thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-09--'No War With Iran' Protesters Demonstrate Across U.S.

Hundreds of peace demonstrations took place across America on Thursday to protest any further actions toward war with Iran after a week of escalating tensions that were ignited when the U.S. killed Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani in Iraq last week .
The “ No War With Iran ” rallies , organized by the liberal MoveOn.org civic action group and scheduled at more than 370 sites across the U.S. , sought to dramatically oppose President Donald Trump ’ s decision to order an airstrike that killed the Iranian general Friday .
The protesters demanded an immediate de-escalation .
“ Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countless lives of U.S. troops , Iraqis , Iranians , and countless other civilians , ” the event website stated .
“ The devastation that a war with Iran could bring upon the earth and humanity can not be overstated — millions of lives hang in the balance.
” Demonstrations took place at hundreds of sites around the U.S. on Thursday to demand the de-escalation of tensions between America and Iran .
The demonstrations began about the same time the House approved a war powers resolution meant to limit the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s an imminent threat or unless Congress declares war .
The resolution would still need to pass in the Senate , where its fate is uncertain , and survive a Trump veto .
In a statement Friday , the president said that the drone strike at Baghdad International Airport was intended “ to stop a war , ” not to start one .
Iran retaliated Wednesday for Soleimani ’ s killing , launching ballistic missiles at Iraqi bases that house U.S. military forces .
There were no casualties reported among American or Iraqi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe Iran shot down a Ukrainian International Airlines passenger plane shortly after it took off from Tehran , killing all 176 people on board .
Following the retaliatory strike , Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif tweeted that the Islamic Republic does not “ seek escalation or war , but will defend ourselves against any aggression.
” Trump said in a national address that “ Iran appears to be standing down ” but vowed to impose additional sanctions on the country .
Signs at rallies around the country included “ Trump : This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convict and remove the MF ” and “ Stop sacrificing innocent lives for your reelection campaign.
” The national movement saw rallies held from New York to Chicago to Atlanta to Los Angeles , with hundreds of protesters braving cold weather to take a stand .
Attendees shared footage and images of the events with the hashtag # NoWarWithIran .
“ Fight the rich , not their wars !
” People here in NY and across the country get it : provoking war might be a boon for Trump and some of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communities here and abroad .
# NoWarWithIran pic.twitter.com/IojdMt3zKS — Daniel Altschuler 🦋 ( @ altochulo ) January 10 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Hundreds of peace demonstrations took place across America on Thursday to protest any further actions toward war with Iran after a week of escalating tensions that were ignited when the U.S. killed Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani in Iraq last week.
The “No War With Iran” rallies, organized by the liberal MoveOn.org civic action group and scheduled at more than 370 sites across the U.S., sought to dramatically oppose President Donald Trump’s decision to order an airstrike that killed the Iranian general Friday. The protesters demanded an immediate de-escalation.
Advertisement
“Trump’s reckless action has needlessly endangered countless lives of U.S. troops, Iraqis, Iranians, and countless other civilians,” the event website stated. “The devastation that a war with Iran could bring upon the earth and humanity cannot be overstated — millions of lives hang in the balance.”
“We’ve learned our lessons from Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and global endless war.”
Demonstrations took place at hundreds of sites around the U.S. on Thursday to demand the de-escalation of tensions between America and Iran. MoveOn.Org
The demonstrations began about the same time the House approved a war powers resolution meant to limit the president’s ability to attack Iran unless there’s an imminent threat or unless Congress declares war. The resolution would still need to pass in the Senate, where its fate is uncertain, and survive a Trump veto.
In a statement Friday, the president said that the drone strike at Baghdad International Airport was intended “to stop a war,” not to start one.
Advertisement
Iran retaliated Wednesday for Soleimani’s killing, launching ballistic missiles at Iraqi bases that house U.S. military forces. There were no casualties reported among American or Iraqi forces; however, U.S. officials reportedly believe Iran shot down a Ukrainian International Airlines passenger plane shortly after it took off from Tehran, killing all 176 people on board.
Following the retaliatory strike, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif tweeted that the Islamic Republic does not “seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression.” Trump said in a national address that “Iran appears to be standing down” but vowed to impose additional sanctions on the country.
Signs at rallies around the country included “Trump: This is your fault,” “Impeach, convict and remove the MF” and “Stop sacrificing innocent lives for your reelection campaign.”
The national movement saw rallies held from New York to Chicago to Atlanta to Los Angeles, with hundreds of protesters braving cold weather to take a stand. Attendees shared footage and images of the events with the hashtag #NoWarWithIran.
Chicago TONIGHT. "When the Constitution is under attack, what do we do? STAND UP FIGHT BACK! #NoWarWithIran pic.twitter.com/RHgMDlL3DU — Peter Morley (@morethanmySLE) January 10, 2020
Advertisement
Portland, Oregon tonight: "What do we want? Peace. When do we want it now?" #NoWarWithIran pic.twitter.com/kJ8zjhgn8c — Peter Morley (@morethanmySLE) January 10, 2020
Happening in Toledo, OH: "No racist war, no deportation, TRUMP MUST GO!" #NoWarWithIran pic.twitter.com/kJ8zjhgn8c — Peter Morley (@morethanmySLE) January 10, 2020
Milford, MA shouted loudly tonight #NoWarWithIran!! An Iranian-American citizen who's lived here 35 yrs & has a business here said she felt so validated & really appreciated our protest! pic.twitter.com/95iiggLPuT — Carolyn C. Barthel (@carolyncbarthel) January 10, 2020
Happening in Philadelphia: "No WAR. No GENOCIDE. Trump & Pence Out Now!" #NoWarWithIranpic.twitter.com/aGCEDa0ZVv — Peter Morley (@morethanmySLE) January 10, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--'Succession' Producer Issues Ominous Warning To Donald Trump 'Cult' Members

Journalist Frank Rich , the executive producer of HBO shows “ Veep ” and “ Succession , ” on Thursday warned Donald Trump ’ s Republican collaborators of the price their families will one day pay for their current unwavering devotion to the president .
“ There ’ s going to be a reckoning , ” Rich said on MSNBC ’ s “ The Last Word with Lawrence O ’ Donnell.
” “ They will be implicated , so will their children and their grandchildren , ” he added .
“ There ’ s going to be a stain.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Trump , “ it is a cult because people who in some cases did have reputations that they have now destroyed , good reputations , have made fools of themselves for their dear leader.
” The cult leader is “ never going to be reformed ” or “ see the problems of their ways , ” he added .
“ But the people who swirl around them and were taken in , they ’ re going to pay a price , a human price and a reputational price forever.
” Rich in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where he is writer-at-large ) published Tuesday wrote that “ once Trump has vacated the Oval Office , and possibly for decades thereafter , his government , like any other deposed strongman ’ s , will be subjected to a forensic colonoscopy to root out buried crimes , whether against humanity or the rule of law or both.
” “ With time , everything will come out — it always does , ” he added , claiming “ Trump ’ s collaborators , our Vichy Republicans , will own all of it ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wrongdoing , ” the “ so-called adults in the room who stood idly by ” or “ those elite allies beyond the White House gates who pretended not to notice administration criminality and moral atrocities in exchange for favors like tax cuts and judicial appointments .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Journalist Frank Rich, an executive producer for HBO shows “Veep” and “Succession,” on Thursday warned Donald Trump’s Republican collaborators of the price their families will one day pay for unwavering devotion to the president.
“There’s going to be a reckoning,” Rich said on MSNBC’s “The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell.” “They will be implicated, so will their children and their grandchildren,” he added. “There’s going to be a stain.”
Advertisement
Rich said that, when it comes to Trump, “it is a cult because people who in some cases did have reputations that they have now destroyed, good reputations, have made fools of themselves for their dear leader.”
The cult leader is “never going to be reformed” or “see the problems of their ways,” he added. “But the people who swirl around them and were taken in, they’re going to pay a price, a human price and a reputational price forever.”
Rich, in an article for New York magazine (where he is a writer-at-large), published on Tuesday, wrote that “once Trump has vacated the Oval Office, and possibly for decades thereafter, his government, like any other deposed strongman’s, will be subjected to a forensic colonoscopy to root out buried crimes, whether against humanity or the rule of law or both.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-09--Bernie Sanders Is On A Roll With Progressive Endorsements

“ My sense is that some parts of the progressive movement felt kind of unprepared by Sanders ’ successes in 2016 and now feel like they don ’ t want to miss out on being part of it this time around , ” said Waleed Shahid , a spokesman for the left-wing group Justice Democrats , which has not endorsed in the presidential primary .
“ There ’ s no question that Sanders has been a huge ally of social movements and community organizations and helped them gain a platform on the national level.
” Sanders ’ hold on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be a given .
But in September , when the Working Families Party , a network of progressive groups with a presence in over 14 states , endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
, it looked like an activist exodus was underway .
To Sanders , the loss of that endorsement to Warren was especially biting because his political director , Analilia Mejia , was a former head of the New Jersey Working Families Party .
Several people with a say in WFP ’ s endorsement process told HuffPost at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had simply put in more work for it , with Sanders forgoing the opportunity to address WFP delegates in a private address in which Warren and former Housing Secretary Julián Castro participated .
And the WFP endorsement crystalized a residual sense from the 2016 election that Sanders had not yet mollified critics in the activism community who considered him unduly articulate about and focused on questions of racial justice .
His groan-inducing remarks at the “ She the People ” conference in Houston for women of color in April and his absence at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ July contributed to a sense that Sanders had missed his moment .
While those activists do not directly affect votes in the early primary and caucus states , they are influential in liberal organizations and websites that help shape perceptions of candidates .
A surge in national coverage of Warren finally turned into a polling spike as the summer came to a close .
By the time the mid-September debates rolled around , Sanders was enough of an afterthought that superrich individuals and members of the Democratic establishment ― elected officials , donors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exclusively on Warren .
Then , at the start of October , Sanders had a heart attack .
For a moment , it seemed like he might be down for the count .
The incident kept Sanders off the campaign trail for two weeks and raised fears among Democratic voters about his age and health .
“ It was that event that really sent a message through the organization that this is an important time and there may not be another time for him to run , and it feels like the whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Jeff Link , an Iowa-based Democratic strategist who has not endorsed in the presidential primary .
“ She reminded us that he has been so consistent from his time as mayor to his time in Congress on the issues that he ’ s cared about , ” said Natalia Salgado , CPD Action ’ s political director .
“ That kind of reminder , for a lot of folks , when we ’ re dealing with an administration as inconsistent and unstable as the one we ’ re dealing with , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Sanders ’ consistency on Medicare for All ― he would introduce it right away rather than three years into his presidency ― as well as his support for a moratorium on the deportation of undocumented immigrants were key to getting CPD Action ’ s blessing , according to Salgado .
“ I ’ m not sure exactly what happens to him when he is in a room surrounded by the people he had made a career advocating for , but something does click and there is a certain humanity that comes into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the broader stages , ” Salgado said .
Warren still has her share of wins from which to take heart .
In addition to the Working Families Party , she has at her side former Housing Secretary Castro , climate expert Rhiana Gunn-Wright , the group Black Womxn For , and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee , which has adopted the role of attack dog with gusto .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
When the youth-led climate action group Sunrise Movement endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for president on Thursday, it boosted Sanders’ efforts to cast himself as the Democrat with the strongest commitment to fighting climate change.
More than a boon to his reputation and ground game ― the relatively new group boasts an army of 10,000 mostly college-age activists ― the endorsement has solidified Sanders’ stature as the candidate of choice for progressive voters, particularly young ones.
Advertisement
It comes on the heels of endorsements from the Florida-based social justice group Dream Defenders; the national progressive community group network People’s Action; and the Center for Popular Democracy Action, a network of community groups that caters specifically to working-class people of color.
“My sense is that some parts of the progressive movement felt kind of unprepared by Sanders’ successes in 2016 and now feel like they don’t want to miss out on being part of it this time around,” said Waleed Shahid, a spokesman for the left-wing group Justice Democrats, which has not endorsed in the presidential primary. “There’s no question that Sanders has been a huge ally of social movements and community organizations and helped them gain a platform on the national level.”
Sanders’ hold on the progressive mantle may have seemed like it would be a given. But in September, when the Working Families Party, a network of progressive groups with a presence in over 14 states, endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), it looked like an activist exodus was underway.
Bernie Sanders speaks at a town hall in Anamosa, Iowa. A run of prominent progressive endorsements is buoying the presidential hopeful's post-heart attack resurgence. Stephen Maturen/Getty Images
Advertisement
To Sanders, the loss of that endorsement to Warren was especially biting because his political director, Analilia Mejia, was a former head of the New Jersey Working Families Party. Several people with a say in WFP’s endorsement process told HuffPost at the time that Warren’s team had simply put in more work for it, with Sanders forgoing the opportunity to address WFP delegates in a private address in which Warren and former Housing Secretary Julián Castro participated.
And the WFP endorsement crystalized a residual sense from the 2016 election that Sanders had not yet mollified critics in the activism community who considered him unduly articulate about and focused on questions of racial justice. His groan-inducing remarks at the “She the People” conference in Houston for women of color in April and his absence at the Netroots Nation conference in Philadelphia in July contributed to a sense that Sanders had missed his moment. While those activists do not directly affect votes in the early primary and caucus states, they are influential in liberal organizations and websites that help shape perceptions of candidates.
A surge in national coverage of Warren finally turned into a polling spike as the summer came to a close. By the time the mid-September debates rolled around, Sanders was enough of an afterthought that superrich individuals and members of the Democratic establishment ― elected officials, donors and operatives ― were training their fire exclusively on Warren.
Then, at the start of October, Sanders had a heart attack. For a moment, it seemed like he might be down for the count. The incident kept Sanders off the campaign trail for two weeks and raised fears among Democratic voters about his age and health.
But the prospect of losing him rallied activists to his cause.
“[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] reminded us that he has been so consistent from his time as mayor to his time in Congress on the issues that he’s cared about.” - Natalia Salgado, Center for Popular Democracy Action
Advertisement
“It was that event that really sent a message through the organization that this is an important time and there may not be another time for him to run, and it feels like the whole campaign for him got more focused,” said Jeff Link, an Iowa-based Democratic strategist who has not endorsed in the presidential primary.
The post-heart attack endorsement of one activist, in particular, made a world of difference for Sanders: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who was reportedly moved by his illness to get off the sidelines.
Ocasio-Cortez went on to headline Sanders’ comeback rally in Queens at the end of October ― the largest of any campaign during the entire primary, per campaign estimates ― and a host of packed rallies in Iowa the following month.
Her endorsement helped nudge Stacey Walker, the chair of Iowa’s Linn County board of supervisors, into Sanders’ corner. And Ocasio-Cortez also played a role in securing Sanders the endorsement of the Center for Popular Democracy Action.
“She reminded us that he has been so consistent from his time as mayor to his time in Congress on the issues that he’s cared about,” said Natalia Salgado, CPD Action’s political director. “That kind of reminder, for a lot of folks, when we’re dealing with an administration as inconsistent and unstable as the one we’re dealing with, is so incredibly refreshing but also exciting.”
Advertisement
And as Sanders was showing renewed vigor on the trail and the debate stage, Warren got mired in a debate over her position on “Medicare for All” that seemed to please neither centrists nor the policy’s progressive champions.
Sanders’ consistency on Medicare for All ― he would introduce it right away rather than three years into his presidency ― as well as his support for a moratorium on the deportation of undocumented immigrants were key to getting CPD Action’s blessing, according to Salgado.
Sanders’ uncompromising policy stances played a role in other endorsements. Hector Bajaras, a founder of the Deported Veterans Support House, cited Sanders’ pledge to roll back a rule requiring the deportation of any undocumented immigrant, including veterans, who commit an “aggravated felony,” in an endorsement announcement on Wednesday.
Elizabeth Warren addressed throngs of supporters in Manhattan on Sept. 16, 2019. It was a high point for her campaign, coming the day the Working Families Party endorsed her. Joel Sheakoski/Barcroft Media/Getty Images
Rachel Gilmer, a co-executive director of Dream Defenders, which emerged after the killing of Trayvon Martin in 2013 and endorsed Sanders on Wednesday, pointed to Sanders’ “transformational vision for the political system.”
Advertisement
When asked about his rhetoric on race during the 2016 run, Gilmer disputed critics’ arguments that it was deficient, but also conceded, “His intersectional analysis grew in 2020.”
More than from any policy though, Sanders has benefited from the warmth he exhibits in the small audiences where he has had to court his would-be endorsers, according to Salgado.
“I’m not sure exactly what happens to him when he is in a room surrounded by the people he had made a career advocating for, but something does click and there is a certain humanity that comes into play that isn’t seen on the broader stages,” Salgado said.
Warren still has her share of wins from which to take heart. In addition to the Working Families Party, she has at her side former Housing Secretary Castro, climate expert Rhiana Gunn-Wright, the group Black Womxn For, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which has adopted the role of attack dog with gusto.
Other entities currently sitting out the race include the Indivisible Project, Democracy for America and MoveOn.org. The latter two groups endorsed Sanders in the last election.
Advertisement
In a Thursday article in The Intercept outlining progressive leaders’ efforts to preserve unity between Sanders and Warren supporters, Democracy for America revealed that it plans to launch an initiative to defeat the “corporate wing” of the Democratic Party and bolster both of the New England senators.
The Working Families Party is also keen to make clear its preference for Warren does not amount to contempt for Sanders.
“Our movements are bigger than any presidential campaign,” said Nelini Stamp, the WFP director of strategy and partnerships.
It’s not clear what kind of consequences these endorsements will have in the early states — especially in Iowa, where Sanders, Warren and Buttigieg have invested so much of their resources. People’s Action has an Iowa affiliate, the Iowa Center for Community Improvement, but most of the other groups do not.
“Maybe there are people who belong to these groups who aren’t typical voters,” Link said. “That is where it could be the most helpful.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Chris Cuomo Rips Every Lawmaker Who Voted Against Limiting Donald Trump's War Powers

CNN anchor Chris Cuomo delivered a stinging rebuke to both Democratic and Republican House lawmakers who on Thursday voted against limiting President Donald Trump ’ s war-making powers against Iran .
“ The House voted 224 to 194 to limit the president ’ s ability to launch an attack against Iran without getting approval first , ” Cuomo explained .
“ This is not a new idea ― that ’ s what is in the Constitution .
My argument , I can ’ t believe it wasn ’ t unanimous.
” Only three Republicans in the Democratic-controlled House supported the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cuomo said it wasn ’ t “ about the GOP just choosing Trump over the truth.
” “ There ’ s some of that , but Democrats have been anxious to give war power to presidents as well , ” he noted .
“ This has been going on for a long time and it ’ s gotten worse and it is the worse example of congressional cowardice.
” “ Now , though , we ’ re hearing really obnoxious comments that is making this partisan , ” he added , citing Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Democrats are “ in love with terrorists ” for not backing Trump ’ s military escalation with Iran .
Cuomo ripped Collins for “ trying to divide Americans at a time that it is life and death that we come together.
” “ Shame on you and every Trumper and never-Trumper who voted against this , ” he added .
`` Shame on you and every Trumper and never-Trumper who voted against this .
`` @ ChrisCuomo addresses those who voted against the Iran War Powers resolution and those in the GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unity is a life and death matter .
pic.twitter.com/kNMnXEeTdJ — Cuomo Prime Time ( @ CuomoPrimeTime ) January 10 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
CNN anchor Chris Cuomo delivered a stinging rebuke to both Democratic and Republican House lawmakers who on Thursday voted against limiting President Donald Trump’s war-making powers against Iran.
“The House voted 224 to 194 to limit the president’s ability to launch an attack against Iran without getting approval first,” Cuomo explained. “This is not a new idea ― that’s what is in the Constitution. My argument, I can’t believe it wasn’t unanimous.”
Advertisement
Only three Republicans in the Democratic-controlled House supported the resolution. Eight Democrats voted against. Cuomo said it wasn’t “about the GOP just choosing Trump over the truth.”
“There’s some of that, but Democrats have been anxious to give war power to presidents as well,” he noted. “This has been going on for a long time and it’s gotten worse and it is the worse example of congressional cowardice.”
“Now, though, we’re hearing really obnoxious comments that is making this partisan,” he added, citing Rep. Doug Collins’ (R-Ga.) claim that Democrats are “in love with terrorists” for not backing Trump’s military escalation with Iran.
Cuomo ripped Collins for “trying to divide Americans at a time that it is life and death that we come together.”
Advertisement
“Shame on you and every Trumper and never-Trumper who voted against this,” he added.
Check out the clip here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Trump Officials Had No Idea When Or Where 'Imminent' Iran Attacks Would Happen

Q : Did you know the time and place of the attacks that were being planned ?
O ’ BRIEN @ @ @ @ @ intelligence that there was an imminent attack being planned .
O ’ BRIEN : It @ @ @ @ @ , you never know the time or place of these things with with perfect particularity @ @ @ @ @ good information that there were imminent attacks planned against Americans in Iraq and potentially Syria @ @ @ @ @ , sailors , airmen , Marines .
I ’ ve seen the intelligence and it @ @ @ @ @ intelligence .
There are a lot of people that want that intelligence released .
You @ @ @ @ @ wish we could , but at the same time , we don ’ t want @ @ @ @ @ that allow us to protect Americans .

Q: Did you know the time and place of the attacks that were being planned?
O’BRIEN: We had very good intelligence that there was an imminent attack being planned.
Q: But time and place?
O’BRIEN: It was imminent. You know, you never know the time or place of these things with with perfect particularity. But we had very good information that there were imminent attacks planned against Americans in Iraq and potentially Syria. Both diplomats and soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines. I’ve seen the intelligence and it was it was incredibly strong intelligence. There are a lot of people that want that intelligence released. You know, look, I wish we could, but at the same time, we don’t want to compromise sources and methods that allow us to protect Americans.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Pranksters Unleash Spoof Army Recruitment Signs To Remind People ‘Who The Trumps Are’

Pranksters have turned Donald Trump Jr. into the poster boy for U.S. Army recruitment to remind voters “ who the Trumps are ” amid heightened military tensions with Iran .
Comedy duo The Good Liars ― aka Davram Stiefler and Jason Selvig — pasted spoof signs featuring President Donald Trump ’ s eldest son onto the windows of an Armed Forces Career Center in Brooklyn , New York , on Wednesday .
“ I ’ m not enlisting but YOU should , ” the fake promo quotes Trump Jr. as saying .
“ Hopefully we aren ’ t going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we know one guy who won ’ t enlist , ” the comedians captioned Instagram images of their latest stunt .
The duo told HuffPost on Friday that “ in the wake of Trump ’ s latest reckless foreign policy actions that could very easily result in more and more troops being sent to the Middle East , we thought the public deserved a reminder of who the Trumps are.
” “ They ’ re a family that have avoided military service on a generational level , ” they added .
“ Don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pose for pictures with them , but he ’ d never go to war although he ’ d expect others to do it.
” The pair have made the poster available for free download via their website .
“ A lot of people have been reaching out to ask for the file so they can print them ― so look for them all over the country , ” they said .
The comedians have a long history of pranking people close to the Trump administration .
In November , they switched up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book “ Triggered ” at a bookstore in Brooklyn : We changed the cover of @ DonaldJTrumpJr ’ s book to make it a little more honest and put them up in @ BNBuzz .
You 're welcome , Junior !
# DonnyLovesDaddy cc : @ realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/cJssiXadtw — The Good Liars ( @ TheGoodLiars ) November 7 , 2019 And only last month they slipped impeachment-themed postcards into the gift store at Trump Tower to do the president “ a favor , ” they told HuffPost at the time .
“ He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeached is a pretty big accomplishment , ” they said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Pranksters have turned Donald Trump Jr. into the poster boy for U.S. Army recruitment to remind voters “who the Trumps are” amid heightened military tensions with Iran.
Comedy duo The Good Liars ― aka Davram Stiefler and Jason Selvig — pasted spoof signs featuring President Donald Trump’s eldest son onto the windows of an Armed Forces Career Center in Brooklyn, New York, on Wednesday.
Advertisement
“I’m not enlisting but YOU should,” the fake promo quotes Trump Jr. as saying.
“There’s weak. And then there’s Trump weak,” is also printed in smaller letters.
“Hopefully we aren’t going to war, but if we did, we know one guy who won’t enlist,” the comedians captioned Instagram images of their latest stunt.
The duo told HuffPost on Friday that “in the wake of Trump’s latest reckless foreign policy actions that could very easily result in more and more troops being sent to the Middle East, we thought the public deserved a reminder of who the Trumps are.”
“They’re a family that have avoided military service on a generational level,” they added. “Don Jr. loves to fire at helpless animals and pose for pictures with them, but he’d never go to war although he’d expect others to do it.”
Advertisement
The pair have made the poster available for free download via their website. “A lot of people have been reaching out to ask for the file so they can print them ― so look for them all over the country,” they said.
The comedians have a long history of pranking people close to the Trump administration. In November, they switched up the covers of Trump Jr.’s book “Triggered” at a bookstore in Brooklyn:
We changed the cover of @DonaldJTrumpJr’s book to make it a little more honest and put them up in @BNBuzz. You're welcome, Junior! #DonnyLovesDaddy
cc: @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/cJssiXadtw — The Good Liars (@TheGoodLiars) November 7, 2019
And only last month they slipped impeachment-themed postcards into the gift store at Trump Tower to do the president “a favor,” they told HuffPost at the time. “He always brags about his accomplishments and getting impeached is a pretty big accomplishment,” they said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Nancy Pelosi To Send Articles Of Impeachment To The Senate Next Week

WASHINGTON ― House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) announced Friday that the House will move to send the two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate next week , signaling an end to a weekslong standoff with Senate Republicans over the rules governing the impeachment trial .
In a letter to colleagues , Pelosi said she had instructed House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler ( D-N.Y. ) to “ be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate.
” Pelosi added that she would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday meeting “ on how we proceed further , ” but the letter is a clear sign of her backing down from demands about the Senate trial .
The two articles , which center on Trump ’ s dealings with Ukraine and its president , Volodymyr Zelensky , charge Trump with using the power of his office to further his political ambitions and block congressional investigations .
Although the House votes making Trump the third president in American history to be impeached occurred on Dec. 18 , Pelosi said afterward that she would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until she knew more about how the trial would be conducted in the Republican-controlled chamber .
She has urged Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) to allow new witnesses to testify and new documentation to be introduced at trial and to make the rules of that trial public before it starts .
But McConnell , a staunch Trump ally , refused .
The Kentucky Republican has been dismissive of the impeachment charges and has all but promised the acquittal of the president .
Pelosi said at a Thursday press conference that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indefinitely .
The speaker also defended the delay when asked whether it could potentially allow Trump to continue his Ukraine dealings , saying the House was acting “ strategically.
” “ We need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers .
Is that too much to ask ?
” she said at that press conference , referring to the group of House members who will make the case for removing the president from office before the Senate .
It is not yet known who will be selected .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our defense of the Constitution of the United States .
We are concerned that the senators will not be able to live up to the oath they must take to hold an impartial trial.
” McConnell has said on national television that there would be “ total coordination ” with the White House in the trial , disturbing even some in his own party .
Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) , another staunch Trump ally , also drew criticism with public comments that he would not even try to be a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s trial .
Indications that Pelosi ’ s fellow Democrats were breaking with her resolve to hold off sending the articles arose in recent days as several Senate Democrats appeared eager to move the proceedings along .
Those Democrats argued that while Pelosi ’ s gambit had focused the public ’ s attention on their efforts to make sure witnesses are heard at trial , it was time to move forward while continuing to press for witness testimony during the proceedings .
To subpoena their desired witnesses , Democrats will need to convince @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with them .
To oust Trump from the Oval Office , two-thirds of the Senate would need to vote in favor of doing so .
Given GOP control of the chamber , its votes on the impeachment articles are widely expected to fall far short of the required total .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced Friday that the House will move to send the two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate next week, signaling an end to a weekslong standoff with Senate Republicans over the rules governing the impeachment trial.
In a letter to colleagues, Pelosi said she had instructed House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) to “be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate.” Pelosi added that she would be consulting with her caucus at a Tuesday meeting “on how we proceed further,” but the letter is a clear sign of her backing down from demands about the Senate trial.
Advertisement
The two articles, which center on Trump’s dealings with Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, charge Trump with using the power of his office to further his political ambitions and block congressional investigations.
Although the House votes making Trump the third president in American history to be impeached occurred on Dec. 18, Pelosi said afterward that she would not send the articles to the Senate until she knew more about how the trial would be conducted in the Republican-controlled chamber.
She has urged Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to allow new witnesses to testify and new documentation to be introduced at trial and to make the rules of that trial public before it starts. But McConnell, a staunch Trump ally, refused. The Kentucky Republican has been dismissive of the impeachment charges and has all but promised the acquittal of the president.
Pelosi said at a Thursday press conference that she never planned on holding the articles indefinitely. The speaker also defended the delay when asked whether it could potentially allow Trump to continue his Ukraine dealings, saying the House was acting “strategically.”
Advertisement
“We need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers. Is that too much to ask?” she said at that press conference, referring to the group of House members who will make the case for removing the president from office before the Senate. It is not yet known who will be selected.
She continued: “We are proud of our defense of the Constitution of the United States. We are concerned that the senators will not be able to live up to the oath they must take to hold an impartial trial.”
McConnell has said on national television that there would be “total coordination” with the White House in the trial, disturbing even some in his own party. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), another staunch Trump ally, also drew criticism with public comments that he would not even try to be a “fair juror” in the president’s trial.
Indications that Pelosi’s fellow Democrats were breaking with her resolve to hold off sending the articles arose in recent days as several Senate Democrats appeared eager to move the proceedings along. Those Democrats argued that while Pelosi’s gambit had focused the public’s attention on their efforts to make sure witnesses are heard at trial, it was time to move forward while continuing to press for witness testimony during the proceedings. To subpoena their desired witnesses, Democrats will need to convince at least four Republican senators to vote with them.
To oust Trump from the Oval Office, two-thirds of the Senate would need to vote in favor of doing so. Given GOP control of the chamber, its votes on the impeachment articles are widely expected to fall far short of the required total.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--NYC Bar Association Calls For Probe Of William Barr's 'Troubling Pattern Of Conduct'

The New York City Bar Association is calling on Congress to investigate whether William Barr is too politically biased to fulfill his legal obligations as the nation ’ s attorney general .
A letter from the 24,000-member organization released Thursday highlights controversial comments by Barr attacking “ so-called progressives ” and “ social justice reformers ” as evidence the attorney general and the Justice Department can ’ t be trusted to fairly enforce the law .
The group also criticized Barr ’ s watered-down “ mischaracterization ” of special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s report on the Trump campaign ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 election .
Barr ’ s “ recent actions and statements position ” him and “ by extension , the United States Department of Justice , as political partisans willing to use the levers of government to empower certain groups over others , ” warned the letter to congressional leaders .
The letter appears to be the first time the city bar association or a comparable organization has ever called on House and Senate leaders to probe the conduct of a sitting attorney general , Bloomberg reported .
Barr ’ s “ troubing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the fair and impartial administration of justice , ” the letter said .
His conduct is “ inconsistent with the role of the Attorney General in our legal and constitutional system.
” The “ duties to act impartially ... and to avoid manifesting bias , prejudice or partisanship in the exercise of official responsibilities are bedrock obligations for government lawyers , ” the letter continued .
“ Mr .
Barr has disregarded these fundamental obligations in several public statements during the past few months.
” The bar association highlighted Barr ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the University of Notre Dame in October lashing ” so-called progressives ” for supposedly waging a “ campaign to destroy the traditional moral order.
” His speech is now posted on the DOJ website .
In New Orleans in December , Barr attacked “ district attorneys from large cities ‘ who style themselves as social justice reformers ... letting criminals off the hook ’ ” before a group of police officials .
In a speech in November at the Federalist Society ’ s National Lawyers Convention , he “ again vilified ‘ progressives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the bar association letter said .
In a “ troubling number of instances , ” Barr has appeared to present himself as “ narrowly ” serving “ certain segments of society , ” including members of a certain religion or a political party , the letter concluded .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The New York City Bar Association is calling on Congress to investigate whether William Barr is too politically biased to fulfill his legal obligations as the nation’s attorney general.
A letter from the 24,000-member organization released Thursday highlights controversial comments by Barr attacking “so-called progressives” and “social justice reformers” as evidence the attorney general and the Justice Department can’t be trusted to fairly enforce the law. The group also criticized Barr’s watered-down “mischaracterization” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the Trump campaign’s links to Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Advertisement
Barr’s “recent actions and statements position” him and “by extension, the United States Department of Justice, as political partisans willing to use the levers of government to empower certain groups over others,” warned the letter to congressional leaders.
The letter appears to be the first time the city bar association or a comparable organization has ever called on House and Senate leaders to probe the conduct of a sitting attorney general, Bloomberg reported.
Barr’s “troubing pattern of conduct ... threatens public confidence in the fair and impartial administration of justice,” the letter said. His conduct is “inconsistent with the role of the Attorney General in our legal and constitutional system.”
The “duties to act impartially ... and to avoid manifesting bias, prejudice or partisanship in the exercise of official responsibilities are bedrock obligations for government lawyers,” the letter continued. “Mr. Barr has disregarded these fundamental obligations in several public statements during the past few months.”
Advertisement
The bar association highlighted Barr’s recent statements, include a comment at the University of Notre Dame in October lashing ”so-called progressives” for supposedly waging a “campaign to destroy the traditional moral order.” His speech is now posted on the DOJ website.
In New Orleans in December, Barr attacked “district attorneys from large cities ‘who style themselves as social justice reformers ... letting criminals off the hook’” before a group of police officials. In a speech in November at the Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention, he “again vilified ‘progressives’ and ‘the Left,’” the bar association letter said.
In a “troubling number of instances,” Barr has appeared to present himself as “narrowly” serving “certain segments of society,” including members of a certain religion or a political party, the letter concluded.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Here's Who Qualified For The Next Democratic Presidential Debate

The seventh Democratic presidential debate is scheduled for Tuesday , Jan. 14 , at 9 p.m. Eastern , hosted at Drake University in Des Moines , Iowa .
Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez may move it , however , if the event interferes with a yet-unscheduled Senate impeachment trial for President Donald Trump .
To qualify , the candidates needed to meet polling and fundraising minimums : They needed to either secure 5 % support ( or more ) in at least four national or early-voting-state polls approved by the DNC , or receive 7 % ( or more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The early states are Iowa , Nevada , New Hampshire and South Carolina . )
They also needed to have received funds from 225,000 unique donors , with a minimum of 1,000 unique donors per state in at least 20 different states .
Here ’ s who has made the cut as of Friday morning : Businessman Andrew Yang , who qualified for the sixth debate , looks to be notably absent from the seventh .
Steyer was added to the mix late Thursday after surging in polls in two early voting states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one measure ― television ads ― he and billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg have outspent every other candidate many times over , according to a FiveThirtyEight analysis .
As of Friday , Steyer had spent $ 78 million airing 32 TV ads , while Bloomberg had spent $ 110 million on seven TV ads , the outlet reported .
Biden , to compare , has spent $ 1.8 million on 10 TV ads so far .
Moderating the next debate will be CNN ’ s Wolf Blitzer and Abby Phillip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Register ’ s Brianne Pfannenstiel .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The seventh Democratic presidential debate is scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 14, at 9 p.m. Eastern, hosted at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez may move it, however, if the event interferes with a yet-unscheduled Senate impeachment trial for President Donald Trump.
Advertisement
To qualify, the candidates needed to meet polling and fundraising minimums: They needed to either secure 5% support (or more) in at least four national or early-voting-state polls approved by the DNC, or receive 7% (or more) in two early-voting-state polls. (The early states are Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.) They also needed to have received funds from 225,000 unique donors, with a minimum of 1,000 unique donors per state in at least 20 different states.
The deadline is 11:59 p.m. Friday.
Here’s who has made the cut as of Friday morning:
Former Vice President Joe Biden
Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders
Billionaire Tom Steyer
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Businessman Andrew Yang, who qualified for the sixth debate, looks to be notably absent from the seventh.
Steyer was added to the mix late Thursday after surging in polls in two early voting states, Nevada and South Carolina. By one measure ― television ads ― he and billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg have outspent every other candidate many times over, according to a FiveThirtyEight analysis. As of Friday, Steyer had spent $78 million airing 32 TV ads, while Bloomberg had spent $110 million on seven TV ads, the outlet reported. Biden, to compare, has spent $1.8 million on 10 TV ads so far.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--White House Considers Expanding Travel Ban To More Countries

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The White House is considering expanding its much-litigated travel ban to additional countries amid a renewed election-year focus on immigration issues by President Donald Trump , according to four people familiar with the deliberations .
A document outlining the plans has been circulating the White House , but the countries that would be affected are blacked out , according to two of the people , who spoke on condition of anonymity because the measure has yet to be finalized .
The expanded ban could cover several countries that were included when Trump announced the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in January 2017 but were later removed amid rounds of litigation .
Iraq , Sudan and Chad , for instance , had originally been affected by the order ; the Supreme Court upheld a watered-down version of it by a 5-4 vote .
The most recent iteration of the ban includes restrictions on five majority-Muslim nations : Iran , Libya , Somalia , Syria and Yemen , as well as Venezuela and North Korea .
The White House did not immediately respond to questions about the effort , which appeared timed for release @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s first travel ban , which was announced on Jan. 27 , 2017 .
That ban sparked an uproar , with massive protests across the nation against what many derided as a “ Muslim ban ” and chaos at airports , where passengers were detained .
The latest deliberations come as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi prepares to transmit to the Senate the articles of impeachment the Democratic-led House passed against Trump late last year , launching a formal impeachment trial just as the 2020 election year gets underway .
Trump in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history to be impeached by the House .
The Republican-controlled Senate is not expected to remove him from office .
Trump ran his 2016 campaign promising to crack down on illegal immigration and spent much of his first term fighting lawsuits trying to halt his push to build a wall along the southern border , prohibit the entry of citizens from several majority-Muslim countries and crack down on migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. , amid other measures .
He is expected to press those efforts again this year as he ramps up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York .
Associated Press writers Matthew Lee and Colleen Long contributed to this report from Washington .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House is considering expanding its much-litigated travel ban to additional countries amid a renewed election-year focus on immigration issues by President Donald Trump, according to four people familiar with the deliberations.
A document outlining the plans has been circulating the White House, but the countries that would be affected are blacked out, according to two of the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the measure has yet to be finalized.
Advertisement
The expanded ban could cover several countries that were included when Trump announced the first iteration of the ban by executive order in January 2017 but were later removed amid rounds of litigation. Iraq, Sudan and Chad, for instance, had originally been affected by the order; the Supreme Court upheld a watered-down version of it by a 5-4 vote.
The most recent iteration of the ban includes restrictions on five majority-Muslim nations: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, as well as Venezuela and North Korea.
The White House did not immediately respond to questions about the effort, which appeared timed for release in conjunction with the third anniversary of Trump’s first travel ban, which was announced on Jan. 27, 2017.
That ban sparked an uproar, with massive protests across the nation against what many derided as a “Muslim ban” and chaos at airports, where passengers were detained.
Advertisement
The latest deliberations come as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi prepares to transmit to the Senate the articles of impeachment the Democratic-led House passed against Trump late last year, launching a formal impeachment trial just as the 2020 election year gets underway. Trump in December became just the third president in history to be impeached by the House. The Republican-controlled Senate is not expected to remove him from office.
Trump ran his 2016 campaign promising to crack down on illegal immigration and spent much of his first term fighting lawsuits trying to halt his push to build a wall along the southern border, prohibit the entry of citizens from several majority-Muslim countries and crack down on migrants seeking asylum in the U.S., amid other measures.
He is expected to press those efforts again this year as he ramps up his reelection campaign.
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Marianne Williamson Drops Out Of Presidential Race

In a statement on her website , the author and “ spiritual adviser ” said she didn ’ t want her campaign to diminish the success of progressive candidates leading the polls in early states .
“ I stayed in the race to take advantage of every possible effort to share our message , ” she said .
“ With caucuses and primaries now about to begin , however , we will not be able to garner enough votes in the election to elevate our conversation any more than it is now .
The primaries might be tightly contested among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t want to get in the way of a progressive candidate winning any of them.
” In an early sign of what was to come , Williamson reportedly laid off her entire campaign staff at the start of the new year due to dwindling campaign cash .
The self-help author also failed to qualify for any subsequent primary debates after appearing in the first two .
“ To the remaining Democratic candidates , I wish you all my best on the road ahead .
It was an honor being among you , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of you wins the nomination , I will be there with all my energy and in full support.
” Williamson launched her presidential bid in January 2019 as a way “ to engage voters in a more meaningful conversation about America , about our history , about how each of us fit into it , and how to create a sustainable future.
” “ Our national challenges are deep , but our political conversation is shallow , ” she said during her campaign announcement .
“ My campaign is for people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we face as a nation and deeper into finding the answers.
’ ’ Williamson pitched voters on six policy pillars “ for a season of moral repair ” : financial policy that opposed trickle-down economics ; creating a U.S. Department of Children and Youth ; mass mobilization to reverse climate change ; creating a U.S. Department of Peace ; investing in African American communities as reparations for slavery ; and a “ Whole Health Plan.
” Apart from an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2014 , Williamson spent the bulk of her career @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She ’ s written 12 books , four of which were New York Times bestsellers , including the 1992 work “ A Return To Love.
” But she has also been vocal on a number of political issues over the years .
She was an early AIDS activist and in the late 1980s founded both the Center for Living , which offered counseling to HIV-positive patients , and Project Angel Food , a charity that delivered meals to people living with HIV and AIDS .
In recent years , Williamson has repeatedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what she deems the “ spiritual and moral rot ” in Washington .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Marianne Williamson has exited the race for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, she announced on Friday.
In a statement on her website, the author and “spiritual adviser” said she didn’t want her campaign to diminish the success of progressive candidates leading the polls in early states.
Advertisement
“I stayed in the race to take advantage of every possible effort to share our message,” she said. “With caucuses and primaries now about to begin, however, we will not be able to garner enough votes in the election to elevate our conversation any more than it is now. The primaries might be tightly contested among the top contenders, and I don’t want to get in the way of a progressive candidate winning any of them.”
In an early sign of what was to come, Williamson reportedly laid off her entire campaign staff at the start of the new year due to dwindling campaign cash. The self-help author also failed to qualify for any subsequent primary debates after appearing in the first two.
“To the remaining Democratic candidates, I wish you all my best on the road ahead. It was an honor being among you,” Williamson said Friday. “Whichever one of you wins the nomination, I will be there with all my energy and in full support.”
Marianne Williamson speaks on the first night of the second 2020 Democratic presidential debate in Detroit, Michigan, July 30, 2019. Lucas Jackson / Reuters
Advertisement
Williamson launched her presidential bid in January 2019 as a way “to engage voters in a more meaningful conversation about America, about our history, about how each of us fit into it, and how to create a sustainable future.”
“Our national challenges are deep, but our political conversation is shallow,” she said during her campaign announcement. “My campaign is for people who want to dig deeper into the questions we face as a nation and deeper into finding the answers.’’
Williamson pitched voters on six policy pillars “for a season of moral repair”: financial policy that opposed trickle-down economics; creating a U.S. Department of Children and Youth; mass mobilization to reverse climate change; creating a U.S. Department of Peace; investing in African American communities as reparations for slavery; and a “Whole Health Plan.”
Apart from an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2014, Williamson spent the bulk of her career in the self-help and personal growth space. She’s written 12 books, four of which were New York Times bestsellers, including the 1992 work “A Return To Love.”
Williamson has been called Oprah Winfrey’s “spiritual adviser” and appeared numerous times on the media mogul’s show.
Advertisement
But she has also been vocal on a number of political issues over the years. She was an early AIDS activist and in the late 1980s founded both the Center for Living, which offered counseling to HIV-positive patients, and Project Angel Food, a charity that delivered meals to people living with HIV and AIDS.
In recent years, Williamson has repeatedly spoken out against the Trump administration and what she deems the “spiritual and moral rot” in Washington.
As a Democratic candidate, Williamson drew criticism for calling mandatory vaccinations “draconian” and “Orwellian” amid the worst measles outbreak the U.S. has seen in decades.
She subsequently denied fostering vaccine skepticism and instead highlighted her distrust of pharmaceutical companies.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Rep. Doug Collins Walks Back Claim That Democrats Love Terrorists

Rep. Doug Collins ( R-Ga. ) is throwing a little water on his fiery comments claiming that Democrats “ are in love with terrorists.
” Days after the Donald Trump-supporting lawmaker set off social media fury with his claim on Lou Dobbs ’ Fox Business show that terrorist-loving Democrats are mourning more for assassinated Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani than they do for U.S. service members killed in the line of duty , Collins posted a series of tweets apologizing and trying to dial back his rhetoric .
First , he declared that , no , he doesn ’ t really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Let me be clear : I do not believe Democrats are in love with terrorists , and I apologize for what I said earlier this week .
( 1/5 ) — Rep. Doug Collins ( @ RepDougCollins ) January 10 , 2020 Then he explained his comments on Dobbs ’ show Wednesday were in reference to the war powers resolution that was later passed by the House .
The comment I made on Wednesday evening was in response to a question about the War Powers Resolution being introduced in the House and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s authority .
( 2/5 ) — Rep. Doug Collins ( @ RepDougCollins ) January 10 , 2020 Collins then tried to explain he was fired up because of his military service in Iraq back in 2008 .
As someone who served in Iraq in 2008 , I witnessed firsthand the brutal death of countless soldiers who were torn to shreds by this vicious terrorist .
Soleimani was nothing less than an evil mastermind who viciously killed and wounded thousands of Americans .
( 3/5 ) — Rep. Doug Collins ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collins said his service in the military didn ’ t excuse Wednesday ’ s comments , but he presented it in a way that kind of suggested it did .
These images will live with me for the rest of my life , but that does not excuse my response on Wednesday evening .
( 4/5 ) — Rep. Doug Collins ( @ RepDougCollins ) January 10 , 2020 I remain committed to working with my colleagues in Congress and with my fellow citizens to keep all Americans safe .
( 5/5 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) January 10 , 2020 Collins was quickly taken to task for his caustic comments on Wednesday .
People on Twitter pointed out that Trump has famously attacked Gold Star families and slammed decorated American veterans , including the late Sen. John McCain .
Incidentally , about 45 minutes before Collins apologized for his fiery comments , he tried to raise money off the controversy with a fundraising letter where he vowed not to apologize .
I received a fundraising email at 10:48 AM today from Doug Collins with the subject line : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( He apologized on Twitter at 11:30 AM : https : //t.co/eYcyzzIlIF . )
pic.twitter.com/5bvCuC63Yq — Eric Hananoki ( @ ehananoki ) January 10 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) is throwing a little water on his fiery comments claiming that Democrats “are in love with terrorists.”
Days after the Donald Trump-supporting lawmaker set off social media fury with his claim on Lou Dobbs’ Fox Business show that terrorist-loving Democrats are mourning more for assassinated Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani than they do for U.S. service members killed in the line of duty, Collins posted a series of tweets apologizing and trying to dial back his rhetoric.
Advertisement
First, he declared that, no, he doesn’t really believe Democrats are in love with terrorists.
Let me be clear: I do not believe Democrats are in love with terrorists, and I apologize for what I said earlier this week. (1/5) — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) January 10, 2020
Then he explained his comments on Dobbs’ show Wednesday were in reference to the war powers resolution that was later passed by the House.
The comment I made on Wednesday evening was in response to a question about the War Powers Resolution being introduced in the House and House Democrats’ attempt to limit the president’s authority. (2/5) — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) January 10, 2020
Collins then tried to explain he was fired up because of his military service in Iraq back in 2008.
As someone who served in Iraq in 2008, I witnessed firsthand the brutal death of countless soldiers who were torn to shreds by this vicious terrorist. Soleimani was nothing less than an evil mastermind who viciously killed and wounded thousands of Americans. (3/5) — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) January 10, 2020
Advertisement
Collins said his service in the military didn’t excuse Wednesday’s comments, but he presented it in a way that kind of suggested it did.
These images will live with me for the rest of my life, but that does not excuse my response on Wednesday evening. (4/5) — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) January 10, 2020
I remain committed to working with my colleagues in Congress and with my fellow citizens to keep all Americans safe. (5/5) — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) January 10, 2020
Incidentally, about 45 minutes before Collins apologized for his fiery comments, he tried to raise money off the controversy with a fundraising letter where he vowed not to apologize.
Advertisement
I received a fundraising email at 10:48 AM today from Doug Collins with the subject line: "I will not apologize." (He apologized on Twitter at 11:30 AM: https://t.co/eYcyzzIlIF.) pic.twitter.com/5bvCuC63Yq — Eric Hananoki (@ehananoki) January 10, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Legal Experts Destroy Giuliani's 'Gibberish' Argument To Void Trump Impeachment

Legal experts took President Donald Trump ’ s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to task on Thursday after he suggested the Supreme Court should rule Trump ’ s impeachment over the Ukraine scandal as “ unconstitutional.
” The former New York mayor argued on Twitter that such a move would “ prevent a precedent from forming which would allow the House to overstep its bounds and impeach for policy differences or political leverage.
” “ If this impeachment is not declared illegal it would remove the constitutional limitation of crimes on the power to impeach , ” Giuliani continued .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for policy differences or political leverage.
” The Supreme Court should step in and rule this impeachment unconstitutional , to prevent a precedent from forming which would allow the House to overstep its bounds and impeach for policy differences or political leverage .
— Rudy Giuliani ( @ RudyGiuliani ) January 9 , 2020 House Democrats have put our constitutional government in grave danger by attempting to rewrite the carefully calibrated separation of powers under our Constitution & usurping powers not granted to the House .
— Rudy Giuliani ( @ RudyGiuliani ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not declared illegal it would remove the constitutional limitation of crimes on the power to impeach .
It would allow the House to impeach for policy differences or political leverage .
— Rudy Giuliani ( @ RudyGiuliani ) January 9 , 2020 It would prevent a future president to raise any challenge to the most illegal , overbroad subpoena from any of the multitude of congressional committees and sub-committees .
Anytime Congress disagrees , it could charge abuse of power .
— Rudy Giuliani ( @ RudyGiuliani ) January 9 , 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether it would be worse if he believed this was the sort of thing that might happen , or if he was just cynically making it up for ...
I dunno , reasons , ” Chafetz responded , also challenging Giuliani to “ file whatever sort of paperwork you think would be necessary to put this process in motion.
” I honestly do n't know whether it would be worse if he believed this was the sort of thing that might happen , or if he was just cynically making it up for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Josh Chafetz ( @ joshchafetz ) January 9 , 2020 But I tell you what , @ RudyGiuliani : You 're the president 's `` lawyer , '' right ?
So why do n't you file whatever sort of paperwork you think would be necessary to put this process in motion at the Supreme Court .
Be creative !
I have n't heard much about the writ of scire facias lately !
— Josh Chafetz ( @ joshchafetz ) January 9 , 2020 Neal Katyal , a former acting U.S. solicitor general who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Supreme Court , described Giuliani ’ s tweet as “ just about as good of a legal argument as everything else ” he says .
This is just about as good of a legal argument as everything else Giuliani says .
Back in the world of legal reality , the Supreme Court resoundingly and unanimously concluded in US v Nixon that it had no role to play in impeachments whatsoever .
https : //t.co/meheUeDsnK — Neal Katyal ( @ neal_katyal ) January 9 , 2020 You ’ re all talk and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up .
If not , go ahead and bring a lawsuit .
Back up your talk .
( You won ’ t because you know any federal court would throw out your suit and find the impeachment legitimate ) .
— Elie Honig ( @ eliehonig ) January 9 , 2020 As did University of Iowa law professor Andy Grewal , who responded with a simple “ lol.
” No , its not the job of the supreme court to be the final arbiter .
That is ridiculous .
Its upon the senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do so .
https : //t.co/lK83BLw6yb — Daniel Horowitz ( @ RMConservative ) January 9 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Legal experts took President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to task on Thursday after he suggested the Supreme Court should rule Trump’s impeachment over the Ukraine scandal as “unconstitutional.”
The former New York mayor argued on Twitter that such a move would “prevent a precedent from forming which would allow the House to overstep its bounds and impeach for policy differences or political leverage.”
Advertisement
“If this impeachment is not declared illegal it would remove the constitutional limitation of crimes on the power to impeach,” Giuliani continued. “It would allow the House to impeach for policy differences or political leverage.”
But his case was swiftly shot down.
The Supreme Court should step in and rule this impeachment unconstitutional, to prevent a precedent from forming which would allow the House to overstep its bounds and impeach for policy differences or political leverage. — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) January 9, 2020
House Democrats have put our constitutional government in grave danger by attempting to rewrite the carefully calibrated separation of powers under our Constitution & usurping powers not granted to the House. — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) January 9, 2020
Democrats have brought Alexander Hamilton’s nightmare of an entirely partisan impeachment to fruition and are making a mockery of fair proceedings. — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) January 9, 2020
Advertisement
If this impeachment is not declared illegal it would remove the constitutional limitation of crimes on the power to impeach. It would allow the House to impeach for policy differences or political leverage. — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) January 9, 2020
It would prevent a future president to raise any challenge to the most illegal, overbroad subpoena from any of the multitude of congressional committees and sub-committees. Anytime Congress disagrees, it could charge abuse of power. — Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) January 9, 2020
Josh Chafetz, a Cornell law professor and expert on impeachment, described Giuliani’s argument as “some quality gibberish.”
“I honestly don’t know whether it would be worse if he believed this was the sort of thing that might happen, or if he was just cynically making it up for ... I dunno, reasons,” Chafetz responded, also challenging Giuliani to “file whatever sort of paperwork you think would be necessary to put this process in motion.”
this is some quality gibberish right here https://t.co/QkbelrG8be — Josh Chafetz (@joshchafetz) January 9, 2020
Advertisement
I honestly don't know whether it would be worse if he believed this was the sort of thing that might happen, or if he was just cynically making it up for ... I dunno, reasons. — Josh Chafetz (@joshchafetz) January 9, 2020
But I tell you what, @RudyGiuliani: You're the president's "lawyer," right? So why don't you file whatever sort of paperwork you think would be necessary to put this process in motion at the Supreme Court.
Be creative! I haven't heard much about the writ of scire facias lately! — Josh Chafetz (@joshchafetz) January 9, 2020
Neal Katyal, a former acting U.S. solicitor general who as a private lawyer frequently argues cases in the Supreme Court, described Giuliani’s tweet as “just about as good of a legal argument as everything else” he says.
This is just about as good of a legal argument as everything else Giuliani says.
Back in the world of legal reality, the Supreme Court resoundingly and unanimously concluded in US v Nixon that it had no role to play in impeachments whatsoever. https://t.co/meheUeDsnK — Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) January 9, 2020
Former federal prosecutors Renato Mariotti and Elie Honig also chimed in:
Impeachment is literally written in the constitution, which gives the House the “sole power” of impeachment. — Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) January 9, 2020
Advertisement
You’re all talk and you know you’re making crap up. If not, go ahead and bring a lawsuit. Back up your talk. (You won’t because you know any federal court would throw out your suit and find the impeachment legitimate). — Elie Honig (@eliehonig) January 9, 2020
As did University of Iowa law professor Andy Grewal, who responded with a simple “lol.”
Others also dismantled Giuliani’s rationale:
No, its not the job of the supreme court to be the final arbiter. That is ridiculous. Its upon the senate to check the house and they will do so. https://t.co/lK83BLw6yb — Daniel Horowitz (@RMConservative) January 9, 2020
I'm no SCOTUS scholar, but I am pretty sure it doesn't work that way. https://t.co/ckul6lNyLl — Joshua Rhett Miller (@joshuarhett) January 9, 2020
shorter Rudy: the Supreme Court should rule the Constitution unconstitutional https://t.co/NYti2ouC7U — Johnny McNulty Is 35 This Year & Can Be President (@JohnnyMcNulty) January 9, 2020
Advertisement
That's Not How Any Of This Works Dot GIF https://t.co/HeVGHNhQPy — johntdrake (@johntdrake) January 9, 2020
The gross misunderstanding of the most basic Supreme Court jurisdiction and procedure here should really be grounds for disbarment https://t.co/20NiyYoEZf — Fiddler (@cFidd) January 9, 2020
Impeachment is literally part of the Constitution, you dunce. — William LeGate 🧢 (@williamlegate) January 9, 2020
Why don't we just get rid of the constitution, and the Congress and the Supreme Court for that matter. — Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) January 9, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Rep. Jackie Speier Lays Blame For Iran Passenger Jet Downing On Donald Trump

Rep. Jackie Speier ( D-Calif. ) on Thursday suggested President Donald Trump was in part to blame for Iran ’ s suspected mistaken downing of a Ukraine International Airlines passenger plane during hostilities with the U.S. Speier , who sits on the House Intelligence Committee , told CNN ’ s Wolf Blitzer she ’ d been briefed on the crash , which killed all 176 aboard , but was “ not at liberty to say ” whether Iran mistakenly believed the aircraft was a U.S. military plane .
The Boeing jet crashed soon after taking off from Tehran ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ projected is true , this is yet another example of collateral damage from the actions that have been taken in a provocative way by the president of the United States , ” Speier said .
She also lambasted Trump ’ s “ continued saber-rattling , ” called for the situation with Iran to be “ de-escalated ” and for Trump to return to the negotiating table .
Tensions flared last week following the U.S. assassination of top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani .
Iran responded with missile strikes on two Iraqi bases housing U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hours later , the passenger jet crashed .
U.S. , Canadian and British officials say they have intelligence that Iranian missiles , probably fired by mistake , brought down the airliner .
“ But there are many people in that region and around the world who are bad actors , ” she said .
“ We have to find a way to live together and attempt to move towards peace.
” “ This needs to be de-escalated… Iran has been a bad actor .
Soleimani was a bad actor , but there are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world that are bad actors .
We have to find a way to live together and attempt to move towards peace . ''
- @ RepSpeier on US-Iran relations .
pic.twitter.com/dVXMH6b28C — The Situation Room ( @ CNNSitRoom ) January 9 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Speier, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer she’d been briefed on the crash, which killed all 176 aboard, but was “not at liberty to say” whether Iran mistakenly believed the aircraft was a U.S. military plane. The Boeing jet crashed soon after taking off from Tehran’s airport.
Advertisement
“If what is being projected is true, this is yet another example of collateral damage from the actions that have been taken in a provocative way by the president of the United States,” Speier said.
She also lambasted Trump’s “continued saber-rattling,” called for the situation with Iran to be “de-escalated” and for Trump to return to the negotiating table.
Tensions flared last week following the U.S. assassination of top Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani. Iran responded with missile strikes on two Iraqi bases housing U.S. soldiers. No casualties were reported.
Hours later, the passenger jet crashed. U.S., Canadian and British officials say they have intelligence that Iranian missiles, probably fired by mistake, brought down the airliner.
Advertisement
“Iran has been a bad actor. Soleimani was a bad actor,” Speier acknowledged.
“But there are many people in that region and around the world who are bad actors,” she said. “We have to find a way to live together and attempt to move towards peace.”
Check out the clip here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Larry David Appears With Bernie Sanders, Shows Some Enthusiasm

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate gave an interview in the 7 a.m. hour , and the star and creator of HBO ’ s “ Curb Your Enthusiasm ” promoted his show ’ s upcoming new season in “ Today ’ s ” 8 a.m. hour .
In between , Sanders and David had a little fun , with host Al Roker jokingly confusing them before a commercial break .
What are the odds !
Both @ BernieSanders and Larry David are with us on the same morning .
pic.twitter.com/eJFuwIeYSi — TODAY ( @ TODAYshow ) January 10 , 2020 When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the presidency , David will have to “ be flying back and forth ” from his home in Los Angeles to New York to appear on “ SNL , ” David gave one of his signature cranky responses .
“ It ’ s not going to be easy for me .
It ’ ll be great for the country , terrible for me , ” David joked .
“ I ’ m getting you a good job for four years , and you ’ re complaining !
” Sanders responded .
“ He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s frightening to me how well he ’ s doing !
I have to rethink everything after this , ” David added later .
In 2017 , an episode of PBS ’ “ Finding Your Roots ” revealed that the two of them , both Brooklyn natives from Jewish immigrant families , are distant cousins .
“ I don ’ t think you ’ re acting when you play him , ” host Savannah Guthrie , who had just interviewed Sanders , told David .
In an interview with GQ published earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his new dog Bernie .
Sanders and David appeared together on a 2016 episode of “ SNL .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate gave an interview in the 7 a.m. hour, and the star and creator of HBO’s “Curb Your Enthusiasm” promoted his show’s upcoming new season in “Today’s” 8 a.m. hour.
Advertisement
In between, Sanders and David had a little fun, with host Al Roker jokingly confusing them before a commercial break.
What are the odds! Both @BernieSanders and Larry David are with us on the same morning. pic.twitter.com/eJFuwIeYSi — TODAY (@TODAYshow) January 10, 2020
When Roker pointed out that if Sanders wins the presidency, David will have to “be flying back and forth” from his home in Los Angeles to New York to appear on “SNL,” David gave one of his signature cranky responses.
“It’s not going to be easy for me. It’ll be great for the country, terrible for me,” David joked.
“I’m getting you a good job for four years, and you’re complaining!” Sanders responded.
“He’s doing too well! It’s frightening to me how well he’s doing! I have to rethink everything after this,” David added later.
Advertisement
In 2017, an episode of PBS’ “Finding Your Roots” revealed that the two of them, both Brooklyn natives from Jewish immigrant families, are distant cousins.
“I feel a familial connection to him,” David said Friday.
“I don’t think you’re acting when you play him,” host Savannah Guthrie, who had just interviewed Sanders, told David.
In an interview with GQ published earlier this week, David revealed he named his new dog Bernie.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Trump Breaks Silence On Harry And Meghan’s Exit From Royal Life

Now that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have announced their decision to step down as “ senior ” members of @ @ @ @ @ is weighing in with their thoughts ― even President Donald Trump .
However , the @ @ @ @ @ how things are going with the queen .
At least he did when Fox News @ @ @ @ @ asked him his thoughts on what some are calling “ Megxit ” for an interview @ @ @ @ @ , of course , he used his favorite word that begins with the letter “ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a great woman , ” he said , referencing Queen Elizabeth .
“ @ @ @ @ @ a mistake if you look .
She ’ s had , like , a flawless @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t “ want to get into the whole thing , ” but added @ @ @ @ @ such respect for the queen .
I don ’ t think this should be happening @ @ @ @ @ see the brief exchange in the teaser video below :

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Now that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have announced their decision to step down as “senior” members of the royal family, everyone is weighing in with their thoughts ― even President Donald Trump.
However, the president seems most concerned with how things are going with the queen.
At least he did when Fox News Channel’s Laura Ingraham asked him his thoughts on what some are calling “Megxit” for an interview airing Friday night.
Advertisement
And, of course, he used his favorite word that begins with the letter “s”:
“I think it’s sad. I really do,” Trump said.
“She’s a great woman,” he said, referencing Queen Elizabeth. “She’s never made a mistake if you look. She’s had, like, a flawless time.”
Trump insisted he didn’t “want to get into the whole thing,” but added, “I just have such respect for the queen. I don’t think this should be happening to her.”
You can see the brief exchange in the teaser video below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--White House Puts More Sanctions On Iran

White House Puts More Sanctions On Iran

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The Trump administration on Friday announced a new wave of sanctions on Iran following this week ’ s missile strikes by the Islamic Republic on U.S. bases in Iraq .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said the new sanctions will target eight senior Iranian officials involved in “ destabilizing ” activities in the Middle East as well as Tuesday ’ s missile strike , which came in retaliation for the U.S. killing of a senior Iranian general in a drone strike .
Mnuchin said President Donald Trump will issue an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Iranian textile , construction , manufacturing or mining sectors .
They will also impose separate sanctions against the steel and iron sectors .
“ As a result of these actions we will cut off billions of dollars of support to the Iranian regime , ” the treasury secretary said .
The administration has already reinstated all the U.S. sanctions that were eased under the 2015 nuclear deal , which has caused significant economic hardship in Iran and cut its oil exports to historic lows .
Iran this week launched the strikes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that killed Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qassem Soleimani , the country ’ s most powerful commander , in Baghdad last week .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Friday announced a new wave of sanctions on Iran following this week’s missile strikes by the Islamic Republic on U.S. bases in Iraq.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said the new sanctions will target eight senior Iranian officials involved in “destabilizing” activities in the Middle East as well as Tuesday’s missile strike, which came in retaliation for the U.S. killing of a senior Iranian general in a drone strike.
Advertisement
Mnuchin said President Donald Trump will issue an executive order imposing sanctions on anyone involved in the Iranian textile, construction, manufacturing or mining sectors. They will also impose separate sanctions against the steel and iron sectors.
“As a result of these actions we will cut off billions of dollars of support to the Iranian regime,” the treasury secretary said.
The administration has already reinstated all the U.S. sanctions that were eased under the 2015 nuclear deal, which has caused significant economic hardship in Iran and cut its oil exports to historic lows.
Iran this week launched the strikes in retaliation for the U.S. drone strike that killed Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the country’s most powerful commander, in Baghdad last week.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--White Nationalist Rep. Steve King Really Wants You To Stop Calling Him A White Nationalist

The interview , published in September , came to HuffPost ’ s attention this week .
In his conversation with @ @ @ @ @ belief in the superiority of European culture over others .
He talked fearfully of falling @ @ @ @ @ and spoke at length about his belief that Europe and America are threatened by Muslim @ @ @ @ @ If we don ’ t defend Western civilization , then we will become subjugated by @ @ @ @ @ enemies of faith , the enemies of justice , ” King said .
The interview @ @ @ @ @ sitting U.S. congressman completely fluent in modern white nationalist talking points just weeks before an @ @ @ @ @ win .

The interview, published in September, came to HuffPost’s attention this week. In his conversation with Sommerfeld, King discussed his belief in the superiority of European culture over others. He talked fearfully of falling fertility rates in the West and spoke at length about his belief that Europe and America are threatened by Muslim and Latino immigration.
“If we don’t defend Western civilization, then we will become subjugated by the people who are the enemies of faith, the enemies of justice,” King said.
The interview is remarkable, capturing a sitting U.S. congressman completely fluent in modern white nationalist talking points just weeks before an election he is favored to win.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-01-10--Saudi Arabia And Trump's Other Middle East Pals Don't Want More Escalation With Iran

The U.S. killed Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani on Friday , prompting Tehran to promise revenge and bringing the U.S. closer than it ’ s been in years to an outright war with the Islamic Republic .
Though U.S.-aligned countries in the Persian Gulf are happy about the death of a skilled opponent , they ’ re also anxious that they might suffer from Iran ’ s response ― and that Trump won ’ t help if that ’ s the case .
The anxiety , along with Iran-linked attacks since the summer that reminded Gulf Arabs how vulnerable they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own choices have made peace harder to achieve and what they can do differently .
If those countries shift away from confrontation with Iran , it would have huge implications for the stability of the region and its hundreds of millions of people .
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have brutally fought pro-Iran forces in Syria and Yemen , and have pushed the U.S. and other Western countries to take a hawkish stance toward Iran through influential officials , paid lobbyists and sympathetic contacts in industries such as the arms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toward diplomacy with Tehran would be a major shift that would make American saber-rattling more difficult .
“ This is one positive consequence in all this : [ Persian ] Gulf countries are becoming more unified and realistic than they were before , ” said Yasmine Farouk , a visiting fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace .
Now , she said , the nations are “ asking themselves questions about whether the U.S. knows where this all is going.
” His friends in the Middle East don ’ t want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ de-escalate tensions , Arab officials and analysts say .
The risk of U.S.-Iran conflict remains dramatically high , and other events that could spark a spiral ― such as Tehran retaliating further over Soleimani ’ s death , especially since its initial response is now tied to the tragic downing of a civilian airliner , or U.S. forces and Iranian proxies veering into fighting in Iraq ― aren ’ t hard to imagine .
American policymakers , politicians and pundits tend to assume the more assertive Persian Gulf states are driven above all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including White House adviser Jared Kushner have relied on that assumption to try to influence the region on issues like an Israeli-Palestinian pact .
By centering its Middle East strategy on Iran , the Trump administration appeared to think it could make unprecedented gains in American influence .
The Arab monarchies moved quickly to stress de-escalation after the Soleimani assassination ― and spread the same message despite their disagreements with each other .
Riyadh sent its defense minister and the brother of de facto ruler Crown Prince Muhammed bin Salman , Prince Khalid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leader spoke with Trump and sent his foreign minister to Iran .
Although Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E .
are officially boycotting Qatar , their neighbor and fellow U.S. partner , over its regional policies and relative willingness to engage with Iran , the three countries are now aligned in a way they haven ’ t been for years .
The turn comes after recent indications that Iran ’ s nervous neighbors were interested in a new way of dealing with the Islamic Republic .
Saudi Arabia is negotiating with the Houthis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fighting in Yemen since 2015 ; in July , U.A.E .
officials met with Iranians to talk about maritime security in shared waters for the first time in six years .
A Sept. 14 drone attack on the Saudi oil company Aramco , which a Reuters investigation found was planned by Iran to punish the U.S. for withdrawing from a landmark 2015 global agreement on its nuclear program , reminded regional officials how much they have to lose from outright fighting .
The Saudis blamed Iran ( as did the U.S. , Britain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ avoided retaliation , a decision that other Arab governments saw as wise even as Iran hawks in the U.S. suggested it was important to respond with a show of American power .
The attack on Aramco epitomized the danger of the U.S.-Iran standoff for American partners in the region .
If the U.S. intervened to help them , it would almost certainly make further attacks by Iran and its allies inevitable .
Or even worse , Washington might prove how little it cared .
Trump stated after the incident that it “ was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that wasn ’ t an attack on us ” ― an unmistakable message to Iran that left its neighbors feeling even more exposed .
Iran and the neighboring U.S.-aligned states need to figure out a way to coexist , as do other global players with stakes in the region , such as China and Russia .
So , despite Tehran ’ s bloody recent track record around the Arab world , particularly in Syria , Trump ’ s counterparts feel they can ’ t just try to punish and ignore it as he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an opportunity to appear more rational than the U.S. ― and shape a new regional status quo on its terms .
“ You have a lot of signals by Iran that they are in a maximum resistance campaign against the U.S. for obvious reasons ... but that in complement to that they are actually open to talking and building new initiatives with pretty much anyone , ” Soubrier said .
“ The U.S. keeps pushing , pushing , pushing , but if you look in the region and elsewhere in the world , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s interesting to see how much Trump ’ s choices are actually pushing everyone else together.
” Forging a broad agreement would be hard for Iran and America ’ s Arab partners to do .
“ There ’ s a huge problem of confidence between the two parties , ” Farouk said , and some officials in those nations worry , too , about being excluded from some kind of U.S.-Iran rapprochement the way they felt they were from President Barack Obama ’ s nuclear talks .
Past periods of relative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diplomacy hasn ’ t resulted in much concrete improvement .
But it ’ s not impossible ; Tehran and the Gulf states might , for instance , ask third parties who have tried to encourage U.S.-Iran talks , like the Europeans and Japan , to be involved in making guarantees so that both sides live up to their commitments , she said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
After years of pushing for the U.S. to make tougher moves against Iran, some of America’s closest partners in the Middle East now desperately want President Donald Trump to take a more moderate tack.
The U.S. killed Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani on Friday, prompting Tehran to promise revenge and bringing the U.S. closer than it’s been in years to an outright war with the Islamic Republic. Though U.S.-aligned countries in the Persian Gulf are happy about the death of a skilled opponent, they’re also anxious that they might suffer from Iran’s response ― and that Trump won’t help if that’s the case. The anxiety, along with Iran-linked attacks since the summer that reminded Gulf Arabs how vulnerable they are, has led officials to consider how their own choices have made peace harder to achieve and what they can do differently.
Advertisement
If those countries shift away from confrontation with Iran, it would have huge implications for the stability of the region and its hundreds of millions of people. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have brutally fought pro-Iran forces in Syria and Yemen, and have pushed the U.S. and other Western countries to take a hawkish stance toward Iran through influential officials, paid lobbyists and sympathetic contacts in industries such as the arms trade and finance. A meaningful move toward diplomacy with Tehran would be a major shift that would make American saber-rattling more difficult.
“This is one positive consequence in all this: [Persian] Gulf countries are becoming more unified and realistic than they were before,” said Yasmine Farouk, a visiting fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Now, she said, the nations are “asking themselves questions about whether the U.S. knows where this all is going.”
Iran responded to the Soleimani assassination with strikes on American positions in Iraq on Wednesday. Trump then announced new sanctions against the country. He said he wants to eventually negotiate with the Islamic Republic but wants its behavior to change before a bargain can be struck.
His friends in the Middle East don’t want to wait much longer for an agreement to de-escalate tensions, Arab officials and analysts say. The risk of U.S.-Iran conflict remains dramatically high, and other events that could spark a spiral ― such as Tehran retaliating further over Soleimani’s death, especially since its initial response is now tied to the tragic downing of a civilian airliner, or U.S. forces and Iranian proxies veering into fighting in Iraq ― aren’t hard to imagine.
Advertisement
American policymakers, politicians and pundits tend to assume the more assertive Persian Gulf states are driven above all else by wariness of Tehran. Officials including White House adviser Jared Kushner have relied on that assumption to try to influence the region on issues like an Israeli-Palestinian pact. By centering its Middle East strategy on Iran, the Trump administration appeared to think it could make unprecedented gains in American influence.
But instead, Trump’s plan has made America’s friends feel significantly less safe and freshly interested in finding new ways to achieve peace without the goal of total Iranian capitulation. European leaders have thought that way for years. It’s significant that more bellicose Arab counterparts are coming around, too.
“This perception that the Gulf countries might enjoy any of what is happening right now is a false perception,” said Emma Soubrier, a visiting scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington.
The Arab monarchies moved quickly to stress de-escalation after the Soleimani assassination ― and spread the same message despite their disagreements with each other. Riyadh sent its defense minister and the brother of de facto ruler Crown Prince Muhammed bin Salman, Prince Khalid, to Washington. Qatar’s leader spoke with Trump and sent his foreign minister to Iran. Although Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. are officially boycotting Qatar, their neighbor and fellow U.S. partner, over its regional policies and relative willingness to engage with Iran, the three countries are now aligned in a way they haven’t been for years.
Israel has also avoided involvement or the encouragement of escalation.
The foreign minister of Qatar, left, whose country hosts the biggest U.S. base in the Middle East, visited Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif the day after the drone strike that killed an Iranian military commander. Anadolu Agency via Getty Images
Advertisement
The turn comes after recent indications that Iran’s nervous neighbors were interested in a new way of dealing with the Islamic Republic. Saudi Arabia is negotiating with the Houthis, an Iran-backed militia it’s been fighting in Yemen since 2015; in July, U.A.E. officials met with Iranians to talk about maritime security in shared waters for the first time in six years.
A Sept. 14 drone attack on the Saudi oil company Aramco, which a Reuters investigation found was planned by Iran to punish the U.S. for withdrawing from a landmark 2015 global agreement on its nuclear program, reminded regional officials how much they have to lose from outright fighting. The Saudis blamed Iran (as did the U.S., Britain, France and Germany) but notably avoided retaliation, a decision that other Arab governments saw as wise even as Iran hawks in the U.S. suggested it was important to respond with a show of American power.
“None of [the Arab governments] were calling for a military response after the Aramco attack ― such calls essentially came from the Washington bubble,” Soubrier said.
The attack on Aramco epitomized the danger of the U.S.-Iran standoff for American partners in the region. If the U.S. intervened to help them, it would almost certainly make further attacks by Iran and its allies inevitable. Or even worse, Washington might prove how little it cared. Trump stated after the incident that it “was an attack on Saudi Arabia, and that wasn’t an attack on us” ― an unmistakable message to Iran that left its neighbors feeling even more exposed.
Trump’s moves since then haven’t done much to change their view. He did not inform Saudi Arabia, his closest partner in the Muslim-majority world, of the Soleimani strike beforehand, a Saudi official told HuffPost. In his post-assassination comments, he noted, “We are independent, and we do not need Middle East oil.”
Advertisement
Iran and the neighboring U.S.-aligned states need to figure out a way to coexist, as do other global players with stakes in the region, such as China and Russia. So, despite Tehran’s bloody recent track record around the Arab world, particularly in Syria, Trump’s counterparts feel they can’t just try to punish and ignore it as he has. For Iran, that represents an opportunity to appear more rational than the U.S. ― and shape a new regional status quo on its terms.
“You have a lot of signals by Iran that they are in a maximum resistance campaign against the U.S. for obvious reasons ... but that in complement to that they are actually open to talking and building new initiatives with pretty much anyone,” Soubrier said. “The U.S. keeps pushing, pushing, pushing, but if you look in the region and elsewhere in the world, most countries are calling for de-escalation… . It’s interesting to see how much Trump’s choices are actually pushing everyone else together.”
Forging a broad agreement would be hard for Iran and America’s Arab partners to do. “There’s a huge problem of confidence between the two parties,” Farouk said, and some officials in those nations worry, too, about being excluded from some kind of U.S.-Iran rapprochement the way they felt they were from President Barack Obama’s nuclear talks. Past periods of relative reconciliation have ultimately faded, and informal diplomacy hasn’t resulted in much concrete improvement. But it’s not impossible; Tehran and the Gulf states might, for instance, ask third parties who have tried to encourage U.S.-Iran talks, like the Europeans and Japan, to be involved in making guarantees so that both sides live up to their commitments, she said.
But the countries’ room for maneuver is ultimately limited by the U.S., which right now means Trump and his anti-Iran Cabinet.
The president hasn’t protested the Gulf nations’ limited outreach to Iran so far but would likely do so if, for instance, those countries sought to make a wider deal with Tehran in private, said Rob Malley, a top Mideast adviser to Obama and now president of the International Crisis Group. As Arab leaders wait to see how Washington and Tehran proceed, “I just don’t know how much they can do” to influence either side’s decisions, Malley said.