thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Bad News For Biden: Nobody Has Won The Nomination After A Start Like This

The Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary have produced plenty of surprises over the years .
Favorites have faltered and previously overlooked presidential candidates pulled off stunning victories ; the hastily anointed front-runner who won in Iowa has tanked a week later in the Granite State .
But one constant has held true since 1972 : Nobody has ever finished outside the top two in both of the first two states and gone on to become the Democratic ( or Republican ) nominee .
That ’ s very bad news for former Vice President Joe Biden , who entered the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and surely hoped to compete well in , if not win , both races .
And it ’ s obviously good news for Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg , who were the top two finishers in both states .
Losing produces negative momentum , which hinders fundraising , which means the losing candidates can ’ t compete effectively in later primaries .
Winning , unsurprisingly , can do the opposite .
Surprise second-place finishes in the early contests have also boosted candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a long-enough run to reach the party convention .
No one has been boosted by a surprise third-place finish , let alone a humiliating fifth-place collapse .
Biden will make a last stand in South Carolina , the first state where the majority of Democratic primary voters will be African American .
He hopes to hold on to the strong support among older Black voters that he has shown in polls so far .
But if precedent holds , South Carolina won ’ t be able to save him .
Prior to 1972 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conventions with the primaries and caucuses playing a limited role .
Still , the New Hampshire primary results could be influential in the Democratic nominating process .
Presidents Harry Truman in 1952 and Lyndon Johnson in 1968 both declined to run for reelection after receiving weak support in the New Hampshire primary .
( The Iowa caucuses were of no importance until 1972 . )
Four years later , Sen. George McGovern ( D-S.D . )
used his surprising second-place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire to build momentum towards the party ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jimmy Carter , then little known outside his own state , used a victory in the Iowa caucuses to propel himself toward the nomination in 1976 .
Clinton , then the governor of Arkansas , was beset by scandal heading into the New Hampshire primary while Sen. Paul Tsongas , from neighboring Massachusetts , was viewed as the prohibitive front-runner .
The week before the contest Gennifer Flowers accused Clinton of having an affair with her and Clinton ’ s former ROTC officer accused him of manipulating his way out of the Vietnam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staff , however , believed that his particular knack for retail politics would play well with New Hampshire voters .
So he went wherever he could to shake hands and tell voters that he was going to fight for their interests .
The goal was to finish second and come within less than 10 percentage points of Tsongas .
McCain skipped the Iowa caucuses in 2008 and finished fourth .
As it did for Clinton , the New Hampshire primary saved him .
He won there and then rolled to the nomination afterward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a candidacy that had nearly gone bankrupt one year earlier .
Why Could This Election Be Different From All Other Elections ?
“ Nothing ’ s going to happen until we get down to a place and around the country where there ’ s much more diversity , ” Biden said on Sunday , after his fourth-place fall in Iowa and before his fifth-place disaster in New Hampshire .
But voters in the next two contests may change their minds based on the successful narratives of the top two finishers in Iowa and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ garnering greater media attention noting that they are at the top of the contest .
Winning creates positive press , which helps alter voters ’ preferences .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary have produced plenty of surprises over the years. Favorites have faltered and previously overlooked presidential candidates pulled off stunning victories; the hastily anointed front-runner who won in Iowa has tanked a week later in the Granite State. But one constant has held true since 1972: Nobody has ever finished outside the top two in both of the first two states and gone on to become the Democratic (or Republican) nominee.
That’s very bad news for former Vice President Joe Biden, who entered the contests as conventional wisdom’s front-runner and surely hoped to compete well in, if not win, both races. And it’s obviously good news for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who were the top two finishers in both states.
Advertisement
Losing produces negative momentum, which hinders fundraising, which means the losing candidates can’t compete effectively in later primaries. Winning, unsurprisingly, can do the opposite. Surprise second-place finishes in the early contests have also boosted candidates to either the nomination or at least a long-enough run to reach the party convention. No one has been boosted by a surprise third-place finish, let alone a humiliating fifth-place collapse.
Biden will make a last stand in South Carolina, the first state where the majority of Democratic primary voters will be African American. He hopes to hold on to the strong support among older Black voters that he has shown in polls so far. But if precedent holds, South Carolina won’t be able to save him.
‘The Comeback Kid’
Prior to 1972, presidential nominations were decided at party conventions with the primaries and caucuses playing a limited role. Still, the New Hampshire primary results could be influential in the Democratic nominating process. Presidents Harry Truman in 1952 and Lyndon Johnson in 1968 both declined to run for reelection after receiving weak support in the New Hampshire primary. (The Iowa caucuses were of no importance until 1972.)
Presidential candidate Bill Clinton hugs his wife at his primary night party in Merrimack, New Hampshire, on Feb. 18, 1992. Clinton placed second in the primary behind Paul Tsongas and declared himself the "Comeback Kid." Ron Frehm/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Advertisement
After the debacle of the 1968 Democratic National Convention, both major parties adopted reforms putting the real power of choosing a presidential nominee into the hands of state primaries and caucuses. Iowa and New Hampshire were placed at the start of the Democratic Party’s primary calendar.
Four years later, Sen. George McGovern (D-S.D.) used his surprising second-place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire to build momentum towards the party’s nomination. Former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter, then little known outside his own state, used a victory in the Iowa caucuses to propel himself toward the nomination in 1976.
But the best-known instance of a candidate using a surprise second-place finish to win the nomination is President Bill Clinton’s “Comeback Kid” performance in the 1992 New Hampshire primary. The Granite State’s primary was effectively the first contest that year after a crowded field of Democratic candidates ceded the Iowa caucuses to Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin.
Clinton, then the governor of Arkansas, was beset by scandal heading into the New Hampshire primary while Sen. Paul Tsongas, from neighboring Massachusetts, was viewed as the prohibitive front-runner. The week before the contest Gennifer Flowers accused Clinton of having an affair with her and Clinton’s former ROTC officer accused him of manipulating his way out of the Vietnam War draft.
The campaign’s internal polling put him in the single digits. This left Clinton fighting for second place with Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey, a veteran who lost part of his right leg in Vietnam. And everyone knew that second-place finish mattered a lot.
Advertisement
“I knew you were not likely to survive as a presidential candidate if you’re third or fourth place coming out of New Hampshire,” Kerrey told The New York Times in a 2016 interview.
Clinton’s campaign staff, however, believed that his particular knack for retail politics would play well with New Hampshire voters. So he went wherever he could to shake hands and tell voters that he was going to fight for their interests. The goal was to finish second and come within less than 10 percentage points of Tsongas.
It worked. Clinton finished 9 points back of Tsongas, who won only 33%. New Hampshire had made him “the Comeback Kid,” Clinton declared in a victory speech.
Since 1972, only two other candidates have won their party’s nomination after not reaching the top two in Iowa: George H.W. Bush in 1988 and John McCain in 2008.
McCain skipped the Iowa caucuses in 2008 and finished fourth. As it did for Clinton, the New Hampshire primary saved him. He won there and then rolled to the nomination afterward. It marked a huge comeback for a candidacy that had nearly gone bankrupt one year earlier.
Advertisement
Why Could This Election Be Different From All Other Elections?
On the night of the 2020 New Hampshire primary, Joe Biden campaigns in South Carolina, where he is making his last stand. Sean Rayford via Getty Images
Precedents are, of course, made to be broken. And the momentum could fade for the top two Democratic finishers in this year’s first two contests.
One reason why the influence of the Iowa and New Hampshire contests could suffer in 2020 is the contrast between the diversity of the national Democratic Party base and the lack of diversity in those two states.
Iowa and New Hampshire are over 90% white. The Democratic Party is not. This tension has long been highlighted in efforts to dislodge Iowa and New Hampshire from their position as prime decision-makers in the party’s nomination calendar.
“Iowa and New Hampshire are wonderful states with wonderful people,” now-former presidential candidate Julián Castro said in November. “But they’re also not reflective of the diversity of our country, and certainly not reflective of the diversity of the Democratic Party.”
Advertisement
The third and fourth nominating contests in Nevada and South Carolina, respectively, do feature the kind of diverse electorate that represents the Democratic base. Biden has argued this is why his poor finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire should be discounted.
“Nothing’s going to happen until we get down to a place and around the country where there’s much more diversity,” Biden said on Sunday, after his fourth-place fall in Iowa and before his fifth-place disaster in New Hampshire.
But voters in the next two contests may change their minds based on the successful narratives of the top two finishers in Iowa and New Hampshire. Sanders and Buttigieg are garnering greater media attention noting that they are at the top of the contest. Winning creates positive press, which helps alter voters’ preferences.
That’s at least one reason why a 2010 study titled “Momentum and Learning in Presidential Primaries” found that Iowa and New Hampshire have five times more influence on who wins a party’s nomination than the larger, more diverse states that vote on Super Tuesday.
Another factor that might break the precedent this year is the unprecedented campaigns of former New York City Michael Bloomberg and, to a lesser extent, hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer.
Advertisement
Bloomberg, who is worth more than $60 billion, has already spent more of his own money ― $310 million ― to win the Democratic nomination than any campaign has ever spent during a presidential primary season.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Trump’s Budget Proposal Is A Political Gift To Vulnerable Democrats

Specifically , Trump ’ s budget proposed a small trim to Social Security ― an estimated $ 30 billion over 10 years , by cutting assistance to some people with disabilities who get money through Social Security Disability Insurance ― and a more substantial cut to Medicare : about $ 500 billion over the next decade , mostly through reductions to reimbursements to doctors and hospitals .
Those are both relatively modest cuts .
The administration argues the SSDI cut isn ’ t really a “ Social Security ” reduction : White House budget documents omit the disability program ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ federal disability program.
” And the Medicare cut would be imperceptible to many older Americans because doctors and hospitals might bear the brunt of it .
Lamb , who now sits in a safer seat thanks to redistricting but remains wary of trashing Trump , cited a tweet where the president promised not to cut Medicare or Medicaid .
“ And he has tried to cut those things every single year , and it ’ s the Democrats in Congress who stop him , ” Lamb said .
Lauren Underwood ( D-Ill. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican in 2018 , said she would talk about the budget as a way to underscore why the work Democrats do is important .
“ This is life and death for the American people , ” Underwood said , adding that health care is still the No .
1 issue in 2020 elections .
The budget would cut an estimated $ 920 billion from Medicaid over 10 years , by tightening restrictions and federal matching funds for states that expanded the program .
And the budget would cut money from other Obamacare-related programs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration continues its efforts to strike down the Affordable Care Act in the courts .
And the last DCCC Chairman ― Ben Ray Lujan ( D-N.M. ) , who oversaw the dramatic Democratic gains in 2018 ― had a similar message : “ Every one of my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle should be abundantly clear when they ’ re going home to visit with their constituents how devastating President Donald Trump ’ s priorities and budget are to their families.
” Lujan said the budget was an opportunity to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are .
“ Think about the success that we had as Democrats in 2018 , earning back the trust of voters where it had been lost , ” he said , specifically mentioning the “ kitchen table issues ” like health care .
“ Voters know where [ candidates ] stand on impeachment , ” this strategist said .
“ Those numbers have been static for months .
This election is going to be about health care , so if you ’ re a Democrat in a swing district and you use your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them where you stand on impeachment , you ’ re wasting the opportunity to connect with them on the issue that ’ s driving their vote.
” Vulnerable Republicans do seem to sense how damaging Trump ’ s budget could be for their party .
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick ( R-Pa. ) , who represents a new district that is about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans , had no problem criticizing the Trump budget .
“ I ’ m opposed to it .
Completely opposed to it , ” he said .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would weigh him down too much , because he can answer for himself .
He did think , however , that the proposal is still an election issue , particularly for nonprofit organizations in districts that could be affected by the blueprint .
There was no real benefit to releasing a budget like this , other than delighting fiscal hawks at GOP think tanks — a fact that makes the proposal seem like an unforced error by the Trump administration .
The ideas laid out in this document aren ’ t going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s budget request ” and “ dead on arrival ” are mentioned together so much that it ’ s almost a joke at this point , and legislators don ’ t seem to have any interest in putting together a new budget this year .
Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) is so fond of saying “ Show me your budget , show me your values ” that other Democrats have picked up on the adage .
And even if lawmakers know this budget is going nowhere and won ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the budget process seem to be lost on many voters .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― For the 31 House Democrats representing districts that President Donald Trump won in 2016, issues like impeachment and his latest unhinged tweet probably aren’t making it into the campaign stump speech.
But there’s one less-discussed topic that these Democrats think could be a massive political liability for Trump and Republicans: The president’s latest budget request.
Advertisement
Less than a week after he stood in the House chamber and said in his State of the Union address that he wouldn’t cut Medicare or Social Security, the president offered a budget blueprint Monday that would do both.
Specifically, Trump’s budget proposed a small trim to Social Security ― an estimated $30 billion over 10 years, by cutting assistance to some people with disabilities who get money through Social Security Disability Insurance ― and a more substantial cut to Medicare: about $500 billion over the next decade, mostly through reductions to reimbursements to doctors and hospitals.
Those are both relatively modest cuts. The administration argues the SSDI cut isn’t really a “Social Security” reduction: White House budget documents omit the disability program’s name, describing SSDI as a “federal disability program.” And the Medicare cut would be imperceptible to many older Americans because doctors and hospitals might bear the brunt of it.
But these are cuts nonetheless. And even in a highly partisan era in which news stories come and go in a matter of hours, vulnerable Democrats think Trump’s budget could have real staying power in the campaign.
Advertisement
“In a district like mine, Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are important and no one wants to lose their health insurance,” Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-N.Y.), who won his district in 2018 despite Trump winning it in 2016 by 15 points, told HuffPost Tuesday.
Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Pa.), who won a special election in early 2018 in a district Trump carried by 20 points, told HuffPost that the budget offered “a really clear example of a place where he promised one thing in 2016, and he has in fact done the exact opposite.”
Lamb, who now sits in a safer seat thanks to redistricting but remains wary of trashing Trump, cited a tweet where the president promised not to cut Medicare or Medicaid. “And he has tried to cut those things every single year, and it’s the Democrats in Congress who stop him,” Lamb said.
Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), who also defeated an incumbent Republican in 2018, said she would talk about the budget as a way to underscore why the work Democrats do is important. “This is life and death for the American people,” Underwood said, adding that health care is still the No. 1 issue in 2020 elections.
That was a refrain HuffPost heard from many Democrats and strategists, underscoring how large of a gift Trump’s budget proposal is.
Advertisement
On top of breaking his promises on Medicare and Social Security, Trump’s proposal goes hard after Medicaid, the health care program designed to help low-income families and children.
The budget would cut an estimated $920 billion from Medicaid over 10 years, by tightening restrictions and federal matching funds for states that expanded the program. And the budget would cut money from other Obamacare-related programs as well, all while the Trump administration continues its efforts to strike down the Affordable Care Act in the courts.
Those issues ― not impeachment or tweets or the president’s general unfitness for office ― seem to be the things Democrats want to target in 2020, particularly in the areas where Trump won in 2016.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairwoman Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.) told HuffPost on Tuesday that “health care is the ballgame.”
“We’ll keep talking about health care, health care, health care,” she said, while mentioning that the budget proposal is “terrible for people who just want to try and improve their lives.”
Advertisement
And the last DCCC Chairman ― Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), who oversaw the dramatic Democratic gains in 2018 ― had a similar message: “Every one of my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle should be abundantly clear when they’re going home to visit with their constituents how devastating President Donald Trump’s priorities and budget are to their families.”
Lujan said the budget was an opportunity to contrast who Trump is with who Democrats are. “Think about the success that we had as Democrats in 2018, earning back the trust of voters where it had been lost,” he said, specifically mentioning the “kitchen table issues” like health care.
A Democratic campaign strategist was a little more blunt about how this document could hurt Republicans in tough districts.
“Trump’s budget triples down on Republicans’ constant attacks on health care and puts every Republican in a god-awful spot. You think Rodney Davis, Scott Perry, or Don Bacon wants to answer for this shit?” the strategist said, mentioning three vulnerable incumbent Republicans.
“Voters know where [candidates] stand on impeachment,” this strategist said. “Those numbers have been static for months. This election is going to be about health care, so if you’re a Democrat in a swing district and you use your one minute with a voter to tell them where you stand on impeachment, you’re wasting the opportunity to connect with them on the issue that’s driving their vote.”
Advertisement
Vulnerable Republicans do seem to sense how damaging Trump’s budget could be for their party. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), who represents a new district that is about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, had no problem criticizing the Trump budget. “I’m opposed to it. Completely opposed to it,” he said.
But Fitzpatrick didn’t think that it would weigh him down too much, because he can answer for himself. He did think, however, that the proposal is still an election issue, particularly for nonprofit organizations in districts that could be affected by the blueprint.
There was no real benefit to releasing a budget like this, other than delighting fiscal hawks at GOP think tanks — a fact that makes the proposal seem like an unforced error by the Trump administration. The ideas laid out in this document aren’t going to become law. The words “president’s budget request” and “dead on arrival” are mentioned together so much that it’s almost a joke at this point, and legislators don’t seem to have any interest in putting together a new budget this year.
Because Congress has already reached a two-year budget deal that goes through fiscal year 2021, Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) told HuffPost this week that putting together a new budget this year would be a “waste of time.”
Trump’s proposal is, then, a statement of values, as Democrats say.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is so fond of saying “Show me your budget, show me your values” that other Democrats have picked up on the adage. And even if lawmakers know this budget is going nowhere and won’t be enacted into law, the subtleties of the budget process seem to be lost on many voters.
Advertisement
So when Democrats talk about the president’s budget, they believe that the only thing really stopping him is a Democratic majority in the House.
As Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-N.J.), another Democrat who beat an incumbent Republican in 2018, told HuffPost this week, the budget is “an indication” of what Trump “would do if he had a compliant House of Representatives, and therefore an argument we should not give him a compliant House of Representatives.”
And Malinowski, while acknowledging that a lot of this could be “in the weeds” for voters, suggested there are ways to campaign on the topic that make it more understandable.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Ilhan Omar Pitches A New ‘Progressive Baseline’ For U.S. Foreign Policy

Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) introduced a broad package of bills Wednesday that would amount to an overhaul of America ’ s approach to global affairs .
It ’ s a bold move for the already high-profile first-term representative — and one that gives her a bigger role in the national debate about reforming U.S. foreign policy and challenges the popular caricature of her as an ideologue defined by a fixation on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict .
The suite of proposals would initiate tighter scrutiny of U.S. support to countries that commit abuses and transfer $ 5 billion in wartime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They would also give Congress new responsibility for approving and assessing economic sanctions that come via emergency declarations from the White House — bringing new accountability to a tool many experts feel presidents have overused .
Successive presidents have treated sanctions as an ideal alternative to military intervention , even though they often lead to severe humanitarian crises .
The proposals would also require the U.S. to join United Nations agreements on children ’ s rights and migration , as well as the International Criminal Court , which could mean unprecedented consequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And arguably the most ambitious measure would direct U.S. officials to craft a bigger international deal to address the massive displacement of people around the world .
Working on Capitol Hill has allowed Omar to see “ the intentions ” behind traditional U.S. foreign policy .
“ I know that it is deeply rooted in justice , in wanting to advance peace and in fighting for a more democratic and open society , but I also uniquely know and see and hear and have experienced how the outside world reacts to our foreign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Somali American refugee and one of the first two Muslim women in Congress .
Her approach champions both an idealistic vision of what America can achieve and the importance of multilateralism , breaking with the historic bipartisan commitment to America ’ s exceptional status and right to act as it pleases on the world stage .
She takes as an unquestioned foundation that U.S. military intervention is a last resort ill-suited to tackle most global problems .
Omar said she is informed by the fact that Washington ’ s choices in recent decades @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gets to see is policies that are deprived of our values and of our principles , and so we don ’ t get the reaction or the outcome that we ’ ve hoped for.
” “ Whatever Ilhan Omar does is going to be caricatured by the right wing .
Frankly , whatever Democrats do , even a centrist Democrat is going to be caricatured by the right wing .
I think the best way to answer that is to be substantive , ” said Ben Rhodes , a top national security aide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Omar about her thinking on sanctions and migration .
“ I know that the fight for a just world isn ’ t one that is about being progressive , about being a liberal , about being a moderate or being a conservative ― it ’ s about really being an American that is concerned about what our priorities should be and what it will take for us to continue to have an infusion of our values and principles in the policies we export , ” she said .
Different elements of her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new program for economic opportunity for youth worldwide could appeal to traditional Republicans , while her requirements for congressional limits on U.S. military aid and approval of the president ’ s proposed sanctions , as well as reports on their costs and benefits , and for limiting U.S. military aid may attract antiwar conservatives keen to curb the executive branch ’ s ability to risk conflict .
The coalition of outside groups backing Omar ’ s effort includes the Quincy Institute , a think tank linked to the right-wing Koch family network and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the libertarian Cato Institute .
It ’ s the latest move by a network of activists who are pushing to make America less hawkish and have helped reshape political discussions and promote unprecedented congressional action on issues like U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen .
They see Omar ’ s contribution as setting valuable goalposts .
“ Too often , U.S. policymakers are quick to place sanctions on regimes we disagree with , without considering the likelihood of success or the humanitarian consequences , ” she wrote in The Washington Post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek other means to deter Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan from attacking U.S.-aligned Kurds in Syria .
Omar has been clear about the failings of other governments , from Erdogan ’ s support for vicious militants to Iran ’ s crackdown on protesters , while saying the U.S. should design its response by learning from its own often-shameful history : She pressed Trump ’ s Venezuela envoy on his role in U.S. missteps in Latin America and helped lead congressional efforts to stop a confrontation with Tehran .
She has sought to downgrade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequently criticizing Saudi Arabia and calling for targeted sanctions on officials from Brunei over their repressive new penal code ― establishing a record on the Muslim-majority world that jibes with liberal values and experts ’ warnings that autocracy risks long-term chaos and defies conspiracy theorists ’ claim that she is more loyal to global Islam than the U.S. And she ’ s been vocal about her identity , saying it ’ s only right that she and others hold America accountable for its promises to immigrants and the broader world .
Omar ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cure-all .
Though it allows for some limits on sanctions and establishes bigger humanitarian exceptions to them , the way most sanctions are rolled out means Congress still wouldn ’ t have much power to challenge particular targets .
Its commitment to handling migration is to the U.N. ’ s broad set of ideas rather than specific policies .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) introduced a broad package of bills Wednesday that would amount to an overhaul of America’s approach to global affairs. It’s a bold move for the already high-profile first-term representative — and one that gives her a bigger role in the national debate about reforming U.S. foreign policy and challenges the popular caricature of her as an ideologue defined by a fixation on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Designed as a statement of principles, the legislation seeks to push candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, more moderate members of her caucus and Republicans to commit to a foreign policy that centers on global human rights standards and international cooperation.
Advertisement
The suite of proposals would initiate tighter scrutiny of U.S. support to countries that commit abuses and transfer $5 billion in wartime funding to a new Global Peacebuilding Fund. They would also give Congress new responsibility for approving and assessing economic sanctions that come via emergency declarations from the White House — bringing new accountability to a tool many experts feel presidents have overused. Successive presidents have treated sanctions as an ideal alternative to military intervention, even though they often lead to severe humanitarian crises.
The proposals would also require the U.S. to join United Nations agreements on children’s rights and migration, as well as the International Criminal Court, which could mean unprecedented consequences for Americans linked to war crimes. And arguably the most ambitious measure would direct U.S. officials to craft a bigger international deal to address the massive displacement of people around the world.
Omar shared an advance copy of her proposal, which she calls a “Pathway to Peace,” exclusively with HuffPost and discussed it in a Tuesday interview.
Working on Capitol Hill has allowed Omar to see “the intentions” behind traditional U.S. foreign policy. “I know that it is deeply rooted in justice, in wanting to advance peace and in fighting for a more democratic and open society, but I also uniquely know and see and hear and have experienced how the outside world reacts to our foreign policy,” said Omar, a Somali American refugee and one of the first two Muslim women in Congress.
Advertisement
Her approach champions both an idealistic vision of what America can achieve and the importance of multilateralism, breaking with the historic bipartisan commitment to America’s exceptional status and right to act as it pleases on the world stage. She takes as an unquestioned foundation that U.S. military intervention is a last resort ill-suited to tackle most global problems.
Omar said she is informed by the fact that Washington’s choices in recent decades have meant that “what the world gets to see is policies that are deprived of our values and of our principles, and so we don’t get the reaction or the outcome that we’ve hoped for.”
Omar and her defenders have maintained in the face of hateful attacks and assumptions over the past year that she’s a serious thinker focused on making an impact — and her Wednesday launch bolsters their case.
“You can’t have peace if you don’t figure out how to not be seen as an agitator towards the people you are negotiating peace with.” - Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)
“Whatever Ilhan Omar does is going to be caricatured by the right wing. Frankly, whatever Democrats do, even a centrist Democrat is going to be caricatured by the right wing. I think the best way to answer that is to be substantive,” said Ben Rhodes, a top national security aide to former President Barack Obama who spoke with Omar about her thinking on sanctions and migration.
Advertisement
Omar hopes her proposals can guide fellow lawmakers and attract bipartisan support.
“I know that the fight for a just world isn’t one that is about being progressive, about being a liberal, about being a moderate or being a conservative ― it’s about really being an American that is concerned about what our priorities should be and what it will take for us to continue to have an infusion of our values and principles in the policies we export,” she said.
Different elements of her pitch might attract different allies. Her new program for economic opportunity for youth worldwide could appeal to traditional Republicans, while her requirements for congressional limits on U.S. military aid and approval of the president’s proposed sanctions, as well as reports on their costs and benefits, and for limiting U.S. military aid may attract antiwar conservatives keen to curb the executive branch’s ability to risk conflict.
The coalition of outside groups backing Omar’s effort includes the Quincy Institute, a think tank linked to the right-wing Koch family network and committed to foreign policy restraint, and the libertarian Cato Institute. It’s the latest move by a network of activists who are pushing to make America less hawkish and have helped reshape political discussions and promote unprecedented congressional action on issues like U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen. They see Omar’s contribution as setting valuable goalposts.
“These are really good markers of what we would potentially want to see from a progressive White House,” said Kate Kizer, policy director at Win Without War, a left-leaning national security advocacy group.
The foreign policy project is a culmination of Omar’s rhetoric and work since she entered Congress and took a seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Advertisement
“Too often, U.S. policymakers are quick to place sanctions on regimes we disagree with, without considering the likelihood of success or the humanitarian consequences,” she wrote in The Washington Post last year, warning that Washington should seek other means to deter Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan from attacking U.S.-aligned Kurds in Syria.
Omar has been clear about the failings of other governments, from Erdogan’s support for vicious militants to Iran’s crackdown on protesters, while saying the U.S. should design its response by learning from its own often-shameful history: She pressed Trump’s Venezuela envoy on his role in U.S. missteps in Latin America and helped lead congressional efforts to stop a confrontation with Tehran.
She has sought to downgrade U.S. ties to human rights abusers, frequently criticizing Saudi Arabia and calling for targeted sanctions on officials from Brunei over their repressive new penal code ― establishing a record on the Muslim-majority world that jibes with liberal values and experts’ warnings that autocracy risks long-term chaos and defies conspiracy theorists’ claim that she is more loyal to global Islam than the U.S. And she’s been vocal about her identity, saying it’s only right that she and others hold America accountable for its promises to immigrants and the broader world.
She’s now hoping her suggestions can help a future commander in chief build a more stable world. “You can’t have peace if you don’t figure out how to not be seen as an agitator towards the people you are negotiating peace with,” Omar told HuffPost.
Omar’s plan isn’t a liberal cure-all. Though it allows for some limits on sanctions and establishes bigger humanitarian exceptions to them, the way most sanctions are rolled out means Congress still wouldn’t have much power to challenge particular targets. Its commitment to handling migration is to the U.N.’s broad set of ideas rather than specific policies.
Advertisement
But change has to start somewhere.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Politico's Bernie Sanders Portrait Looks Just Like Chevy Chase, People Say

Bernie Sanders won the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire Tuesday ― or did he ?
A Politico portrait declaring the Vermont senator the victor looked an awful lot like Chevy Chase , according to Twitter users .
Breaking : Bernie Sanders has won the New Hampshire primary , scoring a big shot of momentum in the Democratic presidential race after last week ’ s messy Iowa results https : //t.co/5TxlaCfXaS # NHprimary2020 pic.twitter.com/IX3wDnpAK5 — POLITICO ( @ politico ) February 12 , 2020 Chase , the former “ Community ” star and “ Saturday Night Live ” trouper , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social media feared he had died .
Fortunately Chase , 76 , was alive and apparently triumphing in an election that he had no part in .
They absolutely put a picture of Chevy Chase next to Bernie 's name in the NH results .
Somebody is having a laugh .
pic.twitter.com/fZAYxLLn5p — Ol ' ( @ inevitablybored ) February 12 , 2020 '' Due to a technical glitch , Chevy Chase has won the primary in New Hampshire , and Bernie Sanders has won in Chevy Chase , Maryland .
Please stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FightIdiocracy ) February 12 , 2020 Oh no  @ politico .
You ’ re so blissfully unself-aware .
And you made Chevy Chase trend like he died .
pic.twitter.com/M9UbD9BRPP — Steve Berman ( @ stevengberman ) February 12 , 2020

By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Bloomberg Says He ‘Inherited’ Stop And Frisk. NYC Activists Recall A Different Story.

NEW YORK — New York City activists and academics expressed outrage Tuesday after Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg issued a deceptive statement claiming to have “ inherited ” the racially discriminatory police practice of “ stop and frisk ” during his time as mayor , and to have cut back police stops by “ 95 % .
” Jeffrey Fagan , a criminologist at Columbia University who published an in-depth study of stop and frisk , noted that while Bloomberg claimed to have “ inherited ” the police practice , stops actually “ ballooned ” during his time as mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearly 700,000 in 2011 .
“ It is true that the very end of his administration that stops went way down , but that undoubtedly was a product of all the advocacy and litigation that was taking place , ” Dunn said .
“ He does not get credit for that , and it ’ s notable that he did not try to take credit for it at the time.
” “ People say , ‘ Oh , my God , you are arresting kids for marijuana who are all minorities , ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a 2015 Q & A at The Aspen Institute .
“ Yes , that ’ s true .
Why ?
Because we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods .
Yes , that ’ s true .
Why ’ d we do it ?
Because that ’ s where all the crime is .
And the way you should get the guns out of the kids ’ hands is throw them against the wall and frisk them.
” “ I inherited the police practice of stop-and-frisk , and as part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was overused , ” Bloomberg said in his statement Tuesday .
“ By the time I left office , I cut it back by 95 % , but I should ’ ve done it faster and sooner .
I regret that and I have apologized — and I have taken responsibility for taking too long to understand the impact it had on Black and Latino communities.
” Donna Lieberman , executive director at the NYCLU , speculated to HuffPost that the Bloomberg campaign selectively sliced and diced stop-and-frisk data to its own advantage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at their peak during his mayorship ( about 204,000 stops in the first quarter of 2012 ) to the number of stops at their lowest ( 12,500 stops in the fourth quarter of 2013 ) .
Fagan added that Bloomberg only “ brought down the number of stops due to pressures from the federal district court in a series of court orders beginning in May 2012 and continuing through August 2013 , ” when a federal judge ruled that the city ’ s use of stop and frisk was unconstitutional and amounted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the court ’ s decision at the time , referring to the judge as “ some woman ” who knew “ absolutely zero ” about policing .
He filed an appeal , and worked to eventually get the judge removed from the case altogether .
“ The nation is just now starting to learn what Black , Latinx and other New Yorkers know intimately ― Bloomberg ’ s legacy in NYC was 12 years of racist policing and criminalizing poverty , ” Aguilera , from the Communities United for Police Reform Action Fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s stop-and-frisk program under Bloomberg was the nation ’ s largest racial profiling program at the time.
” “ Bloomberg ’ s mayoralty should be understood as a consistent thread of structural racism , ” Aguilera said , “ including his defense of the NYPD ’ s mass unwarranted religious profiling of Muslim New Yorkers of color ; his refusal to settle the Central Park 5 case ; and his support of failed and dangerous broken windows policing which included stop-and-frisk , racially biased marijuana arrests , and targeting of homeless and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apologized for his stop-and-frisk regimen in November , one week before he announced his bid for president .
He has since spent over $ 300 million of his own money on his campaign , buying himself a surge in recent Democratic presidential primary polls .
He ’ ll appear on the ballot for the first time this election cycle on Super Tuesday in March .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK — New York City activists and academics expressed outrage Tuesday after Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg issued a deceptive statement claiming to have “inherited” the racially discriminatory police practice of “stop and frisk” during his time as mayor, and to have cut back police stops by “95%.”
Jeffrey Fagan, a criminologist at Columbia University who published an in-depth study of stop and frisk, noted that while Bloomberg claimed to have “inherited” the police practice, stops actually “ballooned” during his time as mayor, from 92,000 stops in 2002 to nearly 700,000 in 2011.
Advertisement
“So, he took a policy in place and vastly and enthusiastically expanded it during his regime,” Fagan wrote in a tweet.
Alyssa Aguilera, spokesperson for the Communities United for Police Reform Action Fund, told HuffPost in a statement that “contrary to Bloomberg’s claims that he ‘cut back’ stop-and-frisk,” it was actually local activists who “forced the historic reduction in abusive stops.”
And Christopher Dunn, a lawyer at the New York Civil Liberties Union, shared that analysis, telling Gothamist that Bloomberg’s statement was “completely misleading.”
“It is true that the very end of his administration that stops went way down, but that undoubtedly was a product of all the advocacy and litigation that was taking place,” Dunn said. “He does not get credit for that, and it’s notable that he did not try to take credit for it at the time.”
Advertisement
Bloomberg, a Republican-turned-Democratic billionaire who recently launched a largely self-funded White House run, has struggled to distance himself from a series of aggressive and discriminatory policing policies he oversaw as a three-term mayor of New York City.
His misleading statement Tuesday came in response to outrage over a recently resurfaced audio clip in which he can be heard defending his stop-and-frisk regimen in stark, racist terms.
“People say, ‘Oh, my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana who are all minorities,’” Bloomberg says in the audio recording from a 2015 Q&A at The Aspen Institute. “Yes, that’s true. Why? Because we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods. Yes, that’s true. Why’d we do it? Because that’s where all the crime is. And the way you should get the guns out of the kids’ hands is throw them against the wall and frisk them.”
Prominent figures on the left and right of the political spectrum criticized Bloomberg over the comments. Even President Donald Trump, a stop-and-frisk supporter himself, tweeted: “WOW, BLOOMBERG IS A TOTAL RACIST!” (The president later deleted the tweet.)
“I inherited the police practice of stop-and-frisk, and as part of our effort to stop gun violence it was overused,” Bloomberg said in his statement Tuesday. “By the time I left office, I cut it back by 95%, but I should’ve done it faster and sooner. I regret that and I have apologized — and I have taken responsibility for taking too long to understand the impact it had on Black and Latino communities.”
Advertisement
In a series of emails with HuffPost, a Bloomberg campaign spokesperson did not specify precisely the exact time frame it used to calculate this alleged “95%” drop.
Donna Lieberman, executive director at the NYCLU, speculated to HuffPost that the Bloomberg campaign selectively sliced and diced stop-and-frisk data to its own advantage, comparing the number of police stops at their peak during his mayorship (about 204,000 stops in the first quarter of 2012) to the number of stops at their lowest (12,500 stops in the fourth quarter of 2013).
But experts and activists say this narrow reading of the data obscures larger trends.
“His ’95% decline’ figure is nonsense,” wrote Fagan, the Columbia University criminologist. “Stops declined by 72% from the 2011 peak to 2013, his last year. Stops increased overall 98% from 2002-2013.”
Fagan added that Bloomberg only “brought down the number of stops due to pressures from the federal district court in a series of court orders beginning in May 2012 and continuing through August 2013,” when a federal judge ruled that the city’s use of stop and frisk was unconstitutional and amounted to racial profiling.
Bloomberg was furious over the court’s decision at the time, referring to the judge as “some woman” who knew “absolutely zero” about policing. He filed an appeal, and worked to eventually get the judge removed from the case altogether.
Advertisement
In a sharp rebuke to Bloomberg, New York City voters elected Democrat Bill de Blasio as his successor in 2013. De Blasio had campaigned on police reform and decreasing the use of stop and frisk.
“The nation is just now starting to learn what Black, Latinx and other New Yorkers know intimately ― Bloomberg’s legacy in NYC was 12 years of racist policing and criminalizing poverty,” Aguilera, from the Communities United for Police Reform Action Fund, told HuffPost. “The NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program under Bloomberg was the nation’s largest racial profiling program at the time.”
Of the nearly 700,000 police stops the NYPD conducted in 2011, 87% were Black and Latino New Yorkers. Of those stopped, nearly 90% were innocent of any crime.
“Bloomberg’s mayoralty should be understood as a consistent thread of structural racism,” Aguilera said, “including his defense of the NYPD’s mass unwarranted religious profiling of Muslim New Yorkers of color; his refusal to settle the Central Park 5 case; and his support of failed and dangerous broken windows policing which included stop-and-frisk, racially biased marijuana arrests, and targeting of homeless and other low-income New Yorkers.”
Bloomberg only apologized for his stop-and-frisk regimen in November, one week before he announced his bid for president. He has since spent over $300 million of his own money on his campaign, buying himself a surge in recent Democratic presidential primary polls. He’ll appear on the ballot for the first time this election cycle on Super Tuesday in March.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Sarah Sanders Says Without Irony That Michael Bloomberg's Language Is 'Offensive'

Cue Alanis Morissette because Sarah Huckabee Sanders just said something that is truly “ Ironic.
” The former White House press secretary appeared on Fox News Tuesday night to suggest Michael Bloomberg will face serious problems as he pursues his Democratic presidential candidacy .
“ If he continues to rise , he is going to have serious problems with women , with African-Americans , ” she said .
“ His record , his language is offensive and atrocious.
” Sanders is correct that Bloomberg faces an uphill battle with both voting groups : his support of the stop-and-frisk policing policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters , and he has admitted making disrespectful comments toward women .
But Sanders made her point without a hint of self-awareness ― and without so much as a nod to the problems her former boss has had among both groups of voters , as well as his long history of using coarse , insulting language .
A Washington Post/Ipsos poll last month showed that 80 % of Black Americans consider President Donald Trump to be a racist .
And women , polls have shown over and over again , are far less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump also has been accused of sexual assault multiple times , and has used terms like “ horseface , ” “ lowlife , ” and “ ugly ” to attack women , according to The New York Times .
Then there ’ s that demeaning “ Access Hollywood ” tape in which Trump bragged that he could grab women “ by the pussy ” because of his celebrityhood .
To be fair , Sanders isn ’ t the only former Trump employee who insists on gaslighting Fox News viewers .
On Wednesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the network and claimed with a straight face that the president would never insult a female by calling one a “ lying dog-face pony soldier , ” as former Vice President Joe Biden did while campaigning in New Hampshire recently ( he meant it in jest ) .
“ Can you imagine for one second Donald Trump said that ?
Every media outlet in the country would be saying he hates women… But hey , it ’ s Uncle Joe , it ’ s to be expected , ” Lewandowski said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ forgot that Trump called former Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina a “ horseface ” in 2015 and also used that term for porn actress Stormy Daniels in 2018 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Cue Alanis Morissette because Sarah Huckabee Sanders just said something that is truly “Ironic.”
The former White House press secretary appeared on Fox News Tuesday night to suggest Michael Bloomberg will face serious problems as he pursues his Democratic presidential candidacy.
“If he continues to rise, he is going to have serious problems with women, with African-Americans,” she said. “His record, his language is offensive and atrocious.”
Advertisement
Sarah Sanders says Bloomberg will have serious problems with Women and African Americans. She also says his language is offensive and atrocious pic.twitter.com/bbokyBmjpI — Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) February 12, 2020
Sanders is correct that Bloomberg faces an uphill battle with both voting groups: his support of the stop-and-frisk policing policy could be a sticking point with Black voters, and he has admitted making disrespectful comments toward women.
But Sanders made her point without a hint of self-awareness ― and without so much as a nod to the problems her former boss has had among both groups of voters, as well as his long history of using coarse, insulting language.
Advertisement
Trump also has been accused of sexual assault multiple times, and has used terms like “horseface,” “lowlife,” and “ugly” to attack women, according to The New York Times. Then there’s that demeaning “Access Hollywood” tape in which Trump bragged that he could grab women “by the pussy” because of his celebrityhood.
To be fair, Sanders isn’t the only former Trump employee who insists on gaslighting Fox News viewers.
On Wednesday, former Trump campaign adviser Corey Lewandowski appeared on the network and claimed with a straight face that the president would never insult a female by calling one a “lying dog-face pony soldier,” as former Vice President Joe Biden did while campaigning in New Hampshire recently (he meant it in jest).
“Can you imagine for one second Donald Trump said that? Every media outlet in the country would be saying he hates women… But hey, it’s Uncle Joe, it’s to be expected,” Lewandowski said.
The Mediaite site noted that Lewandowski apparently forgot that Trump called former Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina a “horseface” in 2015 and also used that term for porn actress Stormy Daniels in 2018.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Why A Powerful Nevada Union Is Undermining Bernie Sanders On Medicare For All

On paper , the Culinary Workers Union and Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) look like a perfect match .
The powerful Las Vegas-based local of Unite Here represents service workers throughout the city , making it one of the few places in the U.S. where housekeepers , busboys and cocktail waitresses can lead middle-class lives .
Sanders is arguably the most pro-labor presidential candidate to wage a viable campaign in generations .
The way the Culinary ’ s organizing muscle has lifted up the Strip ’ s most vulnerable workers could make for an entire Sanders stump speech .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem a little scary .
According to the Nevada Independent , the union recently posted flyers inside employee areas of casinos and hotels warning that Sanders would end the Culinary ’ s health care program if elected , through his Medicare for All proposal .
The message could potentially damage the front-runner in the upcoming Nevada caucuses on Feb. 22 , since the union has tremendous reach through its 60,000 members and their families .
It might seem odd to undermine the candidate who ’ s been walking picket lines for decades and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before anyone else , but the Culinary ’ s warning to members on Medicare for All isn ’ t surprising .
The union , which is made up mostly of women and Latino members , has built up a health care program that ’ s the envy not only of low-wage service workers but even well-paid professionals with run-of-the-mill employer coverage .
It doesn ’ t want a single-payer plan like the one Sanders proposes to end the private insurance plan it has built through years of organizing , bargaining and striking .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for wanting to keep the current system ― it is , after all , one of the sweetest benefits Culinary membership can offer .
( Nevada is a right-to-work state , so unions there must constantly prove their value if the workers they represent are to choose to pay dues . )
But plenty of rank-and-file members would share the same concern .
When HuffPost was reporting on the Culinary for a 2018 profile of the union ’ s success , many workers pointed to their excellent health benefits as a point of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see why .
The Culinary Health Fund is a multi-employer , nonprofit plan that all the employers under the union ’ s contracts chip into .
The fund bills itself as the most generous in Southern Nevada .
It provides mental , dental and prescription drug coverage to 139,000 workers and their relatives .
The family coverage comes with no monthly premium for workers , unlike most people with plans through their employers .
( Sanders ’ Medicare for All plan , it ’ s worth noting , would come with no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A few years ago , the fund even built its own standalone health clinic for members , offering adult , pediatric and urgent care onsite .
The fund also runs two pharmacies .
The Culinary is arguably the most powerful union local in the country , having organized all but a handful of casinos and hotels on the Strip , and it offers top-notch health care because that ’ s where it ’ s chosen to put so much of its leverage .
In contract negotiations , wages and health care represent different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employers willing to raise their total labor costs only so much .
Culinary members have forgone pay increases in order to create and maintain their prize health plan .
To many labor activists , that itself is an argument for Medicare for All .
If members had health care through single payer , they could pour all their resources into winning better pay and other benefits .
What union wouldn ’ t love to take a messy and expensive issue like health care off the bargaining table for good ?
But from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All could scrap a health plan their members like and replace it with something untested , with no refund on the capital they spent in the past to build it up .
Sanders himself has acknowledged the misgivings some unions might have with his health plan , and proposed a wrinkle after taking heat on the trail .
The language he added over the summer would allow unions to renegotiate contracts with employers so that any savings from Medicare for All would be pumped into wage and pension increases .
His centrist opponents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watering down his plan .
Unions are rarely in lockstep on any complicated issue , and Medicare for All is no different .
While the Culinary might oppose single payer , other unions and labor leaders have come out in support of it .
Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers has said she would much rather bargain over class sizes than health care .
Sara Nelson of the Association of Flight Attendants has been an outspoken backer of single payer , as has National Nurses United , an ally of Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wage and other economic increases to achieve employer paid health care for them and their families ― now every contract cycle is a fight to maintain it , ” said Sal Rosselli , president of the National Union of Healthcare Workers , which has endorsed Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass. )
.
“ Medicare for All would take health care off the bargaining table so improvements could be made to pensions , wages , training , child/elder care and other economic issues.
” Even the Culinary membership itself is almost certainly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some tough questions on Medicare for All and some heckling when he spoke before union members in Las Vegas in December .
But the Las Vegas Review Journal reported that he otherwise enjoyed an “ enthusiastic reception , ” with the crowd “ firmly behind Sanders ” and chanting “ Bernie !
Bernie !
” at times .
The Culinary has not formally endorsed a presidential candidate yet , if it chooses to at all .
The union is something of a kingmaker in Nevada politics , with a canvassing and phone-banking operation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prides itself on being a ground-up union made up of leaders on the shop floor .
How much damage the union ’ s stance on Medicare for All inflicts on Sanders in Nevada may come down to whether members are really afraid of his plan .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
On paper, the Culinary Workers Union and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) look like a perfect match. The powerful Las Vegas-based local of Unite Here represents service workers throughout the city, making it one of the few places in the U.S. where housekeepers, busboys and cocktail waitresses can lead middle-class lives. Sanders is arguably the most pro-labor presidential candidate to wage a viable campaign in generations. The way the Culinary’s organizing muscle has lifted up the Strip’s most vulnerable workers could make for an entire Sanders stump speech.
But the Culinary has been making Sanders seem a little scary. According to the Nevada Independent, the union recently posted flyers inside employee areas of casinos and hotels warning that Sanders would end the Culinary’s health care program if elected, through his Medicare for All proposal. The message could potentially damage the front-runner in the upcoming Nevada caucuses on Feb. 22, since the union has tremendous reach through its 60,000 members and their families.
Advertisement
It might seem odd to undermine the candidate who’s been walking picket lines for decades and stumped for a $15 minimum wage before anyone else, but the Culinary’s warning to members on Medicare for All isn’t surprising. The union, which is made up mostly of women and Latino members, has built up a health care program that’s the envy not only of low-wage service workers but even well-paid professionals with run-of-the-mill employer coverage. It doesn’t want a single-payer plan like the one Sanders proposes to end the private insurance plan it has built through years of organizing, bargaining and striking.
Union officials would have their own reasons for wanting to keep the current system ― it is, after all, one of the sweetest benefits Culinary membership can offer. (Nevada is a right-to-work state, so unions there must constantly prove their value if the workers they represent are to choose to pay dues.) But plenty of rank-and-file members would share the same concern. When HuffPost was reporting on the Culinary for a 2018 profile of the union’s success, many workers pointed to their excellent health benefits as a point of pride.
Since the whole political world will now be watching whether @Culinary226 endorses someone in Nevada, which would be a genuine earthquake, here’s the candidate policy explainer they’ve sent to members: pic.twitter.com/X3Cgvr3YAX — Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) February 12, 2020
A housekeeper at the Paris resort said that maintaining the current health care coverage was her top priority as the union headed into a new round of negotiations with the casinos. A cocktail server remarked: “My main thing through all this is my health insurance.”
Advertisement
It’s not hard to see why. The Culinary Health Fund is a multi-employer, nonprofit plan that all the employers under the union’s contracts chip into. The fund bills itself as the most generous in Southern Nevada. It provides mental, dental and prescription drug coverage to 139,000 workers and their relatives. The family coverage comes with no monthly premium for workers, unlike most people with plans through their employers. (Sanders’ Medicare for All plan, it’s worth noting, would come with no co-pays or deductibles as proposed.) A few years ago, the fund even built its own standalone health clinic for members, offering adult, pediatric and urgent care onsite. The fund also runs two pharmacies.
The Culinary is arguably the most powerful union local in the country, having organized all but a handful of casinos and hotels on the Strip, and it offers top-notch health care because that’s where it’s chosen to put so much of its leverage. In contract negotiations, wages and health care represent different pockets of the same coat, with employers willing to raise their total labor costs only so much. Culinary members have forgone pay increases in order to create and maintain their prize health plan.
The Culinary Union headquarters in Las Vegas. The union is a powerhouse in Nevada politics. Bill Clark via Getty Images
To many labor activists, that itself is an argument for Medicare for All. If members had health care through single payer, they could pour all their resources into winning better pay and other benefits. What union wouldn’t love to take a messy and expensive issue like health care off the bargaining table for good? But from the Culinary’s perspective, Medicare for All could scrap a health plan their members like and replace it with something untested, with no refund on the capital they spent in the past to build it up.
Sanders himself has acknowledged the misgivings some unions might have with his health plan, and proposed a wrinkle after taking heat on the trail. The language he added over the summer would allow unions to renegotiate contracts with employers so that any savings from Medicare for All would be pumped into wage and pension increases. His centrist opponents pounced and accused him of backtracking and watering down his plan.
Advertisement
Unions are rarely in lockstep on any complicated issue, and Medicare for All is no different. While the Culinary might oppose single payer, other unions and labor leaders have come out in support of it. Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers has said she would much rather bargain over class sizes than health care. Sara Nelson of the Association of Flight Attendants has been an outspoken backer of single payer, as has National Nurses United, an ally of Sanders.
Political door hangers are stacked before a rally with union members at the Culinary Workers Union Hall Local 226 on November 5, 2018 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Ethan Miller via Getty Images
“Over the years members sacrificed wage and other economic increases to achieve employer paid health care for them and their families ― now every contract cycle is a fight to maintain it,” said Sal Rosselli, president of the National Union of Healthcare Workers, which has endorsed Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). “Medicare for All would take health care off the bargaining table so improvements could be made to pensions, wages, training, child/elder care and other economic issues.”
Even the Culinary membership itself is almost certainly divided on the issue. Sanders faced some tough questions on Medicare for All and some heckling when he spoke before union members in Las Vegas in December. But the Las Vegas Review Journal reported that he otherwise enjoyed an “enthusiastic reception,” with the crowd “firmly behind Sanders” and chanting “Bernie! Bernie!” at times.
The Culinary has not formally endorsed a presidential candidate yet, if it chooses to at all. The union is something of a kingmaker in Nevada politics, with a canvassing and phone-banking operation that can tip elections. It also prides itself on being a ground-up union made up of leaders on the shop floor. How much damage the union’s stance on Medicare for All inflicts on Sanders in Nevada may come down to whether members are really afraid of his plan.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Deval Patrick Exits 2020 Presidential Race

After his second term as governor ended in early 2015 , Patrick joined Bain Capital , a private equity firm co-founded by former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney ― another former Massachusetts governor who now serves as a U.S. senator from Utah .
Bain has recently faced criticism for its role in the dissolution of Toys ‘ R ’ Us , which has laid off over 30,000 workers since declaring bankruptcy in 2017 .
Patrick also faced scrutiny over his decision as governor to dismiss two top officials at the state ’ s sex offender registry board .
The ouster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officer ’ s decision that Patrick ’ s brother-in-law didn ’ t have to register as a sex offender despite a conviction for spousal rape .
Three years later , the brother-in-law , Bernard Sigh , was accused of rape a second time .
Once again , the victim was his wife , Patrick ’ s sister .
In June 2019 , Sigh was sentenced to six to eight years in prison for rape , kidnapping , stalking and witness intimidation .
Ahead of the New Hampshire primary , Patrick said a six-day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him that there were plenty of undecided voters who could boost his campaign .
And as he reached a wider audience with a CNN town hall on Feb. 6 , he acknowledged he had to “ beat expectations ” in New Hampshire .

After his second term as governor ended in early 2015, Patrick joined Bain Capital, a private equity firm co-founded by former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney ― another former Massachusetts governor who now serves as a U.S. senator from Utah. Bain has recently faced criticism for its role in the dissolution of Toys ‘R’ Us, which has laid off over 30,000 workers since declaring bankruptcy in 2017.
Patrick also faced scrutiny over his decision as governor to dismiss two top officials at the state’s sex offender registry board. The ouster occurred after the officials questioned a hearing officer’s decision that Patrick’s brother-in-law didn’t have to register as a sex offender despite a conviction for spousal rape.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Ex-Government Ethics Chief Issues War Cry Against ‘Catastrophe For Democracy’

Walter Shaub , the former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics , on Tuesday night issued an urgent rallying cry for people to “ take just one action to defend democracy by Saturday.
” Shaub launched the appeal after senior Department of Justice officials walked back prosecutors ’ sentencing recommendation in the case of longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone .
That followed following intense criticism of the proposed seven to nine years ’ imprisonment from the president himself .
The reversal sparked the resignation of the four federal prosecutors who ran the trial .
“ Today was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who served in the government role under former President Barack Obama and then resigned six months into Donald Trump ’ s presidency .
He has since become a vocal critic of the Trump administration .
“ Doesn ’ t matter if it ’ s time , cash , creativity , or whatever , ” Shaub added , inviting his 439,000 followers to suggest ideas to “ defend democracy ” in reply .
🚨Today was a catastrophe for democracy .
Who will commit to take just one action to defend democracy by Saturday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time , cash , creativity , or whatever .
But will you do ONE concrete thing ?
( Feel free to post ideas in the comments below . )
— Walter Shaub ( @ waltshaub ) February 12 , 2020 Shaub further explained the reason for his call after someone expressed doubt about how small acts could actually make a difference : I hear your frustration .
I feel it too .
But democracy is saved one person at a time , one small act at a time .
It 's not the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it 's reality .
And the alternative is so horrific that it 's worth fighting the despair and taking action .
Hang in there !
— Walter Shaub ( @ waltshaub ) February 12 , 2020 Tweeters responded with dozens of suggestions ― from registering people to vote to writing letters to newspaper editors .
Time To Work # doSomethingBlue ✅register people to 𝗩𝗢𝗧𝗘 ✅𝗗𝗢 blue postcard campaigns ✅show up at protests ✅talk to your representatives ✅chastise your senators ✅write letters to the editor ✅post social media ✅be 𝗦𝗧𝗥𝗢𝗡𝗚 ✅NOT 𝕧𝕠𝕥𝕚𝕟𝕘 is 𝗡𝗢𝗧 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re way past the 25thAm now ( @ EichbergerUSA ) February 12 , 2020 I ’ m working with over a dozen activists to set up mass sustained peaceful protests and connect people at the local level .
We ’ ll be announcing a million person # VigilForDemocracy challenge this week .
Follow @ vigil4democracy if you ’ re interested .
# BeLikePuertoRico — Sam Spiegel 🆘😱 ( @ UNSEATpac ) February 12 , 2020 Register a new voter .
Old or young .
Show em how easy it is to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how good it feels .
https : //t.co/b3eQ1YuF3v — kelly gorman-forrest ( @ gorman_forrest ) February 12 , 2020 Find your local Democratic party , Move On , or teachers ' union and volunteer to knock on doors , address envelopes , and make calls .
You can make a difference AND meet new people https : //t.co/4RKSJaEpUK pic.twitter.com/gDb0S5IO7Z — Deep State Wisco 🏴☠ ( @ Wisco ) February 12 , 2020 In other tweets about the chaotic developments at the Justice Department , Shaub suggested “ it ’ s no overstatement to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis for the republic ” and said “ air raid warnings should ’ ve accompanied this carpet bombing of democracy.
” Name one country where things worked out really well after its top law enforcement agency was politicized .
— Walter Shaub ( @ waltshaub ) February 11 , 2020 It 's no overstatement to say this is a profound moment of crisis for the republic .
https : //t.co/2nZVOHOUD0 — Walter Shaub ( @ waltshaub ) February 11 , 2020 I think what today proves is that democracy and authoritarianism are wrestling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 're all busy .
But if we ca n't make time to fight for democracy , we might not have another chance .
The unthinkable can happen here .
— Walter Shaub ( @ waltshaub ) February 11 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Walter Shaub, the former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, on Tuesday night issued an urgent rallying cry for people to “take just one action to defend democracy by Saturday.”
Shaub launched the appeal after senior Department of Justice officials walked back prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation in the case of longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone. That followed following intense criticism of the proposed seven to nine years’ imprisonment from the president himself. The reversal sparked the resignation of the four federal prosecutors who ran the trial.
Advertisement
“Today was a catastrophe for democracy,” tweeted Shaub, who served in the government role under former President Barack Obama and then resigned six months into Donald Trump’s presidency. He has since become a vocal critic of the Trump administration.
“Doesn’t matter if it’s time, cash, creativity, or whatever,” Shaub added, inviting his 439,000 followers to suggest ideas to “defend democracy” in reply.
🚨Today was a catastrophe for democracy. Who will commit to take just one action to defend democracy by Saturday?
Doesn't matter if it's time, cash, creativity, or whatever. But will you do ONE concrete thing?
(Feel free to post ideas in the comments below.) — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 12, 2020
Shaub further explained the reason for his call after someone expressed doubt about how small acts could actually make a difference:
Advertisement
I hear your frustration. I feel it too. But democracy is saved one person at a time, one small act at a time. It's not the glamorous stuff of action movies, but it's reality. And the alternative is so horrific that it's worth fighting the despair and taking action. Hang in there! — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 12, 2020
Tweeters responded with dozens of suggestions ― from registering people to vote to writing letters to newspaper editors.
Time To Work#doSomethingBlue
✅register people to 𝗩𝗢𝗧𝗘
✅𝗗𝗢 blue postcard campaigns
✅show up at protests
✅talk to your representatives
✅chastise your senators
✅write letters to the editor
✅post social media
✅be 𝗦𝗧𝗥𝗢𝗡𝗚
✅NOT 𝕧𝕠𝕥𝕚𝕟𝕘 is 𝗡𝗢𝗧 an option https://t.co/7duhxMZR8O — We’re way past the 25thAm now (@EichbergerUSA) February 12, 2020
I’m working with over a dozen activists to set up mass sustained peaceful protests and connect people at the local level.
We’ll be announcing a million person #VigilForDemocracy challenge this week. Follow @vigil4democracy if you’re interested. #BeLikePuertoRico — Sam Spiegel 🆘😱 (@UNSEATpac) February 12, 2020
Register a new voter. Old or young. Show em how easy it is to vote, how much it matters, and how good it feels. https://t.co/b3eQ1YuF3v — kelly gorman-forrest (@gorman_forrest) February 12, 2020
Advertisement
Find your local Democratic party, Move On, or teachers' union and volunteer to knock on doors, address envelopes, and make calls. You can make a difference AND meet new people https://t.co/4RKSJaEpUK pic.twitter.com/gDb0S5IO7Z — Deep State Wisco 🏴☠ (@Wisco) February 12, 2020
In other tweets about the chaotic developments at the Justice Department, Shaub suggested “it’s no overstatement to say this is a profound moment of crisis for the republic” and said “air raid warnings should’ve accompanied this carpet bombing of democracy.”
Name one country where things worked out really well after its top law enforcement agency was politicized. — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 11, 2020
It's no overstatement to say this is a profound moment of crisis for the republic. https://t.co/2nZVOHOUD0 — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 11, 2020
air raid warnings should've accompanied this carpet bombing of democracy pic.twitter.com/YhcELuCum4 — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 12, 2020
Advertisement
I think what today proves is that democracy and authoritarianism are wrestling for control of this land. We're all busy. But if we can't make time to fight for democracy, we might not have another chance. The unthinkable can happen here. — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 11, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Fox News Host Mark Levin Says Bernie Sanders Is Racist Because He Lives In Vermont

“ This is a man born in Brooklyn , New York .
Where does he wind up ?
In Vermont @ @ @ @ @ his show Monday .
“ He talks about the society being racist from the top @ @ @ @ @ throughout .
Why did he choose Vermont ?
Why does he live in Vermont ?
@ @ @ @ @ choose another place ?
Why didn ’ t he choose a town like Newark or @ @ @ @ @ Alto or East St. Louis ?
Why didn ’ t he pick any of these @ @ @ @ @ Why didn ’ t he pick them ?
Because he ’ s racist , from @ @ @ @ @ ’ s why .
”

“This is a man born in Brooklyn, New York. Where does he wind up? In Vermont,” Levin said on his show Monday. “He talks about the society being racist from the top to the bottom. Racist throughout. Why did he choose Vermont? Why does he live in Vermont? Why didn’t he choose another place? Why didn’t he choose a town like Newark or Camden? Or East Palo Alto or East St. Louis? Why didn’t he pick any of these really tough majority-minority towns? Why didn’t he pick them? Because he’s racist, from top to bottom, that’s why.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Children Traumatized By Active Shooter Drills, Teachers Unions Say

HARTFORD , Conn. ( AP ) — The nation ’ s two largest teachers unions want schools to revise or eliminate active shooter drills , asserting Tuesday that they can harm students ’ mental health and that there are better ways to prepare for the possibility of a school shooting .
“ Everywhere I travel , I hear from parents and educators about active shooter drills terrifying students , leaving them unable to concentrate in the classroom and unable to sleep at night , ” said Lily Eskelsen Garcia , president of the National Education Association .
“ So traumatizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe from gun violence is not the answer .
That is why if schools are going to do drills , they need to take steps to ensure the drills do more good than harm.
” It also issued guidelines for schools that decide to use drills .
Those include never simulating an actual shooting ; giving parents , educators and students advance notice of any drill ; working with mental health officials to create age-appropriate and trauma-informed drills ; and tracking the effects of drills .
“ In Indiana they were shooting teachers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the adrenaline of what a school shooting would feel like , ” said Shannon Watts , founder of Moms Demand Action , which is part of Everytown .
“ In California recently , a superintendent hired a stranger to wear a mask to rattle the doors of classrooms without letting faculty and students know .
We ’ ve seen students asked to pretend to be victims and lie down using fake blood in the hallway.
” Jean-Paul Guilbault , the chief executive of the Alice Training Institute , which runs active shooter drills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appropriately .
He said his company never runs surprise drills but believes that simulating an event is the best way to prepare for one “ and allow students to practice their options , whether that be lockdown or evacuation.
” “ According to a recent study conducted by The U.S. Secret Service , most school shootings last for two minutes or less , and nearly half of the events studied ended within one minute , ” he said in a written statement .
“ That means it is up to us to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel as slow as a lifetime .
We drill so everyone has a plan when faced with danger , to give people a chance at survival.
” But Abby Clements , who was teaching second grade at the Sandy Hook school in Newtown when a gunman killed 26 people in 2012 , said she doesn ’ t believe a drill would have saved lives there .
“ Our students knew what to do , ” said Clements , who now teaches at another elementary school in town .
“ We taught them what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knew evacuation routes and where a safe spot was in the room , where nobody could see inside .
But frightening students with some type of active drill , I think that is barbaric .
There is no way you could possibly be prepared for the infinite number of ways that a shooting could go down with these weapons of war.
” Clements , an active member of Moms Demand Action , said it breaks her heart when she hears stories like the one about a little girl who refused to wear light-up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was told it could make her an easier target .
“ I ’ ve got kids at the elementary school level who tell me they have to keep a cell phone on them at all times , just in case , ” she said .
“ It should not be like that .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The nation’s two largest teachers unions want schools to revise or eliminate active shooter drills, asserting Tuesday that they can harm students’ mental health and that there are better ways to prepare for the possibility of a school shooting.
The American Federation of Teachers and National Education Association joined with the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund in calling for an end to unannounced drills or drills that simulate gun violence.
Advertisement
“Everywhere I travel, I hear from parents and educators about active shooter drills terrifying students, leaving them unable to concentrate in the classroom and unable to sleep at night,” said Lily Eskelsen Garcia, president of the National Education Association. “So traumatizing students as we work to keep students safe from gun violence is not the answer. That is why if schools are going to do drills, they need to take steps to ensure the drills do more good than harm.”
The report released Tuesday recommends schools concentrate on training teachers to respond to an active shooter incident rather than drilling students.
It also issued guidelines for schools that decide to use drills. Those include never simulating an actual shooting; giving parents, educators and students advance notice of any drill; working with mental health officials to create age-appropriate and trauma-informed drills; and tracking the effects of drills.
About 95% of schools drilled students on lockdown procedures in the 2015-16 school year, according to a survey by the National Center for Education Statistics.
Advertisement
“In Indiana they were shooting teachers with rubber pellets so they would feel the adrenaline of what a school shooting would feel like,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, which is part of Everytown. “In California recently, a superintendent hired a stranger to wear a mask to rattle the doors of classrooms without letting faculty and students know. We’ve seen students asked to pretend to be victims and lie down using fake blood in the hallway.”
PORTLAND, ME - MAY 18: Law enforcement and first responders from Cumberland and York Counties participate in a regional active shooter training at Deering High School led by the District II Training Council. Portland Press Herald via Getty Images
Jean-Paul Guilbault, the chief executive of the Alice Training Institute, which runs active shooter drills, said they are effective when done appropriately. He said his company never runs surprise drills but believes that simulating an event is the best way to prepare for one “and allow students to practice their options, whether that be lockdown or evacuation.”
“According to a recent study conducted by The U.S. Secret Service, most school shootings last for two minutes or less, and nearly half of the events studied ended within one minute,” he said in a written statement. “That means it is up to us to keep ourselves safe for those seconds that will feel as slow as a lifetime. We drill so everyone has a plan when faced with danger, to give people a chance at survival.”
But Abby Clements, who was teaching second grade at the Sandy Hook school in Newtown when a gunman killed 26 people in 2012, said she doesn’t believe a drill would have saved lives there.
Advertisement
“Our students knew what to do,” said Clements, who now teaches at another elementary school in town. “We taught them what to do in an emergency. We knew evacuation routes and where a safe spot was in the room, where nobody could see inside. But frightening students with some type of active drill, I think that is barbaric. There is no way you could possibly be prepared for the infinite number of ways that a shooting could go down with these weapons of war.”
Clements, an active member of Moms Demand Action, said it breaks her heart when she hears stories like the one about a little girl who refused to wear light-up shoes after a drill, because she was told it could make her an easier target.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--American Bar Association Goes After Trump For Blasting Roger Stone Sentencing On Twitter

The American Bar Association indirectly denounced President Donald Trump on Wednesday for publicly criticizing the sentencing recommendation for his friend Roger Stone as well as the judge presiding over Stone ’ s case .
“ The American Bar Association steadfastly supports judicial independence and the sound exercise of prosecutorial discretion , ” ABA President Judy Perry Martinez said in a statement on Wednesday .
“ Public officials who personally attack judges or prosecutors can create a perception that the system is serving a political or other purpose rather than the fair administration of justice.
” The message from the organization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early Tuesday morning calling the seven- to nine-year sentencing recommendation for Stone a “ miscarriage of justice.
” The Trump adviser had been convicted of witness tampering and lying to Congress .
All four federal prosecutors who ran Stone ’ s trial abruptly withdrew from the case after Justice Department leadership intervened to alter the sentencing recommendation later on Tuesday .
Trump also tweeted attacks at Amy Berman Jackson , the judge presiding over Stone ’ s case .
Berman Jackson also presided over former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort ’ s case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT , something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure ?
” Trump tweeted about Berman Jackson .
“ How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton ?
Just asking !
” Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT , something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure ?
How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton ?
Just asking !
https : //t.co/Fe7XkepJNN — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) February 12 , 2020 The ABA message also appeared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Trump appointee and ally who has politicized the Justice Department in the president ’ s favor .
Barr appears to have led the effort to reduce Stone ’ s sentencing recommendation , and Trump seemed to confirm Barr ’ s intervention in a series of tweets that praised the attorney general for “ taking charge ” of the case .
“ It is incumbent upon public officials and members of the legal profession , whose sworn duty it is to uphold the law , to do everything in their power to preserve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Perry Martinez said in the ABA statement .
Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Wednesday that he does not “ want to say yet ” whether he would pardon Stone , who has served as Trump ’ s adviser since the 1980s .
“ I want to thank the Justice Department , ” the president said .
“ They saw the horribleness of a nine-year sentence for doing nothing .
You have murderers and drug addicts ― they don ’ t get nine years.
” Democratic leaders have demanded an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision to walk back the original sentencing recommendation , with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) saying Trump “ engaged in political interference ” by tweeting his criticism of the recommendation .
Senate Democrats have demanded Barr either resign or face impeachment for intervening in Stone ’ s case .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The American Bar Association indirectly denounced President Donald Trump on Wednesday for publicly criticizing the sentencing recommendation for his friend Roger Stone as well as the judge presiding over Stone’s case.
“The American Bar Association steadfastly supports judicial independence and the sound exercise of prosecutorial discretion,” ABA President Judy Perry Martinez said in a statement on Wednesday. “Public officials who personally attack judges or prosecutors can create a perception that the system is serving a political or other purpose rather than the fair administration of justice.”
Advertisement
The message from the organization of lawyers follows Trump’s tweet early Tuesday morning calling the seven- to nine-year sentencing recommendation for Stone a “miscarriage of justice.” The Trump adviser had been convicted of witness tampering and lying to Congress.
All four federal prosecutors who ran Stone’s trial abruptly withdrew from the case after Justice Department leadership intervened to alter the sentencing recommendation later on Tuesday.
New ABA statement: 'Public officials who personally attack judges or prosecutors can create a perception that the system is serving a political or other purpose' pic.twitter.com/0mzgyvatYz — Mike Scarcella (@MikeScarcella) February 12, 2020
Trump also tweeted attacks at Amy Berman Jackson, the judge presiding over Stone’s case. Berman Jackson also presided over former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s case.
Advertisement
“Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure?” Trump tweeted about Berman Jackson. “How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking!”
Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure? How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking! https://t.co/Fe7XkepJNN — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 12, 2020
The ABA message also appeared to refer to Attorney General William Barr, a Trump appointee and ally who has politicized the Justice Department in the president’s favor. Barr appears to have led the effort to reduce Stone’s sentencing recommendation, and Trump seemed to confirm Barr’s intervention in a series of tweets that praised the attorney general for “taking charge” of the case.
“It is incumbent upon public officials and members of the legal profession, whose sworn duty it is to uphold the law, to do everything in their power to preserve the integrity of the justice system,” Perry Martinez said in the ABA statement.
Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Wednesday that he does not “want to say yet” whether he would pardon Stone, who has served as Trump’s adviser since the 1980s.
Advertisement
“I want to thank the Justice Department,” the president said. “They saw the horribleness of a nine-year sentence for doing nothing. You have murderers and drug addicts ― they don’t get nine years.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan Again Accused Of Knowing About Sexual Abuse At OSU

A former captain of the Ohio State University wrestling team told members of the Ohio House Civil Justice Committee on Tuesday that Rep. Jim Jordan ( R-Ohio ) was not only aware of allegations of sexual abuse that took place at the university in the 1980s and 1990s , but that the congressman begged others to cover up his involvement .
Jordan , who worked as an assistant coach for the wrestling team from 1987 to 1995 , has consistently denied allegations that he knew of any abuse taking place .
But the former wrestling team captain , Adam DiSabato @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is one of the former OSU wrestlers who has filed a lawsuit against the institution for ignoring allegations of sexual abuse at the hands of university doctor Richard Strauss , who allegedly abused nearly 1,500 athletes .
( Strauss died by suicide in 2005 . )
Nearly 350 men are currently suing OSU , and many others are unable to do so because of the statute of limitations .
Adam DiSabato was testifying at a hearing for a bill that would waive the statute of limitations for the OSU victims and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Adam DiSabato ’ s brother , Michael , was allegedly a victim of Strauss ’ s abuse and has accused Jordan of being aware of what took place .
“ I considered Jim Jordan a friend , ” Michael DiSabato told NBC in 2018 .
“ But at the end of the day , he is absolutely lying if he says he doesn ’ t know what was going on.
” At Tuesday ’ s hearing , Adam DiSabato alleged that Jordan called him repeatedly after his brother spoke out in 2018 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ groveling … begging me to go against my brother .
… That ’ s the kind of cover-up that ’ s going on there , ” Adam DiSabato said on Tuesday , according to Cleveland.com .
In response , Jordan spokesman Ian Fury again denied that the congressman had been aware of any abuse .
“ Congressman Jordan never saw or heard of any abuse , and if he had he would have dealt with it , ” Fury told HuffPost .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A former captain of the Ohio State University wrestling team told members of the Ohio House Civil Justice Committee on Tuesday that Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) was not only aware of allegations of sexual abuse that took place at the university in the 1980s and 1990s, but that the congressman begged others to cover up his involvement.
Jordan, who worked as an assistant coach for the wrestling team from 1987 to 1995, has consistently denied allegations that he knew of any abuse taking place.
Advertisement
But the former wrestling team captain, Adam DiSabato, told state lawmakers that was untrue. He is one of the former OSU wrestlers who has filed a lawsuit against the institution for ignoring allegations of sexual abuse at the hands of university doctor Richard Strauss, who allegedly abused nearly 1,500 athletes. (Strauss died by suicide in 2005.)
Nearly 350 men are currently suing OSU, and many others are unable to do so because of the statute of limitations. Adam DiSabato was testifying at a hearing for a bill that would waive the statute of limitations for the OSU victims and allow them to sue the university.
Adam DiSabato’s brother, Michael, was allegedly a victim of Strauss’s abuse and has accused Jordan of being aware of what took place.
“I considered Jim Jordan a friend,” Michael DiSabato told NBC in 2018. “But at the end of the day, he is absolutely lying if he says he doesn’t know what was going on.”
Advertisement
At Tuesday’s hearing, Adam DiSabato alleged that Jordan called him repeatedly after his brother spoke out in 2018.
WATCH: “Jim Jordan called me, begging me to change my story. To go against my brother. I had to get my lawyer to tell him to stop. That’s the kind of cover up it is. He’s a coward.”
Trumpist Rep. @Jim_Jordan won’t outwrestle the sex abuse scandal demons. pic.twitter.com/M41CzBGbQq — The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) February 13, 2020
“Jim Jordan called me crying, groveling … begging me to go against my brother. … That’s the kind of cover-up that’s going on there,” Adam DiSabato said on Tuesday, according to Cleveland.com.
In response, Jordan spokesman Ian Fury again denied that the congressman had been aware of any abuse.
“Congressman Jordan never saw or heard of any abuse, and if he had he would have dealt with it,” Fury told HuffPost.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-12--Lindsey Graham: Trump Tweeting About Stone Case 'Is Not Appropriate’

Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) suggested President Donald Trump should exercise some restraint on social media after the president seemed to confirm in a tweet that Attorney General William Barr had intervened in the sentencing of Roger Stone .
The senator and Trump ally rebuffed Democrats ’ calls for a hearing to investigate the president ’ s possible interference in the sentencing of his friend and former adviser .
Graham also told CNN congressional correspondent Manu Raju on Wednesday to put himself in Trump ’ s shoes and understand his feeling that “ people are out to get him.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ while he ’ d told Trump it was understandable how he was feeling , “ tweeting about an ongoing criminal matter is not appropriate.
” Asked if Trump feels emboldened by his acquittal , Lindsey Graham said : “ No , I think he feels like the people are out to get him , going overboard .
I mean just put yourself in his shoes.
” pic.twitter.com/NGFseUodTY — Manu Raju ( @ mkraju ) February 12 , 2020 In a series of tweets Wednesday , Trump suggested Barr had stepped in to recommend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was convicted last November on charges including witness tampering and lying to Congress .
“ Congratulations to Attorney General Bill Barr for taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought , ” the president tweeted .
“ Two months in jail for a Swamp Creature , yet 9 years recommended for Roger Stone ( who was not even working for the Trump Campaign ) .
Gee , that sounds very fair !
Rogue prosecutors maybe ?
The Swamp !
” Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Committee aide James Wolfe , who was sentenced in 2018 to two months in prison after pleading guilty to lying to the FBI .
After Trump tweeted early Tuesday that the initial sentencing recommendation was “ horrible and very unfair ” and a “ miscarriage of justice , ” the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Columbia filed a new recommendation that afternoon suggesting no specific prison sentence .
Later that day , all four of the federal prosecutors on the Stone trial , who had recommended a seven- to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The senator and Trump ally rebuffed Democrats’ calls for a hearing to investigate the president’s possible interference in the sentencing of his friend and former adviser. Graham also told CNN congressional correspondent Manu Raju on Wednesday to put himself in Trump’s shoes and understand his feeling that “people are out to get him.”
Advertisement
Graham added, however, that while he’d told Trump it was understandable how he was feeling, “tweeting about an ongoing criminal matter is not appropriate.”
Asked if Trump feels emboldened by his acquittal, Lindsey Graham said: “No, I think he feels like the people are out to get him, going overboard. I mean just put yourself in his shoes.” pic.twitter.com/NGFseUodTY — Manu Raju (@mkraju) February 12, 2020
In a series of tweets Wednesday, Trump suggested Barr had stepped in to recommend a more lenient sentence for Stone, who was convicted last November on charges including witness tampering and lying to Congress.
“Congratulations to Attorney General Bill Barr for taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought,” the president tweeted.
Advertisement
“Two months in jail for a Swamp Creature, yet 9 years recommended for Roger Stone (who was not even working for the Trump Campaign). Gee, that sounds very fair! Rogue prosecutors maybe? The Swamp!” Trump added, apparently referencing former Senate Intelligence Committee aide James Wolfe, who was sentenced in 2018 to two months in prison after pleading guilty to lying to the FBI.
After Trump tweeted early Tuesday that the initial sentencing recommendation was “horrible and very unfair” and a “miscarriage of justice,” the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia filed a new recommendation that afternoon suggesting no specific prison sentence.