thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-02--CNN's Jake Tapper Calls Out Joe Biden For Declining Interview Requests

CNN ’ s Jake Tapper took a jab at former Vice President Joe Biden for consistently declining requests to appear on Sunday morning politics shows throughout his 2020 presidential campaign .
Tapper thanked Pete Buttigieg for being interviewed on “ State Of The Union ” Sunday , then called out Biden for refusing to do the same .
“ We appreciate you coming and taking our questions , ” Tapper told the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , at the end of a 10-minute interview .
“ Vice President Biden has yet to do a Sunday show interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ count how many times you ’ ve agreed to do interviews.
” It ’ s unclear what ’ s behind Biden ’ s decision to not accept the interview requests .
In August , the Biden campaign reportedly considered scaling back his public schedule in an effort to limit potential gaffes on the campaign trail .
The Biden campaign declined to comment for this story .
According to a CBS News/YouGov poll released Sunday , Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) are tied at 25 % for the first choice of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follows with 21 % of support , according to the poll , with Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
trailing at 16 % .
Watch Tapper ’ s full interview with Buttigieg below .
He mentions the Biden interview requests around the 10-minute mark .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
CNN’s Jake Tapper took a jab at former Vice President Joe Biden for consistently declining requests to appear on Sunday morning politics shows throughout his 2020 presidential campaign.
Tapper thanked Pete Buttigieg for being interviewed on “State Of The Union” Sunday, then called out Biden for refusing to do the same.
Advertisement
“We appreciate you coming and taking our questions,” Tapper told the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, at the end of a 10-minute interview. “Vice President Biden has yet to do a Sunday show interview. ... I can’t even count how many times you’ve agreed to do interviews.”
It’s unclear what’s behind Biden’s decision to not accept the interview requests. In August, the Biden campaign reportedly considered scaling back his public schedule in an effort to limit potential gaffes on the campaign trail.
The Biden campaign declined to comment for this story.
According to a CBS News/YouGov poll released Sunday, Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are tied at 25% for the first choice of likely Democratic caucusgoers in Iowa. Buttigieg follows with 21% of support, according to the poll, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) trailing at 16%.
Watch Tapper’s full interview with Buttigieg below. He mentions the Biden interview requests around the 10-minute mark.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-02--GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander: Trump Made 'Mistake' By Pushing Russian Propaganda

Sen. Lamar Alexander ( R-Tenn. ) on Sunday defended his key vote to block witnesses from being called in the impeachment trial , saying President Donald Trump ’ s dealings with Ukraine were “ wrong ” but not impeachable .
The Tennessee lawmaker told NBC News ’ “ Meet the Press ” that he will vote on Wednesday to acquit Trump , despite the president ’ s “ inappropriate ” actions and his “ mistake ” of echoing Russian talking points to Ukraine ’ s president .
“ I think he shouldn ’ t have done it , ” Alexander @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Ukraine investigating political rival Joe Biden .
“ I think it was wrong .
Inappropriate was the way I ’ d say ― improper , crossing the line.
” Alexander , who is retiring instead of seeking reelection this year , said he believes Trump ’ s actions were “ a long way from treason , bribery , high crimes and misdemeanors ” and that American voters should decide Trump ’ s fate in the 2020 election .
He said Trump , if he was truly concerned about Biden , should have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ukraine ― to look into the matter .
“ Well , the bottom line , it ’ s not an excuse , ” Alexander said .
“ He shouldn ’ t have done it .
And I said he shouldn ’ t have done it.
” “ I don ’ t think so , ” Alexander said .
“ I hope not .
I mean , enduring an impeachment is something that nobody should like .
Even the president said he didn ’ t want that on his resume .
I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call like that gets you an impeachment , I would think he would think twice before he did it again.
” Todd also questioned Alexander about Trump ’ s peddling of Russian propaganda during his infamous July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky .
Trump had mentioned a debunked conspiracy theory pushed by the Kremlin that alleges Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election .
The U.S. intelligence community has repeatedly rejected the claim .
“ I think that ’ s a mistake , ” the senator continued .
“ I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that the Russians are out to do no good , to destabilize Western democracies , including us , and be very wary of theories that Russians come up with and peddle.
” Alexander , widely seen as one of a few swing votes , helped cinch the GOP effort to block a Democratic motion to call witnesses during the impeachment trial .
He announced Thursday , after the final day of the trial ’ s question-and-answer portion , that he would vote against the motion because he doesn ’ t need any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Republicans have been twisting themselves into knots to justify acquitting Trump .
Sen. Joni Ernst ( R-Iowa ) , during an appearance Sunday on CNN ’ s “ State of the Union , ” danced around questions about whether Trump was “ wrong ” to ask Ukraine to investigate Biden .
“ If it ’ s not something you would have done , why wouldn ’ t you have done it ?
Because it was wrong ?
Because it was inappropriate ?
” Tapper pressed .
“ I think , generally speaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right thing to do , ” Ernst said .
“ He did it maybe in the wrong manner .
But I think he could have done it through different channels .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) on Sunday defended his key vote to block witnesses from being called in the impeachment trial, saying President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine were “wrong” but not impeachable.
The Tennessee lawmaker told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that he will vote on Wednesday to acquit Trump, despite the president’s “inappropriate” actions and his “mistake” of echoing Russian talking points to Ukraine’s president.
Advertisement
“I think he shouldn’t have done it,” Alexander said of Trump conditioning U.S. military aid on Ukraine investigating political rival Joe Biden. “I think it was wrong. Inappropriate was the way I’d say ― improper, crossing the line.”
Alexander, who is retiring instead of seeking reelection this year, said he believes Trump’s actions were “a long way from treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors” and that American voters should decide Trump’s fate in the 2020 election.
He said Trump, if he was truly concerned about Biden, should have asked Attorney General William Barr ― not Ukraine ― to look into the matter.
WATCH: @SenAlexander says “maybe [Trump] did not know how to” call the AG to look into Bidens and Burisma. #MTP@chucktodd: “At what point is he no longer new to this?
Sen. Alexander: “Well, the bottom line, it's not an excuse.” pic.twitter.com/CtZjdB8Cwj — Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) February 2, 2020
Advertisement
Asked why he believes Trump didn’t go to Barr, Alexander said Trump “maybe didn’t know how to do it.”
“At what point, though, is he no longer new to this?” host Chuck Todd asked, noting that Republicans often defend Trump’s controversial actions by saying he’s a political outsider.
“Well, the bottom line, it’s not an excuse,” Alexander said. “He shouldn’t have done it. And I said he shouldn’t have done it.”
Todd then asked whether he’s concerned that the Senate likely acquitting Trump could encourage the president to continue seeking foreign interference.
“I don’t think so,” Alexander said. “I hope not. I mean, enduring an impeachment is something that nobody should like. Even the president said he didn’t want that on his resume. I don’t blame him. So if a call like that gets you an impeachment, I would think he would think twice before he did it again.”
Advertisement
WATCH: @SenAlexander says he hope Pres. Trump does not continue to engage in foreign interference. #MTP #IfItsSunday
Sen. Alexander: “If a call like this gets you an impeachment, I would think he would think twice before he did it again.” pic.twitter.com/gupWRsbEmI — Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) February 2, 2020
Todd also questioned Alexander about Trump’s peddling of Russian propaganda during his infamous July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump had mentioned a debunked conspiracy theory pushed by the Kremlin that alleges Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election. The U.S. intelligence community has repeatedly rejected the claim.
“Does it bother you that the President of the United States is reiterating Russian propaganda?” Todd asked.
Alexander said yes.
“I think that’s a mistake,” the senator continued. “I think we need to be sensitive to the fact that the Russians are out to do no good, to destabilize Western democracies, including us, and be very wary of theories that Russians come up with and peddle.”
Alexander, widely seen as one of a few swing votes, helped cinch the GOP effort to block a Democratic motion to call witnesses during the impeachment trial. He announced Thursday, after the final day of the trial’s question-and-answer portion, that he would vote against the motion because he doesn’t need any more evidence to know what Trump did.
Advertisement
The Senate ultimately voted 51-49 to block witnesses. Just two Republicans ― Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine ― joined Democrats in voting in favor of the motion.
Republicans have been twisting themselves into knots to justify acquitting Trump. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), during an appearance Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” danced around questions about whether Trump was “wrong” to ask Ukraine to investigate Biden.
“I think ferreting out corruption is absolutely the right thing to do,” Ernst said. “It’s probably something that I wouldn’t have done.”
Host Jake Tapper noted that Trump never mentioned the word “corruption” during his July 25 call with Zelensky.
“If it’s not something you would have done, why wouldn’t you have done it? Because it was wrong? Because it was inappropriate?” Tapper pressed.
Advertisement
“I think, generally speaking, going after corruption would be the right thing to do,” Ernst said. “He did it maybe in the wrong manner. But I think he could have done it through different channels.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--For Some Out-Of-Staters, Iowa Is Their Best Chance To See The 2020 Candidates

ANAMOSA , Iowa ― Christine and Tito Cantu do not live in Iowa , but they ’ re here in the Strawberry Hill Elementary School cafeteria because this might be their best chance to see Pete Buttigieg up close .
The Cantus live in Rock Falls , Illinois , and some of the Democratic presidential candidates who are crisscrossing Iowa ahead of Monday ’ s caucuses might drop out of the race before Illinois holds its primary in March .
And the candidates who remain will probably not be taking questions in tiny cafeterias .
“ It ’ s so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now it will be six weeks before we get to vote , ” Christine Cantu , 45 , said in an interview .
“ We don ’ t even know who we ’ ll get to vote for.
” Buttigieg acknowledged as much during his events on Saturday , noting that Iowa caucusgoers get to put their “ thumb on the scale ” in the early stages of primary voting .
“ What ’ s really struck me through this process is seeing how seriously Iowans take that responsibility that comes with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said at Strawberry Hill Elementary .
“ You ’ re very mindful of the importance of really looking us over and kicking the tires and all the ideas that we ’ re bringing forward to you.
” Iowa ’ s first-in-the-nation status is controversial , as it privileges the interests of a state that is less diverse and more rural than the rest of the country as a whole and much less diverse than the Democratic Party .
What happens in the Iowa caucuses can have a huge outcome on the rest of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potentially killing a campaign .
Joe Biden , for instance , dropped out of the Democratic primary in 2008 after garnering less than 1 % of Iowa ’ s delegate count .
Barack Obama ’ s surprise victory that year helped propel him to the White House .
With such high stakes , some people come from out of state to try to influence the outcome .
Barbara Nelson , a 60-year-old real estate agent from Hillsborough , Oregon , said she ’ s been canvassing for Buttigieg since Tuesday as part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group .
Other out-of-staters come just to get close to the candidates they admire .
A packed rally in Sanders ’ Iowa City field office on Saturday included a number of visitors from other Midwestern states .
Krissy Haglund , a naturopathic doctor wearing a baseball hat that read “ Doctors for Bernie , ” and her husband Dan Wright , a database engineer , brought their two kids from Minneapolis .
Hardcore Sanders supporters , they were headed to another one of his events some 90 minutes away in Newton and were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rally .
“ It ’ s fun to be here , where the candidates are making little stops and places where we can actually meet them , ” Wright said .
And people really do get to meet candidates here .
Voters from Missouri and Oklahoma greeted Biden at a Friday event in Fort Madison .
John Nicks , a 67-year-old lawyer from Tulsa , said Biden thanked him for making the trip .
Olivia Ortiz came as part of a group of political science students from Benedictine College in Atchison , Kansas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Warren , Buttigieg , Biden and even former Rep. Joe Walsh , who is hopelessly trying to wrest the GOP nomination from President Donald Trump .
Ortiz , 20 , called the experience exciting but also said it ’ s a little “ odd ” that Iowa goes first given its particular demographics .
“ Iowans are white and that ’ s great , but I haven ’ t seen a lot of Hispanic people .
I mean there are not a ton of Black people at any of these rallies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Des Moines on Sunday .
The Cantus got up early on Saturday morning in Rock Falls and made a two-hour drive across the state line to see Klobuchar in Bettendorf , then Warren in Cedar Rapids , then Buttigieg in Anamosa , before returning to Cedar Rapids to see Sanders that evening .
In the cafeteria in Anamosa , people could ask Buttigieg questions without needing a microphone , and the former South Bend , Indiana , mayor posed for selfies afterward .
When candidates make their way to Illinois next month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events around Chicago that aren ’ t nearly as intimate .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
ANAMOSA, Iowa ― Christine and Tito Cantu do not live in Iowa, but they’re here in the Strawberry Hill Elementary School cafeteria because this might be their best chance to see Pete Buttigieg up close.
The Cantus live in Rock Falls, Illinois, and some of the Democratic presidential candidates who are crisscrossing Iowa ahead of Monday’s caucuses might drop out of the race before Illinois holds its primary in March. And the candidates who remain will probably not be taking questions in tiny cafeterias.
Advertisement
“It’s so strange how the Iowa caucus works and now it will be six weeks before we get to vote,” Christine Cantu, 45, said in an interview. “We don’t even know who we’ll get to vote for.”
Buttigieg acknowledged as much during his events on Saturday, noting that Iowa caucusgoers get to put their “thumb on the scale” in the early stages of primary voting.
“What’s really struck me through this process is seeing how seriously Iowans take that responsibility that comes with the influence that you have,” Buttigieg said at Strawberry Hill Elementary. “You’re very mindful of the importance of really looking us over and kicking the tires and all the ideas that we’re bringing forward to you.”
Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status is controversial, as it privileges the interests of a state that is less diverse and more rural than the rest of the country as a whole and much less diverse than the Democratic Party.
Advertisement
What happens in the Iowa caucuses can have a huge outcome on the rest of the race, with a poor performance potentially killing a campaign. Joe Biden, for instance, dropped out of the Democratic primary in 2008 after garnering less than 1% of Iowa’s delegate count. Barack Obama’s surprise victory that year helped propel him to the White House.
Today, the former vice president and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are front-runners nationally, with Buttigieg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) most in need of a strong showing here on Monday.
With such high stakes, some people come from out of state to try to influence the outcome. Barbara Nelson, a 60-year-old real estate agent from Hillsboro, Oregon, said she’s been canvassing for Buttigieg since Tuesday as part of Barnstormers for Pete, a grassroots canvassing group.
“I knocked on doors in five different towns,” Nelson said.
Other out-of-staters come just to get close to the candidates they admire. A packed rally in Sanders’ Iowa City field office on Saturday included a number of visitors from other Midwestern states. Krissy Haglund, a naturopathic doctor wearing a baseball hat that read “Doctors for Bernie,” and her husband Dan Wright, a database engineer, brought their two kids from Minneapolis. Hardcore Sanders supporters, they were headed to another one of his events some 90 minutes away in Newton and were also making time for an Andrew Yang rally.
“It’s fun to be here, where the candidates are making little stops and places where we can actually meet them,” Wright said.
Advertisement
And people really do get to meet candidates here. Voters from Missouri and Oklahoma greeted Biden at a Friday event in Fort Madison. John Nicks, a 67-year-old lawyer from Tulsa, said Biden thanked him for making the trip.
Olivia Ortiz came as part of a group of political science students from Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas, visiting events for Yang, Klobuchar, Warren, Buttigieg, Biden and even former Rep. Joe Walsh, who is hopelessly trying to wrest the GOP nomination from President Donald Trump. Ortiz, 20, called the experience exciting but also said it’s a little “odd” that Iowa goes first given its particular demographics.
“Iowans are white and that’s great, but I haven’t seen a lot of Hispanic people. I mean there are not a ton of Black people at any of these rallies,” Ortiz said at a Buttigieg rally in Des Moines on Sunday.
The Cantus got up early on Saturday morning in Rock Falls and made a two-hour drive across the state line to see Klobuchar in Bettendorf, then Warren in Cedar Rapids, then Buttigieg in Anamosa, before returning to Cedar Rapids to see Sanders that evening.
In the cafeteria in Anamosa, people could ask Buttigieg questions without needing a microphone, and the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor posed for selfies afterward. When candidates make their way to Illinois next month, Cantu figures they’ll hold events around Chicago that aren’t nearly as intimate.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-02--Montana GOP Condemns Lawmaker Calling Socialists To Be Shot

BILLINGS , Montana ( AP ) — The Montana Republican Party on Saturday condemned a comment made by a state GOP lawmaker who said the U.S. Constitution calls for people who identify as socialists to be jailed or shot .
State Rep. Rodney Garcia made the comment Friday at a state party gathering when he spoke about being worried about socialists entering the government and being “ everywhere ” in Billings , the Billings Gazette reported .
Garcia stood behind his remarks on Saturday when asked by a reporter about them , though he couldn ’ t point out where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be shot or jailed .
“ They ’ re enemies of the free state , ” Garcia said .
“ What do we do with our enemies in war ?
In Vietnam , ( Afghanistan ) , all those .
What did we do ?
” Spenser Merwin , the executive director of the Montana Republican Party , said in statement the party wholeheartedly condemned Garcia ’ s comments .
“ Under no circumstance is violence against someone with opposing political views acceptable , ” he said .
” It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the weekend ’ s events which showcased the strength of our statewide candidates and the importance of the upcoming election .
”

BILLINGS, Montana (AP) — The Montana Republican Party on Saturday condemned a comment made by a state GOP lawmaker who said the U.S. Constitution calls for people who identify as socialists to be jailed or shot.
State Rep. Rodney Garcia made the comment Friday at a state party gathering when he spoke about being worried about socialists entering the government and being “everywhere” in Billings, the Billings Gazette reported.
Garcia stood behind his remarks on Saturday when asked by a reporter about them, though he couldn’t point out where in the Constitution it says socialists are to be shot or jailed.
Advertisement
“They’re enemies of the free state,” Garcia said. “What do we do with our enemies in war? In Vietnam, (Afghanistan), all those. What did we do?”
Spenser Merwin, the executive director of the Montana Republican Party, said in statement the party wholeheartedly condemned Garcia’s comments.
“Under no circumstance is violence against someone with opposing political views acceptable,” he said. ”It’s disappointing that this isolated incident took away from the weekend’s events which showcased the strength of our statewide candidates and the importance of the upcoming election.”
Montana Democratic Party chair Robyn Driscoll condemned Garcia’s remarks.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-02--Mitch McConnell’s New Legacy: Impeachment Trial Rigger For Donald Trump

“ Sadly , the constitutional travesty that he orchestrated here will serve as his legacy , ” said George Conway , a prominent Republican Trump critic and husband of a top White House aide .
“ Not the legions of fine judges he has put on the bench , judges of the sort that would have been nominated by a President Pence even if Trump had been removed , as he rightly should have been.
” An aide to Senate Republican leadership , speaking on condition of anonymity , rejected the idea that protecting Trump would become the most noteworthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ If you don ’ t think his legacy on courts and the Merrick Garland decision will be at the top of his legacy then you just aren ’ t in touch with reality , ” the aide said , referring to McConnell ’ s decision to block former President Barack Obama ’ s choice for a Supreme Court vacancy and instead to leave it open for the next president .
Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt said McConnell handled the situation properly .
“ I don ’ t think the leader is affected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out how to move through that and get to the work that needed to be done , ” he said .
Yet that was precisely the decision that Arizona GOP Sen. Barry Goldwater made in 1974 , when he visited President Richard Nixon at the White House to tell him that he and many other Republicans in the Senate would not support him in an impeachment trial .
Nixon announced his resignation the following evening rather than face removal for using the powers of his office to cover up his campaign ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In a news conference after the 2014 midterm election , McConnell said he wanted the chamber to start working together for the common good again , as it used to .
“ The Senate in the last few years basically doesn ’ t do anything .
We don ’ t even vote , ” he said .
An Acquittal For The History Books In a Dec. 12 appearance on Fox News , McConnell said there was “ zero chance ” Trump would be removed from office .
“ I ’ m going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s lawyers , ” he said .
“ We ’ ll be working through this process hopefully in a fairly short period of time , in total coordination with the White House counsel ’ s office and the people who are representing the president.
” And Brinkley , the Rice University professor , said whatever thoughts McConnell might have had for being known as a Senate institutionalist are gone forever .
“ History is going to remember him not for being a great legislator , but as a wingman to Donald Trump , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll be seen as the leading sycophant to Donald Trump .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Years after professing admiration for the “Great Compromiser” Henry Clay but then engineering a dramatic remake of the federal judiciary, Mitch McConnell is now earning a different legacy: The guy who rigged a Senate trial to protect a president impeached for trying to cheat his way to reelection.
With even members of his own caucus agreeing that Donald Trump behaved badly by leveraging $391 million in taxpayer-funded foreign aid to damage a political rival, the Senate’s majority leader is on the brink of acquitting Trump without hearing from a single witness ― defying the three-quarters of Americans who say they want witnesses.
Advertisement
“Sadly, the constitutional travesty that he orchestrated here will serve as his legacy,” said George Conway, a prominent Republican Trump critic and husband of a top White House aide. “Not the legions of fine judges he has put on the bench, judges of the sort that would have been nominated by a President Pence even if Trump had been removed, as he rightly should have been.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) walks to meet with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill on Jan. 31 after the Senate voted not to allow witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump. ASSOCIATED PRESS
An aide to Senate Republican leadership, speaking on condition of anonymity, rejected the idea that protecting Trump would become the most noteworthy part of McConnell’s record. “If you don’t think his legacy on courts and the Merrick Garland decision will be at the top of his legacy then you just aren’t in touch with reality,” the aide said, referring to McConnell’s decision to block former President Barack Obama’s choice for a Supreme Court vacancy and instead to leave it open for the next president.
“History is going to remember him not for being a great legislator, but as a wingman to Donald Trump. He’ll be seen as the leading sycophant to Donald Trump.” - Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley
Advertisement
Other Republican defenders said McConnell was simply doing what both his constituents in Kentucky as well as most Republicans nationally wanted him to do.
Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt said McConnell handled the situation properly. “I don’t think the leader is affected in any way by trying to figure out how to move through that and get to the work that needed to be done,” he said.
“You play the hand you’re dealt,” said Scott Jennings, a Republican political consultant who has worked for McConnell’s campaigns, adding that steering the GOP caucus toward removing Trump from office was never a possibility. “I don’t know that that’s Mitch McConnell’s decision to make.”
Yet that was precisely the decision that Arizona GOP Sen. Barry Goldwater made in 1974, when he visited President Richard Nixon at the White House to tell him that he and many other Republicans in the Senate would not support him in an impeachment trial. Nixon announced his resignation the following evening rather than face removal for using the powers of his office to cover up his campaign’s break-in at the Democratic National Committee.
“It’s like Nixon redux,” said Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley. “When the conservative leader of the Senate found out he had been lied to, he balked at Nixon. And he has a fine place in history. Mitch McConnell is going to be remembered as a lackey for Trump.”
Advertisement
From Henry Clay To Donald Trump
Thirty years after McConnell was first elected to the Senate in 1984, Republicans took control of the chamber, elevating him from minority leader to majority leader and thereby allowing him to realize a lifelong dream.
Just a few years earlier, he had famously declared that his top priority was to make Obama a one-term president. Obama had nonetheless won reelection in 2012, and McConnell spoke in conciliatory tones about working with the Democratic president on bipartisan priorities.
He spoke about his great love of Henry Clay, the 19th century Kentucky senator known for forging a string of major pre-Civil War compromises, and his respect for John Sherman Cooper, the mid-20 century Kentucky senator for whom McConnell had once interned.
In a news conference after the 2014 midterm election, McConnell said he wanted the chamber to start working together for the common good again, as it used to. “The Senate in the last few years basically doesn’t do anything. We don’t even vote,” he said.
Whatever comity McConnell might have hoped for, however, dissipated when he essentially ended judicial confirmation hearings for Obama’s picks, and then vanished entirely when he refused to even acknowledge Obama’s nomination of Garland for the high court after Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.
Advertisement
Then, when Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, McConnell suddenly had the opportunity to fill, assembly-line fashion, over a hundred federal court vacancies he had helped hold open with conservative nominees pre-screened by the Federalist Society.
“That’s a long-term McConnell priority,” said Sarah Binder, a political science professor at George Washington University. “McConnell has a very, very narrow agenda.”
It is also a squarely mainstream Republican agenda, along with tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks ― all of which Trump, who has little personal knowledge or interest in legislation, was happy to give him and House GOP leaders.
“Trump comes along and McConnell comes along and their paths converge, and voila,” Jennings said.
Which was the state of affairs right up until an intelligence community whistleblower’s complaint in August accused Trump of trying to coerce Ukraine into conducting investigations politically useful to Trump by withholding a White House meeting and $391 million in military aid.
House Democratic leaders began an impeachment inquiry, then formal proceedings, and just before the Christmas recess, voted to impeach Trump ― dropping the question of whether to remove Trump directly into McConnell’s lap.
Advertisement
An Acquittal For The History Books
On Friday, Rep. Jason Crow, a Colorado Democrat and one of the House’s impeachment “managers,” asked at the trial: “What do you want your place in history to be?”
If the question was designed to shame Republican senators, it appears not to have had that effect ― and certainly not with McConnell, who wore a broad grin after Democrats’ attempt to open the proceedings to witness testimony failed by two votes.
That tally capped Senate Republicans’ implicit approval of Trump’s unprecedented stonewalling of the House. In sharp contrast even to Nixon, Trump refused to turn over a single requested document and ordered all executive branch employees not to testify.
McConnell openly telegraphed his intention to stand with Trump even as the House was completing impeachment proceedings in December.
In a Dec. 12 appearance on Fox News, McConnell said there was “zero chance” Trump would be removed from office. “I’m going to take my cues from the president’s lawyers,” he said. “We’ll be working through this process hopefully in a fairly short period of time, in total coordination with the White House counsel’s office and the people who are representing the president.”
Advertisement
Indeed, on Friday, McConnell made sure to get Trump’s approval of his plan to finish the trial with a Wednesday acquittal before announcing it on the floor.
“McConnell believes history will record Trump as his useful instrument. I think history will record McConnell as Trump’s useful instrument,” said Stuart Stevens, a former aide to 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who is now a senator from Utah and one of two Republicans who voted to hear from witnesses.
“McConnell will always be remembered as the majority leader who turned the United States Senate into a kangaroo court in order to save Donald Trump from being justly convicted and removed from office,” said Rick Tyler, a GOP consultant and former aide to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s 2016 presidential campaign.
Other Republicans, among them Trump critics, said McConnell’s push to get conservative judges will ultimately outweigh his facts-be-damned acquittal of Trump. “If the judiciary rules in a more conservative direction for the next 20 years, the trade-off for what a few insiders may view as a legacy seems unimportant in contrast,” said Rory Cooper, once a top aide to former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.
One McConnell supporter, a former Republican National Committee official who would only speak on the condition of anonymity, even cited Trump’s vindictiveness and the fanaticism of his core supporters to justify McConnell’s approach. “Removing Trump would have ignited a firestorm from which we will not recover,” he said. “I think prudence dictates they did what they did.”
Advertisement
Historians, though, were dubious that McConnell’s name will ever be disentangled from Trump’s, especially decades after they are long gone, when all the details of Trump’s Ukraine scandal will finally come to light.
“Mitch’s hero was Henry Clay, his role model was John Sherman Cooper,” laughed Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “Nobody has done more to blow up the rules and norms of the Senate and destroy its integrity than McConnell. I knew John Sherman Cooper, and he would be appalled by his onetime protégé. The way he has handled impeachment is in some ways an extension of his utterly immoral behavior, but very likely it will lead the obituary.”
And Brinkley, the Rice University professor, said whatever thoughts McConnell might have had for being known as a Senate institutionalist are gone forever. “History is going to remember him not for being a great legislator, but as a wingman to Donald Trump,” Brinkley said. “He’ll be seen as the leading sycophant to Donald Trump.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-02--This Spud's For You

This Spud's For You

A draft federal rule would give schools more flexibility on several nutrition requirements , which critics have said would primarily result in kids eating more french fries ― as though President Donald Trump , known for his love of fast food , were remaking the former first lady ’ s school lunch standards in his own image .
Based on the report ’ s findings , in 2009 the USDA overhauled its rules for the program , known informally as WIC .
The biggest change was that a portion of monthly benefits would be set aside for the purchase of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potatoes ( with the exception of yams and sweet potatoes ) The big problem with white potatoes ?
Americans already eat them too much .
The bill was expensive , and Democrats initially balked when House leaders pulled funds from SNAP ( often known as food stamps ) in order to offset the cost ― but it was such a priority for the administration that President Obama smoothed things over at a White House meeting .
The law ultimately became the cornerstone of Michele Obama ’ s legacy as a champion of healthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very complicated and led to intense , in-the-weeds lobbying .
The ensuing USDA regulation , finalized in 2012 , called for school lunches to have more fruits , vegetables and whole grains , as well as less salt and fat .
The rule also called for a weekly limit on starchy vegetables such as corn , lima beans , green peas and white potatoes , prompting complaints from some school systems and an outcry from the potato industry .
( The Washington-based nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest , for its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been harsher on white potatoes . )
Before the regulations took effect , lawmakers snuck into an appropriations bill a line killing “ any maximum limits on the serving of vegetables ” ― which included potatoes , corn and lima beans ― in school lunches and breakfasts .
So instead of limiting starchy veggies , the USDA required schools to offer a minimum amount of non-starchy ones , such as leafy greens and beans .
“ The USDA proposed rule [ on starchy vegetables ] would have been another completely unnecessary , unfunded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Mike Simpson ( R-Idaho ) said at the time .
He trumpeted the successful rule change he spearheaded , and also the nutritional benefits of potatoes , which are full of potassium and fiber .
It wasn ’ t just the potato industry fighting the rules .
Schools themselves joined the fray .
The American Association of School Administrators complained that the regulations were overly onerous , potentially forcing schools to buy new kitchen equipment , for example .
And kids , the association and other groups argued , wouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increased waste of meals .
“ It ’ s outrageous what they are doing , ” Rep. Rosa DeLauro ( D-Conn. ) , a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture that has jurisdiction over these sorts of issues , told HuffPost last week .
“ Our kids need to have healthy foods .
That ’ s what these guidelines were about .
They ’ re reversing it , and it is all probably industry-related and not about the public health of our kids.
” Amid intense lobbying by industry and lawmakers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sciences to take another look at potato consumption among participants in the women , infants and children program .
And in 2015 , the scientists determined more access to potatoes wouldn ’ t be so bad for low-income mothers after all .
″The problem is that Congress puts itself in a difficult position when it says part of its job is to micromanage the nutrition standards in federal food programs , ” Hency said .
“ It ’ s hard for them to say no .
”

WASHINGTON ― The Trump administration aims to give U.S. public schools more leeway on what they feed kids for lunch and breakfast, dismantling part of former first lady Michelle Obama’s agenda to make school lunches healthier.
The ultimate symbol in this food fight? Potatoes.
A draft federal rule would give schools more flexibility on several nutrition requirements, which critics have said would primarily result in kids eating more french fries ― as though President Donald Trump, known for his love of fast food, were remaking the former first lady’s school lunch standards in his own image.
Advertisement
The proposal does not explicitly say kids should eat more potatoes, but there’s no doubt it’s a big win for the potato industry. And it’s only the latest episode in a long-running tug of war over spuds in federal programs.
“From our industry’s standpoint, we’re in a much better place than we were when this all started,” said Kam Quarles, director of the National Potato Council, a powerhouse lobbying group.
The potato drama began well before Barack Obama or Trump occupied the White House.
Years of research by a branch of the National Academy of Sciences culminated in a 2006 report on the eating habits and nutritional needs of the beneficiaries of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, which helps millions of low-income mothers buy food.
Based on the report’s findings, in 2009 the USDA overhauled its rules for the program, known informally as WIC. The biggest change was that a portion of monthly benefits would be set aside for the purchase of fresh fruits and vegetables ― but not potatoes, with the exception of yams and sweet potatoes. The big problem with white potatoes? Americans already eat them too much.
Advertisement
The potato industry reeled, and prepared to ramp up its lobbying efforts, which by now are legendary. But first, the industry suffered another setback.
In 2010, Congress overhauled the nutrition standards in the National School Lunch Program. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act called on the USDA to implement new lunch rules based on scientific guidance similar to what it had done with the food vouchers for low-income mothers.
The bill was expensive, and Democrats initially balked when House leaders pulled funds from SNAP (often known as food stamps) in order to offset the cost ― but it was such a priority for the administration that President Obama smoothed things over at a White House meeting. The law ultimately became the cornerstone of Michele Obama’s legacy as a champion of healthy lifestyle habits.
The act itself was very complicated and led to intense, in-the-weeds lobbying. The ensuing USDA regulation, finalized in 2012, called for school lunches to have more fruits, vegetables and whole grains, as well as less salt and fat. The rule also called for a weekly limit on starchy vegetables such as corn, lima beans, green peas and white potatoes, prompting complaints from some school systems and an outcry from the potato industry. (The Washington-based nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, for its part, thought the regulation should have been harsher on white potatoes.)
Before the regulations took effect, lawmakers snuck into an appropriations bill a line killing “any maximum limits on the serving of vegetables” ― which included potatoes, corn and lima beans ― in school lunches and breakfasts. So instead of limiting starchy veggies, the USDA required schools to offer a minimum amount of non-starchy ones, such as leafy greens and beans.
Advertisement
Capitol Hill’s most outspoken critic of the original regulation? A Republican from Idaho, obviously.
“The USDA proposed rule [on starchy vegetables] would have been another completely unnecessary, unfunded mandate by the federal government,” Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said at the time. He trumpeted the successful rule change he spearheaded, and also the nutritional benefits of potatoes, which are full of potassium and fiber.
“From our industry’s standpoint, we’re in a much better place than we were when this all started.” - Kam Quarles, director of the National Potato Council
It wasn’t just the potato industry fighting the rules. Schools themselves joined the fray. The American Association of School Administrators complained that the regulations were overly onerous, potentially forcing schools to buy new kitchen equipment, for example. And kids, the association and other groups argued, wouldn’t necessarily like the healthier food, risking increased waste of meals.
The result has been an unusual political dynamic, with liberal policy advocates pushing for more restrictions in a social program as Republicans and schools seek more flexibility.
Advertisement
Democrats say Republicans are willing to harm the health of children as a sop to “Big Potato.”
“It’s outrageous what they are doing,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture that has jurisdiction over these sorts of issues, told HuffPost last week. “Our kids need to have healthy foods. That’s what these guidelines were about. They’re reversing it, and it is all probably industry-related and not about the public health of our kids.”
DeLauro said lawmakers had an obligation to make sure kids were eating right, and she wasn’t sympathetic to the argument that children want foods like french fries.
“My granddaughter, she’s 12 years old. If she could start eating chocolate in the morning, she would do it at 8 o’clock until bedtime,” DeLauro said.
While allowing for personal choice is a key part of the GOP argument ― kids like potatoes, so let them eat what they want ― Republicans also have some science on their side.
Amid intense lobbying by industry and lawmakers, the USDA asked the National Academy of Sciences to take another look at potato consumption among participants in the women, infants and children program. And in 2015, the scientists determined more access to potatoes wouldn’t be so bad for low-income mothers after all.
Advertisement
“The committee finds no direct evidence that consumption of white potatoes adversely affects health outcomes for WIC participants,” the review committee said, adding that allowing participants to buy white potatoes with their vouchers probably wouldn’t alter their overall potato consumption very much.
But Simpson did not rest. He managed to slip more pro-potato text into appropriations bills, this time giving school administrators leeway to serve more potatoes in the School Breakfast Program.
“You might be surprised that this amendment deals with potatoes,” Simpson said in a May 2018 markup of the bill when he first introduced his measure, to laughter in the room.
The Trump administration has tweaked the school lunch rules multiple times, having previously given schools more freedom to offer flavored milk and cutting back on whole grains.
The House Appropriations Committee has been ground zero for the potato fight in Congress. But during the last two years, it seemed few wanted to debate Simpson’s change to school breakfast rules, potentially affecting nearly 15 million children.
Advertisement
“The potato should not be maligned,” Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) said during the 2018 markup.
President Donald Trump famously — or infamously — decided in January 2019 that he would offer tables full of fast-food offerings as part of the White House visit by Clemson University's newly crowned national championship football team. USA TODAY USPW / Reuters
Simpson’s measure will expire in 2021, but in the school lunch regulation it unveiled last month, the Trump administration said it might make it permanent.
Potatoes got a bad rap in past years because researchers found it easy to win grants for studies on the supposed evils of the most popular vegetable in America, according to Blair Richardson, CEO of the research and marketing group Potatoes USA.
“Whether you’re the New York Yankees, the Dallas Cowboys or the New England Patriots, people love to beat up on Number One,” Richardson said.
Research published in the past five years has been more favorable to potatoes, Richardson said, pointing to one such study, published in January, that suggested daily consumption of non-fried potatoes was associated with better overall diet quality in adults.
Advertisement
But for the most part, dietary advice hasn’t really changed, said Colin Schwartz of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Americans need to eat more vegetables, and they need to eat a variety of vegetables,” Schwartz said ― adding that potatoes are often fried, which is not the most healthful preparation.
Geri Henchy, a nutrition expert with the Food Research & Action Center, an anti-hunger advocacy group, said her complaint concerns the way lawmakers keep inserting themselves into a process that ought to be more scientific.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-02--U.S. Drone Destroyed Structure Housing Al Qaeda Militants, Yemen Sources Say

President Donald Trump , meanwhile , retweeted several tweets and media reports that seemed to offer confirmation the Jan. 25 strike killed top al Qaeda leader Qassim al-Rimi .
The tribal leaders said the drone strike took place in the Wadi Ubaidah area in the eastern province of Marib .
The area is known as a stronghold for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula , or AQAP , as the Yemeni affiliate is known .
They said at least three explosions rocked the area , and that the building was set ablaze .
It was not immediately clear how many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time or their identities .
The tribal leaders said a handful of al Qaeda militants arrived at the area directly after the strike and cordoned off the area .
Trump on Saturday retweeted a handful of tweets and articles that seemed to offer confirmation that al-Rimi , one of AQAP ’ s founders and its current chief , was killed in the strike .
The White House did not comment on whether Trump ’ s retweeting was confirmation and The Associated Press has asked administration officials to clarify .
Al-Rimi succeeded Nasser al-Wahishi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drone strike in 2015 , as the top leader of AQAP .
Among Trump ’ s retweets was a thread by Rita Katz , director of SITE Intelligence Group , which tracks messaging by militant groups .
Katz said the attack took place Jan. 25 and she began tweeting about it Jan. 27 .
“ If true , and it seems to be , the death of al-Rimi would mark a major blow to # AlQaeda on the whole .
Al-Rimi was a candidate for succeeding AQ leader Zawahiri , ” Katz tweeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri .
Katz said that of all living al Qaeda leaders , al-Rimi “ was the most compelling , known for his charisma & beloved across the AQ community.
” AQAP has long been considered the global network ’ s most dangerous branch and has attempted to carry out attacks on the U.S. mainland .
Yemen was plunged into civil war in 2014 .
Al Qaeda and an Islamic State affiliate have exploited the chaos to expand their presence in the country .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
SANAA, Yemen (AP) — Tribal leaders said Saturday a suspected U.S. drone strike destroyed a building housing al Qaeda militants last week in eastern Yemen.
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, retweeted several tweets and media reports that seemed to offer confirmation the Jan. 25 strike killed top al Qaeda leader Qassim al-Rimi.
Advertisement
The tribal leaders said the drone strike took place in the Wadi Ubaidah area in the eastern province of Marib. The area is known as a stronghold for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, as the Yemeni affiliate is known.
They said at least three explosions rocked the area, and that the building was set ablaze.
It was not immediately clear how many militants were in the building at the time or their identities. The tribal leaders said a handful of al Qaeda militants arrived at the area directly after the strike and cordoned off the area.
The tribal leaders spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared reprisals.
Trump on Saturday retweeted a handful of tweets and articles that seemed to offer confirmation that al-Rimi, one of AQAP’s founders and its current chief, was killed in the strike. The White House did not comment on whether Trump’s retweeting was confirmation and The Associated Press has asked administration officials to clarify.
The CIA declined to comment.
The attack was first reported by The New York Times.
Al-Rimi succeeded Nasser al-Wahishi, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in 2015, as the top leader of AQAP.
Advertisement
Among Trump’s retweets was a thread by Rita Katz, director of SITE Intelligence Group, which tracks messaging by militant groups. Katz said the attack took place Jan. 25 and she began tweeting about it Jan. 27.
“If true, and it seems to be, the death of al-Rimi would mark a major blow to #AlQaeda on the whole. Al-Rimi was a candidate for succeeding AQ leader Zawahiri,” Katz tweeted Thursday. She was referring to al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri.
Katz said that of all living al Qaeda leaders, al-Rimi “was the most compelling, known for his charisma & beloved across the AQ community.”
AQAP has long been considered the global network’s most dangerous branch and has attempted to carry out attacks on the U.S. mainland.
Yemen was plunged into civil war in 2014. Al Qaeda and an Islamic State affiliate have exploited the chaos to expand their presence in the country.
Advertisement
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Trump Campaign Spent $1.8 Million On Trump's Own Businesses, Records Reveal

Donald Trump ’ s reelection campaign steered a total of $ 1.8 million to the president ’ s businesses last year , according to the latest campaign finance filings .
The Trump camp spent close to $ 200,000 on Trump-owned properties and businesses in the last quarter of 2019 alone , according to an analysis of the Federal Election Commission filings by the Center for Responsive Politics and The New York Times .
There were 150 payments to Trump “ entities and properties , ” according to the Times .
Money to Trump businesses included several payments to Trump Tower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump Restaurants , the Trump Hotel Collection and the Trump Corporation , according to the records .
New @ FEC filing : Donald Trump ’ s 2020 re-election campaign paid $ 194,247.57 to Trump family members , properties & businesses in the final quarter of last year alone—steering over $ 1.8 MILLION in donations from presidential campaign donors to @ realDonaldTrump 's private interests .
pic.twitter.com/ell9EtWkDH — Anna Massoglia ( @ annalecta ) February 1 , 2020 The campaign also spent more than $ 1.4 million on legal fees in the final quarter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ various charges .
That makes close to $ 12.4 million in total the campaign has spent on various cases against him , including by former alleged lover Stormy Daniels , fraud lawsuits against Trump University , impeachment , and the investigation into Russian election interference by former special counsel Robert Mueller .
Some of those legal fees went to the Trump Organization .
The Trump campaign spent $ 9 million during the last three months of 2019 , mostly on digital ads .
Trump once bragged that if he ever ran for president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
“ It ’ s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it , ” he told Fortune magazine in 2000 .
You can check out the figures for all the presidential candidates here .
The FEC site can be found here .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Donald Trump’s reelection campaign steered a total of $1.8 million to the president’s businesses last year, according to the latest campaign finance filings.
The Trump camp spent close to $200,000 on Trump-owned properties and businesses in the last quarter of 2019 alone, according to an analysis of the Federal Election Commission filings by the Center for Responsive Politics and The New York Times.
Advertisement
There were 150 payments to Trump “entities and properties,” according to the Times.
Money to Trump businesses included several payments to Trump Tower, Trump International Hotel in Washington, Trump Restaurants, the Trump Hotel Collection and the Trump Corporation, according to the records.
New @FEC filing: Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign paid $194,247.57 to Trump family members, properties & businesses in the final quarter of last year alone—steering over $1.8 MILLION in donations from presidential campaign donors to @realDonaldTrump's private interests. pic.twitter.com/ell9EtWkDH — Anna Massoglia (@annalecta) February 1, 2020
The campaign also spent more than $1.4 million on legal fees in the final quarter of the year to defend Trump against various charges. That makes close to $12.4 million in total the campaign has spent on various cases against him, including by former alleged lover Stormy Daniels, fraud lawsuits against Trump University, impeachment, and the investigation into Russian election interference by former special counsel Robert Mueller.
Some of those legal fees went to the Trump Organization.
Trump 's new @FEC disclosure shows his re-election campaign spending $1.4+ million on legal consulting & lawyer fees in the 4th quarter of 2019 alone—roughly $12.4 MILLION since @realDonaldTrump became President facing Mueller investigation, Stormy Daniels lawsuit, impeachment... pic.twitter.com/xWEsAoVRsQ — Anna Massoglia (@annalecta) February 1, 2020
Advertisement
The Trump campaign spent $9 million during the last three months of 2019, mostly on digital ads.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Critics Lash Jared Kushner For Saying Bolton, Kelly, Mattis Didn't 'Have What It Took'

News watchers ’ jaws dropped when CNN reported Saturday that President Donald Trump ’ s son-in-law and political neophyte Jared Kushner claimed that former national security adviser John Bolton , Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and former White House chief of staff John Kelly didn ’ t last in the Trump administration because they “ didn ’ t have what it took.
” The comments are part of a CNN interview with Fareed Zakaria that will air Sunday .
Kushner , referring to the heavyweights , claimed they were no longer in the administration because Trump “ cycled out a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have what it took to be successful ” in the White House .
Jared Kushner says Trump critics like John Bolton and other former White House officials `` did n't have what it took '' https : //t.co/CibImMiMRH pic.twitter.com/GgmqRI37iL — CNN Politics ( @ CNNPolitics ) February 2 , 2020 Kushner was head of his family ’ s real estate business with absolutely no political experience when he was named senior White House adviser by his father-in-law as soon as Trump took office .
Critics on Twitter wondered what a guy like Bolton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 40 years , might need to have what it takes .
They had some ideas : The ability to be corrupted ?
To sign a loyalty pledge ?
Is that what it takes ?
— Bonnie Stacy ( @ bonzoid ) February 2 , 2020 Clarification : An earlier version of this article suggested Jim Mattis was fired from the Trump administration .
He resigned .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
News watchers’ jaws dropped when CNN reported Saturday that President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and political neophyte Jared Kushner claimed that former national security adviser John Bolton, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and former White House chief of staff John Kelly didn’t last in the Trump administration because they “didn’t have what it took.”
The comments are part of a CNN interview with Fareed Zakaria that will air Sunday. Kushner, referring to the heavyweights, claimed they were no longer in the administration because Trump “cycled out a lot of the people who didn’t have what it took to be successful” in the White House.
Advertisement
Jared Kushner says Trump critics like John Bolton and other former White House officials "didn't have what it took" https://t.co/CibImMiMRH pic.twitter.com/GgmqRI37iL — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) February 2, 2020
Kushner was head of his family’s real estate business with absolutely no political experience when he was named senior White House adviser by his father-in-law as soon as Trump took office.
Critics on Twitter wondered what a guy like Bolton, whose government work stretches back some 40 years, might need to have what it takes. They had some ideas:
Advertisement
a relative in a high place — Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) February 2, 2020
Ivanka? — Abolitionist Capital (@H1N1Capital) February 2, 2020
A marriage to a Trump and no morals? — Natives&ImmigrantsAreUS (@LillianRodrigu6) February 2, 2020
What it took=malleable ethics — Jonathan Nida, CFP® (@JonathanDNida) February 2, 2020
It takes nepotism and submission to a cult. Easy peasy — EJ (@ejtwister) February 2, 2020
Advertisement
A daddy who gave them their job... — Elsie (@notalemming70) February 2, 2020
The ability to be corrupted? To sign a loyalty pledge? Is that what it takes? — Bonnie Stacy (@bonzoid) February 2, 2020
LOL. Maybe they too should have read 25 books. pic.twitter.com/8grBBOfTs0 — Mary Trump’s Ghost (@NonnieSchu) February 2, 2020
Clarification: An earlier version of this article suggested Jim Mattis was fired from the Trump administration. He resigned.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Highly Anticipated Iowa Caucuses Poll Shelved Over Possible Errors

The Washington Post via Getty Images Chairs are put up after former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg appeared at a town hall event on Jan. 29 in Mason City , Iowa .
The Iowa caucuses are Feb. 3 .
A highly anticipated final poll of the Iowa caucuses won ’ t be released , owing to a methodological error , its sponsors announced Saturday night .
The CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom survey , conducted by veteran pollster Selzer & Co , has a reputation for accuracy and is closely watched by many political insiders .
“ Today , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way the survey was administered , which could have compromised the results of the poll , ” the Des Moines Register ’ s executive editor , Carol Hunter , said in a statement .
“ It appears a candidate ’ s name was omitted in at least one interview in which the respondent was asked to name their preferred candidate .
While this appears to be isolated to one surveyor , we can not confirm that with certainty .
Therefore , the partners made the difficult decision to not to move forward with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maestro @ jaselzer calls tonight `` heart-wrenching '' : “ Because of the stellar reputation of the poll , and the wish to always be thought of that way , the heart-wrenching decision was made not to release the poll .
The decision was made with the highest integrity in mind.
” — Michael M. Grynbaum ( @ grynbaum ) February 2 , 2020 The poll was shelved following a complaint raised by aides on the Pete Buttigieg campaign , according to The New York Times .
The complaint alleged that Buttigieg ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of response options in at least one interview .
“ One operator had apparently enlarged the font size on their computer screen , perhaps cutting off Mr. Buttigieg ’ s name from the list of options , ” the Times reported , noting that because the list of candidates is randomized between interviews , Buttigieg may not have been the sole candidate affected .
The pollsters weren ’ t immediately able to determine the extent of the problem before the poll ’ s planned ― and much hyped ― release on Saturday night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we apply to our polling very seriously , ” CNN political director David Chalian said .
“ And to keep the highest possible standards , we wanted to present this information to the public and explain why we didn ’ t proceed with releasing this poll this evening.
” “ [ K ] udos to them to being candid and acknowledging an issue , ” GOP pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson wrote on Twitter .
“ Even if it winds up being nothing actually serious , prudence here is praiseworthy .
”

Chairs are put up after former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg appeared at a town hall event on Jan. 29 in Mason City, Iowa. The Iowa caucuses are Feb. 3. The Washington Post via Getty Images
A highly anticipated final poll of the Iowa caucuses won’t be released, owing to a methodological error, its sponsors announced Saturday night. The CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom survey, conducted by veteran pollster Selzer & Co, has a reputation for accuracy and is closely watched by many political insiders.
“Today, a respondent raised an issue with the way the survey was administered, which could have compromised the results of the poll,” the Des Moines Register’s executive editor, Carol Hunter, said in a statement. “It appears a candidate’s name was omitted in at least one interview in which the respondent was asked to name their preferred candidate. While this appears to be isolated to one surveyor, we cannot confirm that with certainty. Therefore, the partners made the difficult decision to not to move forward with releasing the Iowa Poll.”
Advertisement
Iowa Poll maestro @jaselzer calls tonight "heart-wrenching":
“Because of the stellar reputation of the poll, and the wish to always be thought of that way, the heart-wrenching decision was made not to release the poll. The decision was made with the highest integrity in mind.” — Michael M. Grynbaum (@grynbaum) February 2, 2020
The poll was shelved following a complaint raised by aides on the Pete Buttigieg campaign, according to The New York Times. The complaint alleged that Buttigieg’s name was omitted from a list of response options in at least one interview.
“One operator had apparently enlarged the font size on their computer screen, perhaps cutting off Mr. Buttigieg’s name from the list of options,” the Times reported, noting that because the list of candidates is randomized between interviews, Buttigieg may not have been the sole candidate affected. The pollsters weren’t immediately able to determine the extent of the problem before the poll’s planned ― and much hyped ― release on Saturday night.
“We take the standards that we apply to our polling very seriously,” CNN political director David Chalian said. “And to keep the highest possible standards, we wanted to present this information to the public and explain why we didn’t proceed with releasing this poll this evening.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Amazing Pie-Slice Video Dishes On Astounding Wealth Gap In America

People all over know there ’ s a startling wealth discrepancy in America , with the top 20 % holding 86 % of the nation ’ s wealth .
“ CBS This Morning ” decided to appeal to our love of desserts to make a point about how wealth is distributed .
A video Friday — reminiscent of old shopper-survey TV commercials — demonstrated the wealth gap to people at a mall using a pie sliced into 10 equal pieces .
Initially , anchor Tony Dokoupil asked people how best to represent wealth distribution in America by telling him how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on plates representing five categories of Americans divided into 20 % segments : The Wealthiest , the Upper Middle Class , the Middle Class , the Lower Middle Class and the Poorest .
No one in the video came close to an accurate guess .
In fact , nine pieces of the pie go to the wealthiest , while the upper middle and middle class share a mere single slice ( 80 % of it goes to the upper middle class , and 20 % to the middle class ) .
The lower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” which Dokoupil dusted onto their plate in the video .
As for the poorest , they essentially get a bill to pay for pie .
They have a median debt of $ 6,000 .
If a sixth category is established for the richest 1 % of Americans , they would get four pie slices all to themselves .
Later , Dokoupil asked people what they thought of plans by Democratic presidential candidates to boost taxes on the wealthiest .
One of the shoppers asked : “ Why not ?
They can afford @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fork and tucked into a piece of “ rich people ’ s pie.
” Check out the video up top .
Dokoupil gets down to it at 1:45 .

People all over know there’s a startling wealth discrepancy in America, with the top 20% holding 86% of the nation’s wealth.
But do we really understand it?
“CBS This Morning” decided to appeal to our love of desserts to make a point about how wealth is distributed. A video Friday — reminiscent of old shopper-survey TV commercials — demonstrated the wealth gap to people at a mall using a pie sliced into 10 equal pieces.
Advertisement
Initially, anchor Tony Dokoupil asked people how best to represent wealth distribution in America by telling him how many pieces of the pie to put on plates representing five categories of Americans divided into 20% segments: The Wealthiest, the Upper Middle Class, the Middle Class, the Lower Middle Class and the Poorest.
No one in the video came close to an accurate guess.
In fact, nine pieces of the pie go to the wealthiest, while the upper middle and middle class share a mere single slice (80% of it goes to the upper middle class, and 20% to the middle class). The lower middle class gets just “crumbs,” which Dokoupil dusted onto their plate in the video. As for the poorest, they essentially get a bill to pay for pie. They have a median debt of $6,000.
If a sixth category is established for the richest 1% of Americans, they would get four pie slices all to themselves.
Later, Dokoupil asked people what they thought of plans by Democratic presidential candidates to boost taxes on the wealthiest.
Advertisement
“It would be a total disaster,” one private equity manager told him.
One of the shoppers asked: “Why not? They can afford it.” Another simply picked up a fork and tucked into a piece of “rich people’s pie.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Newly Released Emails Show Fallout From Trump's False Claims About Hurricane Dorian

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — A flurry of newly released emails from scientists and top officials at the federal agency responsible for weather forecasting clearly illustrates the consternation and outright alarm caused by President Donald Trump ’ s false claim that Hurricane Dorian could hit Alabama .
What the scientists and officials found even more troubling was a statement later issued by an unnamed NOAA spokesman that supported Trump ’ s claim and repudiated the agency ’ s own forecasters .
The emails , released late Friday in response to Freedom of Information Act requests from The Associated Press and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scramble to respond to the president and the turmoil it caused inside the federal agency .
“ What ’ s next ?
Climate science is a hoax ?
” Craig McLean , NOAA ’ s acting chief scientist , wrote in an email sent to the agency ’ s top officials .
“ Flabbergasted to leave our forecasters hanging in the political wind.
” In a more formal letter , McLean wrote that what concerned him most was that the Trump administration “ is eroding the public trust in NOAA for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and imprecise comment from the President.
” As Dorian headed for the southeastern U.S. in early September , Trump tweeted that Alabama was “ most likely to be hit ( much ) harder than anticipated.
” The National Weather Service in Birmingham corrected him , tweeting that “ Alabama will NOT see any impacts from # Dorian.
” But Trump remained adamant , and NOAA came to his defense with the unsigned statement , which claimed some data provided to the president had indicated that Alabama could be hit by the hurricane and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was issued after the White House and Commerce Department intervened , the AP and others reported at the time .
Gary Shigenaka , a NOAA scientist , wrote to the agency ’ s acting administrator , Neil Jacobs , asking him to “ reassure those of us who serve the public ... that we are not mere pawns in an absurd game.
” In response , Jacobs defended the forecasters and said , “ You have no idea how hard I ’ m fighting to keep politics out of science.
” The whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ became known as Sharpie-gate .
In defending himself in the Oval Office , Trump displayed an NOAA map that was altered using a black marker to extend the hurricane ’ s projected path .
“ Apparently the President is convinced that Alabama was in the path of Dorian and someone altered a NOAA map ( with a sharpie ) to convince folks , ” NOAA official Makeda Okolo wrote in an email to chief operating officer Benjamin Friedman and others .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — A flurry of newly released emails from scientists and top officials at the federal agency responsible for weather forecasting clearly illustrates the consternation and outright alarm caused by President Donald Trump’s false claim that Hurricane Dorian could hit Alabama.
A top National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official even called the president’s behavior “crazy.”
Advertisement
What the scientists and officials found even more troubling was a statement later issued by an unnamed NOAA spokesman that supported Trump’s claim and repudiated the agency’s own forecasters.
The emails, released late Friday in response to Freedom of Information Act requests from The Associated Press and others, give an inside picture of the scramble to respond to the president and the turmoil it caused inside the federal agency.
“What’s next? Climate science is a hoax?” Craig McLean, NOAA’s acting chief scientist, wrote in an email sent to the agency’s top officials. “Flabbergasted to leave our forecasters hanging in the political wind.”
In a more formal letter, McLean wrote that what concerned him most was that the Trump administration “is eroding the public trust in NOAA for an apparent political recovery from an ill timed and imprecise comment from the President.”
Advertisement
As Dorian headed for the southeastern U.S. in early September, Trump tweeted that Alabama was “most likely to be hit (much) harder than anticipated.” The National Weather Service in Birmingham corrected him, tweeting that “Alabama will NOT see any impacts from #Dorian.”
But Trump remained adamant, and NOAA came to his defense with the unsigned statement, which claimed some data provided to the president had indicated that Alabama could be hit by the hurricane and scolded the Birmingham office. The statement was issued after the White House and Commerce Department intervened, the AP and others reported at the time.
It provoked angry emails from within the agency and from the public.
Gary Shigenaka, a NOAA scientist, wrote to the agency’s acting administrator, Neil Jacobs, asking him to “reassure those of us who serve the public ... that we are not mere pawns in an absurd game.”
In response, Jacobs defended the forecasters and said, “You have no idea how hard I’m fighting to keep politics out of science.”
The whole incident is perhaps best remembered for what became known as Sharpie-gate. In defending himself in the Oval Office, Trump displayed an NOAA map that was altered using a black marker to extend the hurricane’s projected path.
Advertisement
“Apparently the President is convinced that Alabama was in the path of Dorian and someone altered a NOAA map (with a sharpie) to convince folks,” NOAA official Makeda Okolo wrote in an email to chief operating officer Benjamin Friedman and others.
Friedman replied: “Yep, crazy.”
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Bloomberg Finds A Welcome Crowd In Denver's White Moderates

DENVER ― In front of any other audience , it would have been a risky opener .
Just after taking the stage at his presidential campaign ’ s new flagship office in downtown Denver on Saturday , Michael Bloomberg — net worth $ 61 billion — joked about wanting to find a stand-in so he could instead spend the day at his Vail vacation home .
While Bloomberg ’ s wealth has drawn scorn from critics who accuse him of attempting to buy the presidency , that concern wasn ’ t shared by many attendees .
Kristi Sweeney , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with her husband , gave Bloomberg a pass on his self-funded campaign given what she sees as the urgency of getting President Donald Trump out of office .
“ I can understand peoples ’ concerns , but this is a unique election , ” she said .
“ I don ’ t think a candidate should have to have wealth , but the fact that he is wealthy might be a plus in this election.
” The self-described moderate said she was also weighing the candidacies of Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We ’ re looking for the candidate who can win , ” said Sweeney .
“ We ’ re desperate for that.
” Bloomberg didn ’ t mention a single primary challenger in his 15-minute stump speech , instead going after the president on issues like gun control , health insurance “ for everyone who needs it , ” education reform and climate change .
“ We need someone that does not cast aside Trump voters as bad people .
They voted for him because they ’ re desperate , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environmentalist .
“ We can ’ t just ignore parts of the country.
” In one of his bigger applause lines , the former New York City mayor called out Trump for being a climate denier .
“ I ’ m an engineer , I actually believe in science , ” he said .
“ Imagine that !
” That was welcome news to Rich and Tami Ward , who described themselves as “ all in ” on Bloomberg after the event .
Rich , 48 , listed the environment , gun control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as priorities , as did Tami , who owns a local hair salon .
Despite being all in , Tami acknowledged that “ if Bloomberg doesn ’ t get the Democratic nomination , obviously we ’ ll get behind someone.
” So will Bloomberg .
If he doesn ’ t secure the nomination , he ’ s pledged to support whoever does ― a point he made Saturday to big applause .
Asked if she was considering any candidate other than Bloomberg , Denver real estate agent Marilyn Newell was emphatic : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she said .
“ I wish [ Sens .
Elizabeth ] Warren and [ Bernie ] Sanders would go back to the Senate and do their jobs .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
DENVER ― In front of any other audience, it would have been a risky opener.
Just after taking the stage at his presidential campaign’s new flagship office in downtown Denver on Saturday, Michael Bloomberg — net worth $61 billion — joked about wanting to find a stand-in so he could instead spend the day at his Vail vacation home.
Instead of alienating the at-capacity crowd in the 5,000-square-foot former Patagonia store, the largely white, slightly older audience gave a knowing laugh.
Advertisement
While Bloomberg’s wealth has drawn scorn from critics who accuse him of attempting to buy the presidency, that concern wasn’t shared by many attendees.
Kristi Sweeney, a certified financial planner who was in attendance with her husband, gave Bloomberg a pass on his self-funded campaign given what she sees as the urgency of getting President Donald Trump out of office.
“I can understand peoples’ concerns, but this is a unique election,” she said. “I don’t think a candidate should have to have wealth, but the fact that he is wealthy might be a plus in this election.”
The self-described moderate said she was also weighing the candidacies of Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and former Vice President Joe Biden. “We’re looking for the candidate who can win,” said Sweeney. “We’re desperate for that.”
Advertisement
Bloomberg didn’t mention a single primary challenger in his 15-minute stump speech, instead going after the president on issues like gun control, health insurance “for everyone who needs it,” education reform and climate change.
“We need someone that does not cast aside Trump voters as bad people. They voted for him because they’re desperate,” said Phil Ord, a 28-year-old self-described pro-nuclear environmentalist. “We can’t just ignore parts of the country.”
In one of his bigger applause lines, the former New York City mayor called out Trump for being a climate denier. “I’m an engineer, I actually believe in science,” he said. “Imagine that!”
That was welcome news to Rich and Tami Ward, who described themselves as “all in” on Bloomberg after the event. Rich, 48, listed the environment, gun control, and improving teachers’ salaries, as priorities, as did Tami, who owns a local hair salon.
Advertisement
Despite being all in, Tami acknowledged that “if Bloomberg doesn’t get the Democratic nomination, obviously we’ll get behind someone.”
So will Bloomberg. If he doesn’t secure the nomination, he’s pledged to support whoever does ― a point he made Saturday to big applause.
Others seemed a bit less open-minded.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Bernie Sanders Focuses On Donald Trump In Final Pre-Caucus Push

INDIANOLA , Iowa ― In his first campaign event since ending a week in Washington for the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump , Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) made a forceful case on Saturday that he is the Democratic presidential candidate with the best chance of unseating the GOP president .
“ No disrespect to my Democratic colleagues who are competing for the nomination , they ’ re friends of mine , but I believe that we are the strongest campaign to defeat Trump , ” he declared on Saturday to a crowd of people on the campus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his campaign is uniquely capable of inspiring groups of people who typically do not show up at the polls , like working-class voters and younger people .
“ To defeat Donald Trump , who will be a formidable candidate for a number of reasons , we need to have the largest voter turnout in American history .
That ’ s just a fact .
If it is a low turnout election , Trump will win , ” he said .
“ And I believe that our campaign is the campaign of energy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] can bring millions of people into the political process who normally do not vote.
” Sanders also implied that his brand of economic populism makes him a more credible messenger for the idea that Trump has failed to live up to his own populist promise .
“ Trump said that he was a different type of Republican , that he was going to take on the establishment , he was a champion of the working class in America , ” he continued .
“ If you ’ re a champion of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t try to throw 32 million people off the health care that they have !
If you are a champion of working people , you don ’ t write a tax bill , which gives 83 % of the benefits to the top 1 % !
” The focus on Trump , who Sanders also characterized as a racist bent on undermining the rule of law , continues his modest shift in emphasis toward electability in the final days before the caucuses on Monday .
This past Thursday , Sanders debuted a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of experience defending Social Security from cuts , compared with Trump ’ s recent suggestion that he would eventually entertain reductions in “ entitlements.
” But Sanders , who has occasionally struggled to keep surrogates and aides on message , also found himself implicitly addressing controversy created by Rep. Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) on Friday night .
Tlaib , who spoke on a panel at a Sanders rally with Reps. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) and Pramila Jayapal ( D-Wash. ) , joined members of the audience in booing Hillary Clinton for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tlaib apologized on Saturday , but only after a spokesman for Clinton and other mainstream Democrats cited Tlaib ’ s conduct as an illustration of Sanders ’ allegedly divisive effect on the party .
“ By the way , let me say this so there is no misunderstanding , ” Sanders said , “ certainly I hope that we ’ re going to win .
But if we do not win , we will support the winner and I know that every other candidate will do the same .
We are united in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Some Iowans at the rally enjoyed hearing from Sanders .
Ashley Merkley , an undecided Simpson College student , who attended with her friend , Maggie Flowers , a hardcore Sanders enthusiast , said the event made it more likely that she would caucus for Sanders on Monday .
She is also considering entrepreneur Andrew Yang , and Sens .
Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
and Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) .
Jay Wilkinson , a college employee , attended the event , despite his commitment to caucus for former South @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is not a fan of “ Medicare for All , ” which is part of why he thinks Sanders is “ too far left.
” “ I was very heartened by what he said today .
I hadn ’ t heard that , ” he said .
“ And I did hold some resentment toward him because I feel like he and his supporters lost the 2016 election because they did not get behind Hillary .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
INDIANOLA, Iowa ― In his first campaign event since ending a week in Washington for the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) made a forceful case on Saturday that he is the Democratic presidential candidate with the best chance of unseating the GOP president.
“No disrespect to my Democratic colleagues who are competing for the nomination, they’re friends of mine, but I believe that we are the strongest campaign to defeat Trump,” he declared on Saturday to a crowd of people on the campus of Simpson College.
Advertisement
Sanders based his argument on what he sees as two of his key strengths.
He insists that his campaign is uniquely capable of inspiring groups of people who typically do not show up at the polls, like working-class voters and younger people.
“To defeat Donald Trump, who will be a formidable candidate for a number of reasons, we need to have the largest voter turnout in American history. That’s just a fact. If it is a low turnout election, Trump will win,” he said. “And I believe that our campaign is the campaign of energy, is the campaign of excitement [and] can bring millions of people into the political process who normally do not vote.”
Sanders also implied that his brand of economic populism makes him a more credible messenger for the idea that Trump has failed to live up to his own populist promise.
“We are going to expose his hypocrisy, his lies,” Sanders said.
“Trump said that he was a different type of Republican, that he was going to take on the establishment, he was a champion of the working class in America,” he continued. “If you’re a champion of the working class of America, you don’t try to throw 32 million people off the health care that they have! If you are a champion of working people, you don’t write a tax bill, which gives 83% of the benefits to the top 1%!”
Advertisement
The focus on Trump, who Sanders also characterized as a racist bent on undermining the rule of law, continues his modest shift in emphasis toward electability in the final days before the caucuses on Monday. This past Thursday, Sanders debuted a TV ad in Iowa touting his decades of experience defending Social Security from cuts, compared with Trump’s recent suggestion that he would eventually entertain reductions in “entitlements.”
But Sanders, who has occasionally struggled to keep surrogates and aides on message, also found himself implicitly addressing controversy created by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) on Friday night. Tlaib, who spoke on a panel at a Sanders rally with Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), joined members of the audience in booing Hillary Clinton for repeatedly attacking Sanders in recent weeks. Tlaib apologized on Saturday, but only after a spokesman for Clinton and other mainstream Democrats cited Tlaib’s conduct as an illustration of Sanders’ allegedly divisive effect on the party.
“By the way, let me say this so there is no misunderstanding,” Sanders said, “certainly I hope that we’re going to win. But if we do not win, we will support the winner and I know that every other candidate will do the same. We are united in understanding that we must defeat Donald Trump.”
Some Iowans at the rally enjoyed hearing from Sanders. Ashley Merkley, an undecided Simpson College student, who attended with her friend, Maggie Flowers, a hardcore Sanders enthusiast, said the event made it more likely that she would caucus for Sanders on Monday. She is also considering entrepreneur Andrew Yang, and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).
“I appreciated how genuine he seemed,” Merkley said of Sanders.
Jay Wilkinson, a college employee, attended the event, despite his commitment to caucus for former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. He is not a fan of “Medicare for All,” which is part of why he thinks Sanders is “too far left.”
Advertisement
Wilkinson still appreciated hearing Sanders’ remarks, particularly his promise to support the eventual Democratic presidential nominee, regardless of who it is.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Rashida Tlaib Addresses Hillary Clinton Boos Ahead Of Iowa Caucuses

Rep. Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) on Saturday addressed what happened at a recent campaign event for Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) , where she joined audience members who booed in response to Hillary Clinton ’ s harsh words about the senator .
The representative shared a series of tweets , noting she is “ so incredibly in love with the movement that our campaign of # NotMeUs has created .
“ This makes me protective over it and frustrated by attempts to dismiss the strength and diversity of our movement , ” she continued , noting in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ over one candidate ” is key to ensuring President Donald Trump isn ’ t reelected in November .
“ In this instance , I allowed my disappointment with Secretary Clinton ’ s latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me , ” Tlaib tweeted .
“ You all , my sisters-in-service on stage , and our movement deserve better.
” “ In this instance , I allowed my disappointment with Secretary Clinton 's latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and our movement deserve better .
( 3/4 ) — Rashida Tlaib ( @ RashidaTlaib ) February 1 , 2020 On Friday , Tlaib was joined by Reps. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) and Pramila Jayapal ( D-Wash. ) for a panel discussion in Iowa to support Sanders ahead of the caucuses on Monday .
During the discussion , panel moderator Dionna Langford , the co-chair Sanders ’ campaign in Iowa , noted that Clinton recently claimed in a much-discussed interview with The Hollywood Reporter that “ nobody likes ” Sanders , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got nothing done ” in Congress .
Clinton declined to say in that interview whether she ’ d endorse Sanders if he were to become the 2020 nominee , though she tweeted the day the piece was published that she ’ d do whatever she could to support the Democratic Party ’ s eventual nominee amid criticism .
“ You all know I can ’ t be quiet ... no , we ’ re going to boo , ” she continued with a smile .
“ The haters will shut up on Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tlaib of further dividing the party , while others argued that much of the criticism against Tlaib was tone-policing , and that women of color should be allowed to express their opinions as candidly as white women like Clinton .
Tlaib concluded her statement on Saturday by noting that she “ will continue to strive to come from a place of love and not react in the same way of those who are against what we are building in this country.
” “ I will continue to strive to come from a place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same way of those who are against what we are building in this country .
This is about building a just and equitable future for my two boys , children across the country , and future generations . ''
( 4/4 ) — Rashida Tlaib ( @ RashidaTlaib ) February 1 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) on Saturday addressed what happened at a recent campaign event for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), where she joined audience members who booed in response to Hillary Clinton’s harsh words about the senator.
The representative shared a series of tweets, noting she is “so incredibly in love with the movement that our campaign of #NotMeUs has created.
Advertisement
“This makes me protective over it and frustrated by attempts to dismiss the strength and diversity of our movement,” she continued, noting in a later tweet that unifying the Democratic Party “over one candidate” is key to ensuring President Donald Trump isn’t reelected in November.
“In this instance, I allowed my disappointment with Secretary Clinton’s latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me,” Tlaib tweeted. “You all, my sisters-in-service on stage, and our movement deserve better.”
“In this instance, I allowed my disappointment with Secretary Clinton's latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me. You all, my sisters-in-service on stage, and our movement deserve better. (3/4) — Rashida Tlaib (@RashidaTlaib) February 1, 2020
On Friday, Tlaib was joined by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) for a panel discussion in Iowa to support Sanders ahead of the caucuses on Monday.
Advertisement
During the discussion, panel moderator Dionna Langford, the co-chair Sanders’ campaign in Iowa, noted that Clinton recently claimed in a much-discussed interview with The Hollywood Reporter that “nobody likes” Sanders, and that the Democratic presidential candidate “got nothing done” in Congress.
Clinton declined to say in that interview whether she’d endorse Sanders if he were to become the 2020 nominee, though she tweeted the day the piece was published that she’d do whatever she could to support the Democratic Party’s eventual nominee amid criticism.
When audience members began to boo Clinton’s remarks on Friday, Langford responded, “We’re not going to boo, we’re classy here.”
Tlaib then chimed in and said, “No, no I’ll boo ... boo.”
“You all know I can’t be quiet ... no, we’re going to boo,” she continued with a smile. “The haters will shut up on Monday when we win.”
Tlaib’s remarks drew varied responses on Twitter.
Some people accused Tlaib of further dividing the party, while others argued that much of the criticism against Tlaib was tone-policing, and that women of color should be allowed to express their opinions as candidly as white women like Clinton.
Advertisement
Tlaib concluded her statement on Saturday by noting that she “will continue to strive to come from a place of love and not react in the same way of those who are against what we are building in this country.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-01--Pentagon Approves Use Of Military Bases To Quarantine Of Up To 1,000

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Saturday approved a request from the Department of Health and Human Services for the possible use of military facilities to accommodate 1,000 people who may have to be quarantined upon arrival from overseas due to a new virus .
A Defense Department statement said HHS officials requested the use of several facilities capable of housing at least 250 people in individual rooms through Feb. 29 .
HHS would be responsible for all care , transportation and security of the evacuees , according to the statement .
The viral outbreak began @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rose to 259 on Saturday .
More than 11,900 people have been infected with the coronavirus globally , the vast majority of them on the Chinese mainland .
An order signed Friday by President Donald Trump temporarily bars entry to foreign nationals who have traveled to China within the last 14 days , with the exception of immediate family of U.S. citizens and permanent residents .
Americans returning from China will be allowed into the country , but will face screening at select ports of entry and be required to undertake 14 days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t pose a health risk .
Those returning from Hubei province , the center of the outbreak , will be subject to up to 14 days of mandatory quarantine .
Nearly 200 Americans already are quarantined at a military base in Southern California after being evacuated from Wuhan , the capital of Hubei province .
None of the Americans being housed at the March Air Reserve Base in Riverside has shown signs of illness , but it can take up to two weeks for someone who is infected to get sick .
Beginning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funneling all flights to the U.S. from China to seven major airports where passengers can be screened for illness .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Saturday approved a request from the Department of Health and Human Services for the possible use of military facilities to accommodate 1,000 people who may have to be quarantined upon arrival from overseas due to a new virus.
A Defense Department statement said HHS officials requested the use of several facilities capable of housing at least 250 people in individual rooms through Feb. 29. HHS would be responsible for all care, transportation and security of the evacuees, according to the statement.
Advertisement
The viral outbreak began in China, where the death toll rose to 259 on Saturday. More than 11,900 people have been infected with the coronavirus globally, the vast majority of them on the Chinese mainland.
An order signed Friday by President Donald Trump temporarily bars entry to foreign nationals who have traveled to China within the last 14 days, with the exception of immediate family of U.S. citizens and permanent residents.
Americans returning from China will be allowed into the country, but will face screening at select ports of entry and be required to undertake 14 days of self-screening to ensure they don’t pose a health risk.
Those returning from Hubei province, the center of the outbreak, will be subject to up to 14 days of mandatory quarantine.
Advertisement
The installations selected by the Defense Department are the 168th Regiment, Regional Training Institute, Fort Carson, Colorado; Travis Air Force Base, California; Lackland Air Force Base, Texas; Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California.
Nearly 200 Americans already are quarantined at a military base in Southern California after being evacuated from Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province.
None of the Americans being housed at the March Air Reserve Base in Riverside has shown signs of illness, but it can take up to two weeks for someone who is infected to get sick.
Beginning Sunday, the U.S. will also begin funneling all flights to the U.S. from China to seven major airports where passengers can be screened for illness.