494 delegates up for grabs ( more than 10 percent of the total ) as part of the big batch of Super Tuesday nominating contests on March 3 , the Golden State could shake up the race and boost one or more candidates provided they meet the required 15 percent threshold of support at the congressional district or statewide level .
Most polls have shown Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) with a healthy lead , though things could still change after Nevada and South Carolina heads to the polls this month .
A clear-cut victory for the senator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nomination and lower the chances of a contested convention this summer .
If a large number of candidates remain viable , however , the state party ’ s proportional system of allocating delegates could rob Sanders of a decisive net advantage .
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg , Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
, former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg , and former Vice President Joe Biden have all made stops there and are clustered near the 15 percent threshold , according to a recent survey from Capitol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California different this year ( in addition to the state ’ s earlier primary date ) is that its large number of unaffiliated voters , or No Party Preference ( NPP ) voters , can request a special ballot or even switch parties to cast a vote for the candidate of their choice .
As of October 2019 , more than 5.4 million of the state ’ s 20 million registered voters had selected no party preference ― outnumbering registered Republicans .
Sanders ’ campaign , in particular , has made a big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His team opened a hotline where voters can call with questions , and has educated its canvassers and phone bankers on how to speak to voters in four different languages about getting the right ballot .
Sanders , who himself is an independent , has spoken about the ballot issue during campaign events in the state , urging rallygoers to request a Democratic ballot “ so that we can win here in California.
” “ This is the most consequential election in the modern history of our country , ” Sanders said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Francisco Bay Area .
“ I think you all know , you are the largest state in this country .
You have the most delegates to the Democratic National Convention .
The candidate who wins here in California stands a pretty good chance to win the nomination.
” The Vermont senator is a known commodity among California voters ― he received 46 percent of the vote share in the state ’ s 2016 Democratic presidential primary , which then took place in the month of June .
Sanders is positioned to do well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ efforts to reach Latino voters this cycle , as well as those who reside in the rural areas of the state like the Central Valley , which could make even more of a difference for his California campaign operation .
Bloomberg could complicate Sanders ’ play for a clean delegate haul in California , however .
The self-funding billionaire who made a late entry into the race has flooded the state with ads , a strategy that has made him competitive .
His campaign has more than 300 full-time staffers on the ground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state ― an organization made possible by his sheer wealth and decision to skip the first four nominating contests .
He ’ s also picked up endorsements from prominent California Democrats such as San Francisco Mayor London Breed and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa .
Warren ’ s campaign has three offices in California ( Los Angeles , Oakland , and San Francisco ) and more than four dozen paid staff .
Her campaign has been on the ground in the state since last summer .
The Massachusetts senator is looking for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after disappointing finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire .
Other campaigns have little to no infrastructure set up in California so far , however .
Though he finished a close second place in New Hampshire behind Sanders , Buttigieg has only begun staffing up in the state .
The 38-year-old former mayor held two events in Northern California last week , and his campaign said there ’ s more to come .
“ We are thrilled with the progress of this campaign , but we ’ re only two states in .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Buttigieg told a crowd near Sacramento City Hall on Friday .
“ And so much depends on what happens when the future-oriented , forward-looking , racially diverse , justice-minded state of California has its say.
” Biden , meanwhile , is focused on resuscitating his struggling campaign in Nevada and South Carolina .
The former vice president has the backing of top California Democrats , including Sen. Dianne Feinstein , Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti , and Secretary of State Alex Padilla .
But like in most national surveys , Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sharply following his losses in Iowa and New Hampshire .
Most California voters received their absentee ballot earlier this month , a full month before election day .
Roughly 1 million Californians have already mailed theirs in as of Tuesday , according to a Capitol Weekly tracker .
The data shows Democrats are lagging behind Republicans in returning their ballots ― suggesting many Democratic voters are waiting to see how the race develops before deciding who should lead their party in taking on Trump in November .
If most California Democrats hold off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South Carolina primary on Feb. 29 , it could take potentially up to two to three weeks to determine the ultimate winner in a state already known for its slow vote counting .
That would mean that top-placing candidates could miss out on momentum they ’ d have otherwise gained on or immediately after election night .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
An unusually large field of candidates and the Iowa caucus fiasco has made California, the most populous and diverse state in the nation, more relevant than ever this year in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
With 494 delegates up for grabs (more than 10 percent of the total) as part of the big batch of Super Tuesday nominating contests on March 3, the Golden State could shake up the race and boost one or more candidates provided they meet the required 15 percent threshold of support at the congressional district or statewide level.
Advertisement
Most polls have shown Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) with a healthy lead, though things could still change after Nevada and South Carolina heads to the polls this month. A clear-cut victory for the senator in California would solidify his path to the nomination and lower the chances of a contested convention this summer.
If a large number of candidates remain viable, however, the state party’s proportional system of allocating delegates could rob Sanders of a decisive net advantage. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and former Vice President Joe Biden have all made stops there and are clustered near the 15 percent threshold, according to a recent survey from Capitol Weekly.
What makes the battle for California different this year (in addition to the state’s earlier primary date) is that its large number of unaffiliated voters, or No Party Preference (NPP) voters, can request a special ballot or even switch parties to cast a vote for the candidate of their choice. As of October 2019, more than 5.4 million of the state’s 20 million registered voters had selected no party preference ― outnumbering registered Republicans.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, a 78-year-old from Vermont, is the man to beat in California. Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
Advertisement
Sanders’ campaign, in particular, has made a big effort to reach those voters this cycle. His team opened a hotline where voters can call with questions, and has educated its canvassers and phone bankers on how to speak to voters in four different languages about getting the right ballot. Sanders, who himself is an independent, has spoken about the ballot issue during campaign events in the state, urging rallygoers to request a Democratic ballot “so that we can win here in California.”
“This is the most consequential election in the modern history of our country,” Sanders said at a Monday rally in the San Francisco Bay Area. “I think you all know, you are the largest state in this country. You have the most delegates to the Democratic National Convention. The candidate who wins here in California stands a pretty good chance to win the nomination.”
The Vermont senator is a known commodity among California voters ― he received 46 percent of the vote share in the state’s 2016 Democratic presidential primary, which then took place in the month of June. Sanders is positioned to do well again. He’s made concentrated efforts to reach Latino voters this cycle, as well as those who reside in the rural areas of the state like the Central Valley, which could make even more of a difference for his California campaign operation.
Bloomberg could complicate Sanders’ play for a clean delegate haul in California, however. The self-funding billionaire who made a late entry into the race has flooded the state with ads, a strategy that has made him competitive. His campaign has more than 300 full-time staffers on the ground in more than 20 offices across the state ― an organization made possible by his sheer wealth and decision to skip the first four nominating contests. He’s also picked up endorsements from prominent California Democrats such as San Francisco Mayor London Breed and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.
“The data shows we’re competitive in every district across California,” Will Dubbs, deputy states director for Bloomberg’s campaign, told HuffPost.
Advertisement
Warren’s campaign has three offices in California (Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Francisco) and more than four dozen paid staff. Her campaign has been on the ground in the state since last summer. The Massachusetts senator is looking for a strong performance in the Golden State after disappointing finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Other campaigns have little to no infrastructure set up in California so far, however. Though he finished a close second place in New Hampshire behind Sanders, Buttigieg has only begun staffing up in the state. The 38-year-old former mayor held two events in Northern California last week, and his campaign said there’s more to come.
Former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg has struggled to gain traction among minority voters. He's betting California is the place to change that. Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
“We are thrilled with the progress of this campaign, but we’re only two states in. So much depends on what happens next,” Buttigieg told a crowd near Sacramento City Hall on Friday. “And so much depends on what happens when the future-oriented, forward-looking, racially diverse, justice-minded state of California has its say.”
Biden, meanwhile, is focused on resuscitating his struggling campaign in Nevada and South Carolina. The former vice president has the backing of top California Democrats, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, and Secretary of State Alex Padilla. But like in most national surveys, Biden’s support among California voters has dropped sharply following his losses in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Advertisement
Most California voters received their absentee ballot earlier this month, a full month before election day. Roughly 1 million Californians have already mailed theirs in as of Tuesday, according to a Capitol Weekly tracker. The data shows Democrats are lagging behind Republicans in returning their ballots ― suggesting many Democratic voters are waiting to see how the race develops before deciding who should lead their party in taking on Trump in November.
“Voters in California — and especially Democrats — are congenitally late voters,” said veteran California Democratic strategist Garry South. “They don’t rush to return their ballots until they get a sense of what’s going on with the candidate field.”
If most California Democrats hold off on making their choice until after the South Carolina primary on Feb. 29, it could take potentially up to two to three weeks to determine the ultimate winner in a state already known for its slow vote counting. That would mean that top-placing candidates could miss out on momentum they’d have otherwise gained on or immediately after election night.
Sanders supporters at his rally in Northern California on Monday seemed optimistic that the earlier primary date will help Californians have a voice in the nominating process.
“I think it could definitely help other voters and other states move in a certain direction,” said Lupe Pulido, a Sanders supporter from Richmond. “I do feel that California has a big wave.”