thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-02--Virginia governor’s call for 18-person gun ban force comes under fire

Virginia ’ s pop-up gun sanctuary movement has turned its attention to fighting the governor ’ s call for a $ 4.8 million , 18-officer team to enforce his proposed “ assault weapons ” ban .
Two key groups issued an alert this week to push gun owners to four budget hearings Thursday around the state , asking them to quiz state legislators if they will vote to ban or confiscate weapons .
“ We understand that this is short notice .
But it would have a significant impact if many of our members could show up and make a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislators in attendance , ” said the Virginia Citizens Defense League .
“ We see in the governor ’ s proposed budget that he wants $ 4 million and 18 new law-enforcement positions to enforce a ban on commonly-owned firearms , ” said Erich Pratt , Gun Owners of America senior vice president .
“ Gun owners want to know : Is this money going to be used for the gun confiscation ?
” he added .
Both groups have been key in the surprising success of the organic gun sanctuary movement in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ralph Northam said he ’ d back sweeping gun control legislation after Democrats took control of the legislature in the 2019 elections .
The election surprised gun owners and prompted them to subsequently flood town and county meetings to demand that local lawmakers OK sanctuary resolutions to ignore Richmond ’ s gun control urge .
A surprising 91 % of all state counties have adopted the resolutions , sending a signal to state lawmakers .
In two weeks , the groups are planning to bus in thousands of gun owners for a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demands not to pass new gun laws .
The gun control side is also working overtime to win support for gun control initiatives , including expanded background checks and a ban on modern sporting weapons such as AR-15 rifles and pistols .
At today ’ s budget hearings , the groups have urged their members to ask questions about Northam ’ s budget that includes $ 4.8 million for an 18-person force to implement his proposed assault weapons ban .
It also features more than $ 2 million to hire 10 more to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universal background checks , a one gun purchase per month limit , and “ extreme risk legislation.
” “ We need to get as many pro-gun Virginians as possible to attend these meetings and demand to know if the delegates and senators plan to allocate money -- as delineated in budget -- to confiscate common , household firearms from Virginia citizens , ” VCDL wrote in an email alert .
[ Read more : Virginia gun store says firearms , ammunition , and magazines flying off shelves with upswing in cash purchases ]

Virginia’s pop-up gun sanctuary movement has turned its attention to fighting the governor’s call for a $4.8 million, 18-officer team to enforce his proposed “assault weapons” ban.
Two key groups issued an alert this week to push gun owners to four budget hearings Thursday around the state, asking them to quiz state legislators if they will vote to ban or confiscate weapons.
“We understand that this is short notice. But it would have a significant impact if many of our members could show up and make a 3-minute statement and ask questions of the legislators in attendance,” said the Virginia Citizens Defense League.
“We see in the governor’s proposed budget that he wants $4 million and 18 new law-enforcement positions to enforce a ban on commonly-owned firearms,” said Erich Pratt, Gun Owners of America senior vice president.
Over 150 people in Blacksburg for the public hearing on @GovernorVA’s proposed budget. Most people in the room are here — following a call put out by gun rights group VCDL — to speak about money in Northam’s budget to support implementation of gun control. pic.twitter.com/G32p7AEC8D — Amy Friedenberger (@AJFriedenberger) January 2, 2020
“Gun owners want to know: Is this money going to be used for the gun confiscation?” he added.
Both groups have been key in the surprising success of the organic gun sanctuary movement in Virginia that was prompted when Gov. Ralph Northam said he’d back sweeping gun control legislation after Democrats took control of the legislature in the 2019 elections.
The election surprised gun owners and prompted them to subsequently flood town and county meetings to demand that local lawmakers OK sanctuary resolutions to ignore Richmond’s gun control urge.
A surprising 91% of all state counties have adopted the resolutions, sending a signal to state lawmakers.
In two weeks, the groups are planning to bus in thousands of gun owners for a “lobby day” in Richmond to reinforce demands not to pass new gun laws.
Gun rights activists are paying a lot of notice to this section of Gov. Northam's proposed budget, which calls for $250k in extra prison funding to enforce potential gun control laws. pic.twitter.com/NAHKWpiWzw — Ben Paviour (@BPaves) January 2, 2020
The gun control side is also working overtime to win support for gun control initiatives, including expanded background checks and a ban on modern sporting weapons such as AR-15 rifles and pistols.
At today’s budget hearings, the groups have urged their members to ask questions about Northam’s budget that includes $4.8 million for an 18-person force to implement his proposed assault weapons ban.
It also features more than $2 million to hire 10 more to enforce other gun control proposals, including universal background checks, a one gun purchase per month limit, and “extreme risk legislation.”
“We need to get as many pro-gun Virginians as possible to attend these meetings and demand to know if the delegates and senators plan to allocate money -- as delineated in budget -- to confiscate common, household firearms from Virginia citizens,” VCDL wrote in an email alert.
[Read more: Virginia gun store says firearms, ammunition, and magazines flying off shelves with upswing in cash purchases]


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--Judge Judy comes out as a nanny stater

Judge Judy comes out as a nanny stater

Everybody loves Judge Judy .
But now that she ’ s waded in the 2020 presidential race , Americans should view the beloved cultural icon a bit differently .
Judith Sheindlin , the host of daytime television ’ s courtroom drama Judge Judy , endorsed former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in a television advertisement that debuted on Monday .
`` Mike Bloomberg has done amazing things and will be a truly great president , '' Judge Judy .
`` No one comes close to Mike Bloomberg 's executive achievement , government experience , and impactful philanthropy .
His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring us through these very challenging times . ''
The judge should stick to the ( TV ) courtroom .
She ’ s a beloved American figure , drawing the and bringing in 10 million viewers on average , more than triple the reach of prime-time news hosts such as Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow .
People love the judge ’ s no-nonsense attitude and the way she speaks her mind , no holds barred .
But as far as Judge Judy ’ s politics are concerned … well , maybe she should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To endorse Bloomberg , of all people , is to reject the common-sense ethos she projects in the courtroom and side with a politician who thinks everyday people are too stupid to be trusted with the freedom to run their own lives even in the most simple ways .
The judge ’ s pitch for Bloomberg largely rests on her positive view of how he performed as mayor of New York City .
But when I look at his record as mayor , I don ’ t see the “ steady leadership ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touts .
Rather , the stark opposite .
Bloomberg as mayor repeatedly defended and carried out authoritarian that allowed police to shake down and search people at random , which — in an absolutely shocking twist — led to disproportionate targeting of racial minorities .
He also intruded on the lives of New Yorkers in the pettiest and most paternalistic ways , such as a nanny state ban on large-sized sodas .
And now , Bloomberg is running for president on a He ’ s one of the loudest cheerleaders of the foolish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the failed drug war against marijuana , essentially seeks to and disarm all Americans , and more .
Also , for what it ’ s worth , is Judge Judy not bothered by Bloomberg ’ s ?
She wouldn ’ t allow a man to bark at a pregnant woman to “ kill it ” or ask a newly engaged woman , “ What is the guy dumb and blind ?
What the hell is he marrying you for ?
” , in her courtroom .
Bloomberg has repeatedly said all these things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So why does Judge Judy think a man too callous for her courtroom is qualified for the Oval Office ?
Don ’ t get me wrong , I still love Judge Judy .
But I won ’ t be taking her political advice anytime soon , and neither should you .

Everybody loves Judge Judy. But now that she’s waded in the 2020 presidential race, Americans should view the beloved cultural icon a bit differently.
Judith Sheindlin, the host of daytime television’s courtroom drama Judge Judy, endorsed former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in a television advertisement that debuted on Monday.
NEW: Judge Judy has endorsed Mike Bloomberg pic.twitter.com/215fqJCDli — Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) January 6, 2020
"Mike Bloomberg has done amazing things and will be a truly great president," Judge Judy said . "No one comes close to Mike Bloomberg's executive achievement, government experience, and impactful philanthropy. His steady leadership will unite our country and bring us through these very challenging times."
The judge should stick to the (TV) courtroom. She’s a beloved American figure, drawing the highest salary of any television host and bringing in 10 million viewers on average, more than triple the reach of prime-time news hosts such as Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow. People love the judge’s no-nonsense attitude and the way she speaks her mind, no holds barred.
But as far as Judge Judy’s politics are concerned … well, maybe she should have kept this one to herself. To endorse Bloomberg, of all people, is to reject the common-sense ethos she projects in the courtroom and side with a politician who thinks everyday people are too stupid to be trusted with the freedom to run their own lives even in the most simple ways.
Do not underestimate the importance of this endorsement. Half the country thinks Judge Judy is on the Supreme Court. https://t.co/QxstFyRtGh — (((evan shapiro))) (@eshap) January 6, 2020
The judge’s pitch for Bloomberg largely rests on her positive view of how he performed as mayor of New York City. But when I look at his record as mayor, I don’t see the “steady leadership” or “amazing things” Judge Judy touts.
Rather, the stark opposite. Bloomberg as mayor repeatedly defended and carried out authoritarian “stop and frisk” policies that allowed police to shake down and search people at random, which — in an absolutely shocking twist — led to disproportionate targeting of racial minorities. He also intruded on the lives of New Yorkers in the pettiest and most paternalistic ways, such as a nanny state ban on large-sized sodas.
And now, Bloomberg is running for president on a platform of toxic, big-government centrism. He’s one of the loudest cheerleaders of the foolish war on vaping, wants to continue the failed drug war against marijuana, essentially seeks to repeal the Second Amendment and disarm all Americans, and more.
Also, for what it’s worth, is Judge Judy not bothered by Bloomberg’s long, well-documented history of sexism and misogyny ? She wouldn’t allow a man to bark at a pregnant woman to “kill it” or ask a newly engaged woman, “What is the guy dumb and blind? What the hell is he marrying you for?”, in her courtroom. Bloomberg has repeatedly said all these things to women he employed and worse. So why does Judge Judy think a man too callous for her courtroom is qualified for the Oval Office?
Don’t get me wrong, I still love Judge Judy. But I won’t be taking her political advice anytime soon, and neither should you.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--Democrats struggle to play Soleimani killing right

Foreign policy is typically a general election trap for Democrats , but now it ’ s presenting a problem for some 2020 presidential candidates in the primary .
President Trump ’ s order to kill Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani on Iraqi soil and left some Democrats in uncharted waters .
While Joe Biden ’ s long foreign policy record is both an asset and a liability , the positions of comparatively untested top Democratic rivals such as Bernie Sanders , Elizabeth Warren , and Pete Buttigieg are now receiving greater scrutiny as the opening Iowa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American Politics Research ’ s Costas Panagopoulos , Trump ’ s drone strike last week on Soleimani , the top general for Iran 's Ali Khamenei , may have “ wittingly or unwittingly ” helped “ to narrow down the Democratic field.
” “ I suspect recent developments in the Middle East could give a leg up to someone like Buttigieg , who has personal military experience in the region and can speak to the real-world implications of these decisions for American families , or to Biden , who has had considerable foreign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told the Washington Examiner .
Biden , the former vice president , 77 , was a longtime member and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before joining the Obama administration but voted in favor of the Iraq War and advised against the raid that killed Osama bin Laden .
Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , 37 , served seven months in Afghanistan as a naval intelligence officer in an Army-style role , although he 's never fired his weapon , come under fire , or fought in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a senator for Vermont , 78 , has based his second White House bid partly on an anti-war platform after protesting the Vietnam War as a University of Chicago student .
And though she sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee , Warren , Sanders ’ s senatorial colleague from Massachusetts , 70 , has been targeted by her opponents over her lack of foreign policy exposure and flip-flops as she veers to the left of the ideological spectrum .
Democratic strategist Vic Fingerhut predicted the long-term political environment , however , would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event .
“ If something actually happens , if they strike U.S. assets overseas , then I don ’ t think there ’ s any question that it will change the focus .
And it ’ s very unclear who will benefit .
The conventional wisdom is that it will benefit Biden because he ’ s been around , ” he said .
In the aftermath of Soleimani ’ s death in Baghdad on Jan. 3 during an operation launched to counter the “ imminent threat ” posed to U.S. citizens , criticized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questioned Trump ’ s broader Middle East strategy .
Sanders , meanwhile , slammed the administration ’ s choice to escalate tensions in the region without acknowledging the death of a terrorist .
On the campaign trail last weekend , when Biden and Sanders were in Iowa and Buttigieg and Warren were in New Hampshire , Iran was raised by the press more than voters .
Reporters ’ questions then drove a media and online conversation about whether Soleimani ’ s killing should be called “ an assassination.
” Warren came under fire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sooner , while more center-left Buttigieg avoided the same level of scrutiny .
Warren also made headlines for as the Senate prepares for the president ’ s impeachment trial , adding she wouldn ’ t have ordered the attack .
Despite the swipes , Fingerhut warned Democrats that the traditional divide between the major political parties over domestic and foreign policy no longer rings true in the Trump era .
“ In the last 10 or 15 years , the very clear perception of the two parties has been blurred a little bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ populist left as well as a populist right on trade issues , on infrastructure , stuff like that , and the fact that there ’ s been an economic expansion for several years , is that the Republicans are much stronger on domestic and economic policy than they ’ ve been in the past .
Most of that is Trump , it ’ s not the Republicans , ” he told the Washington Examiner .

Foreign policy is typically a general election trap for Democrats, but now it’s presenting a problem for some 2020 presidential candidates in the primary.
President Trump’s order to kill Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani on Iraqi soil has shifted the 2020 political landscape and left some Democrats in uncharted waters. While Joe Biden’s long foreign policy record is both an asset and a liability, the positions of comparatively untested top Democratic rivals such as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg are now receiving greater scrutiny as the opening Iowa caucuses near on Feb. 3.
For American Politics Research’s Costas Panagopoulos, Trump’s drone strike last week on Soleimani, the top general for Iran's Ali Khamenei, may have “wittingly or unwittingly” helped “to narrow down the Democratic field.”
“I suspect recent developments in the Middle East could give a leg up to someone like Buttigieg, who has personal military experience in the region and can speak to the real-world implications of these decisions for American families, or to Biden, who has had considerable foreign policy experience for decades,” Panagopoulos told the Washington Examiner.
Biden, the former vice president, 77, was a longtime member and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before joining the Obama administration but voted in favor of the Iraq War and advised against the raid that killed Osama bin Laden . Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, 37, served seven months in Afghanistan as a naval intelligence officer in an Army-style role, although he's never fired his weapon, come under fire, or fought in battle.
In contrast, Sanders, a senator for Vermont, 78, has based his second White House bid partly on an anti-war platform after protesting the Vietnam War as a University of Chicago student. And though she sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Warren, Sanders’s senatorial colleague from Massachusetts, 70, has been targeted by her opponents over her lack of foreign policy exposure and flip-flops as she veers to the left of the ideological spectrum.
Democratic strategist Vic Fingerhut predicted the long-term political environment, however, would only become permanently altered with another major event.
“If something actually happens, if they strike U.S. assets overseas, then I don’t think there’s any question that it will change the focus. And it’s very unclear who will benefit. The conventional wisdom is that it will benefit Biden because he’s been around,” he said.
In the aftermath of Soleimani’s death in Baghdad on Jan. 3 during an operation launched to counter the “imminent threat” posed to U.S. citizens, Biden, Buttigieg, and Warren criticized Soleimani as a murderer of Americans but questioned Trump’s broader Middle East strategy. Sanders, meanwhile, slammed the administration’s choice to escalate tensions in the region without acknowledging the death of a terrorist.
On the campaign trail last weekend, when Biden, Sanders, and Warren were in Iowa and Buttigieg was in New Hampshire, Iran was raised by the press more than voters. Reporters’ questions then drove a media and online conversation about whether Soleimani’s killing should be called “an assassination.” Warren came under fire from liberals for not using the word sooner, while more center-left Buttigieg avoided the same level of scrutiny. Warren also made headlines for questioning the timing of Trump’s strike as the Senate prepares for the president’s impeachment trial, adding she wouldn’t have ordered the attack.
Despite the swipes, Fingerhut warned Democrats that the traditional divide between the major political parties over domestic and foreign policy no longer rings true in the Trump era.
“In the last 10 or 15 years, the very clear perception of the two parties has been blurred a little bit in the sense that Trump being a populist left as well as a populist right on trade issues, on infrastructure, stuff like that, and the fact that there’s been an economic expansion for several years, is that the Republicans are much stronger on domestic and economic policy than they’ve been in the past. Most of that is Trump, it’s not the Republicans,” he told the Washington Examiner.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--'Every side of every foreign policy issue': Rise of Iran tensions leaves Biden vulnerable

Joe Biden ’ s wishy-washy foreign policy record could be a liability for him in the wake of President Trump ’ s ordered strike that killed Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani .
Escalating tensions with Iran are becoming a major political issue just a month before the first Democratic presidential nominating contests .
One of the major arguments from Biden , 77 , is that he is the candidate best positioned to represent the United States because he has relationships with many world leaders and a long record of foreign policy experience .
But Biden has a long history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ renewed criticism with Middle East policy shot to the forefront of national policy , and he has contradicted or distanced himself from much of that record on the campaign trail .
“ He has been on every side of every foreign policy issue — the Balkans , China post-Tiananmen , Iraq , Russia , and Afghanistan — depending on what is most convenient at any point in time , ” said Michael Rubin , a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Middle East policy expert .
“ Not even his supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Iraq War in 2002 while he was a Delaware senator .
In a July Democratic primary debate , Biden claimed that he “ from the moment ” the March 2003 invasion started .
But the public record shows that Biden supported the effort much later , saying in July 2003 that he still thought the job was “ doable.
” On the floor of the Senate , Biden said , “ I voted to go into Iraq , and I 'd vote to do it again . ''
Numerous high-level Obama administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011 .
On the campaign trail in Iowa on Friday , that he advised President Barack Obama against the raid .
Biden oversaw the withdrawal of nearly 150,000 troops from Iraq in 2011 during Obama ’ s first term , a move that many argue fueled the rise of the Islamic State .
During a July Democratic , he called delivering the troop withdrawal announcement “ one of the proudest moments of my life.
” Former Defense Secretary in September criticized Biden as `` indifferent '' to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate a few weeks later , Biden said that while `` we were right to get the combat troops out , ” the administration made a “ mistake ” in not ensuring “ Shia and the Kurds would work together to keep ISIS from coming.
” In November , Biden to Mattis , saying that he `` pled with the Iraqi government to allow a residual force to stay so we could stay and focus on , then , al Qaeda , before ISIS . ''
Foreign policy had largely been an afterthought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s death , leaving Biden , who has a half-century of national political experience , as the default authority on global matters .
An October CNN national found that 56 % of likely Democratic voters said that Biden would best handle foreign policy , putting him 43 points ahead of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , the second most trusted on foreign policy with 13 % .
“ The question is whether voters believe his cynical political perversion of national security is acceptable simply because they perceive that he behaves more presidentially than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The two are really peas in a pod , though , when it comes not only to shifting with the wind but spinning like windmills.
” Biden ’ s primary rivals have avoided directly criticizing his foreign policy record in the wake of Soleimani ’ s death , but his biggest competitors have subtle distinctions between their principles and that of the former vice president .
“ Every piece of this is about judgment , ” Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , 70 , said Sunday when asked about voters ’ trust in Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are people who are running for president who are willing to keep combat troops in the Middle East indefinitely , five years , 10 years , ” she told , adding , “ We need to dial back from that.
” “ I will let the VP speak to his own judgment , ” former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg , 37 , said when asked about Biden ’ s Iraq War vote and opposition to the bin Laden raid during a CNN interview on Sunday .
“ My @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that generation that has lived through conflicts that we were told would be over in days or weeks and are continuing to this day.
” Sanders , 78 , mentioned his initial 2002 vote against the Iraq War in his statement reacting to Soleimani ’ s death , a contrast from Biden .
In the days before the strike that killed Soleimani , Sanders took aim at Biden ’ s `` weak '' record , saying that Biden ’ s vote for the Iraq War and support for the North American Free Trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election against Trump .
`` It ’ s just a lot of baggage that Joe takes into a campaign , which isn ’ t going to create energy and excitement , '' .

Joe Biden’s wishy-washy foreign policy record could be a liability for him in the wake of President Trump’s ordered strike that killed Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani.
Escalating tensions with Iran are becoming a major political issue just a month before the first Democratic presidential nominating contests.
One of the major arguments from Biden, 77, is that he is the candidate best positioned to represent the United States because he has relationships with many world leaders and a long record of foreign policy experience.
But Biden has a long history of foreign policy positions that could draw renewed criticism with Middle East policy shot to the forefront of national policy, and he has contradicted or distanced himself from much of that record on the campaign trail.
“He has been on every side of every foreign policy issue — the Balkans, China post-Tiananmen, Iraq, Russia, and Afghanistan — depending on what is most convenient at any point in time,” said Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Middle East policy expert. “Not even his supporters suggest he has intellectual consistency.”
Biden voted for the Iraq War in 2002 while he was a Delaware senator. In a July Democratic primary debate, Biden claimed that he opposed the effort “from the moment” the March 2003 invasion started. But the public record shows that Biden supported the effort much later, saying in July 2003 that he still thought the job was “doable.” On the floor of the Senate, Biden said, “I voted to go into Iraq, and I'd vote to do it again."
Numerous high-level Obama administration officials said that Biden opposed the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011. On the campaign trail in Iowa on Friday, Biden denied that he advised President Barack Obama against the raid.
Biden oversaw the withdrawal of nearly 150,000 troops from Iraq in 2011 during Obama’s first term, a move that many argue fueled the rise of the Islamic State. During a July Democratic debate , he called delivering the troop withdrawal announcement “one of the proudest moments of my life.”
Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis in September criticized Biden as "indifferent" to the consequences of withdrawal. In a debate a few weeks later, Biden said that while "we were right to get the combat troops out,” the administration made a “mistake” in not ensuring “Shia and the Kurds would work together to keep ISIS from coming.” In November, Biden responded to Mattis, saying that he "pled with the Iraqi government to allow a residual force to stay so we could stay and focus on, then, al Qaeda, before ISIS."
Foreign policy had largely been an afterthought during the Democratic presidential cycle until Soleimani’s death, leaving Biden, who has a half-century of national political experience, as the default authority on global matters. An October CNN national poll found that 56% of likely Democratic voters said that Biden would best handle foreign policy, putting him 43 points ahead of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the second most trusted on foreign policy with 13%.
“The question is whether voters believe his cynical political perversion of national security is acceptable simply because they perceive that he behaves more presidentially than Trump,” Rubin said. “The two are really peas in a pod, though, when it comes not only to shifting with the wind but spinning like windmills.”
Biden’s primary rivals have avoided directly criticizing his foreign policy record in the wake of Soleimani’s death, but his biggest competitors have subtle distinctions between their principles and that of the former vice president.
“Every piece of this is about judgment,” Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, 70, said Sunday when asked about voters’ trust in Biden on foreign policy. “I understand there are people who are running for president who are willing to keep combat troops in the Middle East indefinitely, five years, 10 years,” she told CNN , adding, “We need to dial back from that.”
“I will let the VP speak to his own judgment,” former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, 37, said when asked about Biden’s Iraq War vote and opposition to the bin Laden raid during a CNN interview on Sunday. “My judgment is also informed by belonging to that generation that has lived through conflicts that we were told would be over in days or weeks and are continuing to this day.”
Sanders, 78, mentioned his initial 2002 vote against the Iraq War in his statement reacting to Soleimani’s death, a contrast from Biden. In the days before the strike that killed Soleimani, Sanders took aim at Biden’s "weak" record, saying that Biden’s vote for the Iraq War and support for the North American Free Trade Agreement make him vulnerable in a general election against Trump.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--Trump fires up reelection campaign early

President Trump is actively campaigning for reelection earlier than any incumbent in modern history , with a flurry of major events scheduled in just the first two weeks of 2020 .
Previous presidents avoided the campaign trail until deep into their reelection year , milking incumbency in a bid to cultivate the image of a bipartisan policymaker untainted by ugly politics .
Trump has upended that model .
This month , he is headlining at least two `` Keep America Great '' rallies in swing states Ohio and Wisconsin , with Vice President Mike Pence headed to Florida for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s daughter-in-law , campaigning in key suburban battlegrounds .
“ This is critical counterprogramming , ” Jason Miller , a former Trump communications adviser , said Monday .
“ As we head into the Senate impeachment trial , it ’ s very clear that if the president wants to see any good news about the positive accomplishments from the administration , [ the campaign ] is going to have to go out and create those opportunities themselves.
” Trump declared his run for reelection soon after being inaugurated nearly three years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pace of signature-style , stadium rallies .
The president kicked off his reelection last June in Orlando , Florida , with a daylong festival and rally .
Trump 's immediate predecessors devoted the year preceding their reelection year , and a significant portion of their reelection year , to fundraising and building their campaign organizations .
In 2004 , President George W. Bush did not hold his first campaign rally — also in Orlando — until late March .
President Barack Obama , his successor , waited until early May of 2012 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Columbus , Ohio .
“ At this point , presidential campaigns are normally more focused on fundraising , ” said Alex Conant , a Republican strategist .
“ When [ Trump ] goes to Ohio this week , he ’ s going for a rally , not a fundraiser , and that ’ s unique.
” Already this month , the president launched his campaign ’ s “ Evangelicals for Trump ” coalition with a rally-style speech before more than 5,000 people at a megachurch in Miami , Florida .
On Thursday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a `` Keep America Great '' rally , followed by another the following Tuesday in Milwaukee , Wisconsin .
Lara Trump is to hold separate , more intimate events the day before each rally , in Columbus , Ohio , and Wausau , Wisconsin .
On Jan. 16 , Pence and his wife will deploy to Tampa , Florida , for a mini-rally , after which they will lead a bus tour along the crucial Interstate 4 corridor to Orlando for a “ Latinos for Trump ” event .

President Trump is actively campaigning for reelection earlier than any incumbent in modern history, with a flurry of major events scheduled in just the first two weeks of 2020.
Previous presidents avoided the campaign trail until deep into their reelection year, milking incumbency in a bid to cultivate the image of a bipartisan policymaker untainted by ugly politics. Trump has upended that model. This month, he is headlining at least two "Keep America Great" rallies in swing states Ohio and Wisconsin, with Vice President Mike Pence headed to Florida for a bus tour and Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, campaigning in key suburban battlegrounds.
“This is critical counterprogramming,” Jason Miller, a former Trump communications adviser, said Monday. “As we head into the Senate impeachment trial, it’s very clear that if the president wants to see any good news about the positive accomplishments from the administration, [the campaign] is going to have to go out and create those opportunities themselves.”
Trump declared his run for reelection soon after being inaugurated nearly three years ago and has since maintained an aggressive pace of signature-style, stadium rallies. The president kicked off his reelection last June in Orlando, Florida, with a daylong festival and rally.
[Related: 'Unstoppable': Trump campaign outpaces Democrats with $46M fourth-quarter haul]
Trump's immediate predecessors devoted the year preceding their reelection year, and a significant portion of their reelection year, to fundraising and building their campaign organizations. In 2004, President George W. Bush did not hold his first campaign rally — also in Orlando — until late March. President Barack Obama, his successor, waited until early May of 2012 to hit the stump with a rally in Columbus, Ohio.
“At this point, presidential campaigns are normally more focused on fundraising,” said Alex Conant, a Republican strategist. “When [Trump] goes to Ohio this week, he’s going for a rally, not a fundraiser, and that’s unique.”
Already this month, the president launched his campaign’s “Evangelicals for Trump” coalition with a rally-style speech before more than 5,000 people at a megachurch in Miami, Florida.
On Thursday, Trump travels to Toledo, Ohio, for a "Keep America Great" rally, followed by another the following Tuesday in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Lara Trump is to hold separate, more intimate events the day before each rally, in Columbus, Ohio, and Wausau, Wisconsin. On Jan. 16, Pence and his wife will deploy to Tampa, Florida, for a mini-rally, after which they will lead a bus tour along the crucial Interstate 4 corridor to Orlando for a “Latinos for Trump” event.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-06--Biden and Buttigieg could benefit from impeachment chaos

Democratic candidates face a chaotic campaign ahead of early state primary and caucuses , thanks to Nancy Pelosi 's decision to hold up impeachment .
Although the House voted to impeach President Trump on Dec. 18 , the House speaker has yet to deliver the articles of impeachment to the Senate .
That means four Democratic presidential candidates , Sens .
Bernie Sanders of Vermont , Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts , Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota , and Cory Booker of New Jersey , wo n't be able to make any concrete travel plans in Iowa before the state 's caucuses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who are n't sitting lawmakers , former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg , could have Iowa to themselves in the weeks leading up to the first Democratic presidential primary contest .
`` All the senators would be stuck in D.C. , leaving Iowa and elsewhere to everyone else .
Impeachment 's also not really a voting issue in the Dem primary , so whatever coverage the senators get off of the hearings would n't matter much .
We would much rather be doing local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about healthcare jobs , educations , etc.
, '' said an aide to an unnamed campaign .
Some Democrats who spoke with the Washington Examiner feared Pelosi could deliver the articles of impeachment this week , meaning a Senate trial could start as soon as next Monday .
The first Democratic primary debate of the year , also in Iowa , is Jan. 14 .
`` The Democratic campaigns have gotten a lot trickier given the news of the last few weeks .
The reality is , they ’ re going to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process , no matter what .
For me , it ’ s going to be interesting to see what happens with the debate among other things , '' said Democratic strategist Jim Manley .
`` It all depends on when the Senate process is up and running , but for any candidate looking to have some downtime for debate prep , they might be pulling an all-nighter . ''
Since the impeachment proceedings against Trump began , Democratic senators running for president had been aware that a trial would likely interfere with their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holding onto the articles of impeachment , however , the conventional wisdom for White House hopefuls was that the trial would start shortly after the New Year , which would give their campaigns a sense of when to plan campaign stops .
`` This is a big plus for Biden .
People like Klobuchar who depend on in-person events for fundraising are going to face real issues , '' said former Pennsylvania Gov .
Ed Rendell , a Biden supporter .
`` If you 're someone like Sanders , who makes most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ afford to fly to Iowa for a quick day trip and then back to D.C. All of this is happening while Biden is coming back in Iowa , if you look at the polls , and that 's a state he does n't even need to win , just have a strong finish . ''
For candidates who are strapped for cash or facing diminishing fundraising , that means their staffs will have to make hard choices about when they 're certain a candidate 's Senate duties wo n't conflict with a campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Skype chats or relying on surrogates , may become the norm .
On Monday , failed presidential candidate Julian Castro announced his support for Warren .
The two have already planned rallies together later this month .
Other candidates , meanwhile , rely on surrogates ; Sanders has Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York to campaign on his behalf .
Sanders , Buttigieg , and Biden are currently in a three-way virtual tie at 22 % , 21.7 % , and 20.3 % support , respectively , according to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last 30 days .
For Iowa voters , who are notorious for not firmly settling on a candidate weeks before the caucuses , a candidate 's absence in the state could hold major consequences for how he or she finishes .
`` Any good staffer is going to have a hell of a lot of options to deal with what ’ s going on .
I can only assume you ’ re going to have to make some bets on when and where to campaign .
Folks are going to lose some money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out , '' Manley said .

Democratic candidates face a chaotic campaign ahead of early state primary and caucuses, thanks to Nancy Pelosi's decision to hold up impeachment.
Although the House voted to impeach President Trump on Dec. 18, the House speaker has yet to deliver the articles of impeachment to the Senate. That means four Democratic presidential candidates, Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Cory Booker of New Jersey, won't be able to make any concrete travel plans in Iowa before the state's caucuses on Feb. 3.
The two front-runners who aren't sitting lawmakers, former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, could have Iowa to themselves in the weeks leading up to the first Democratic presidential primary contest.
"All the senators would be stuck in D.C., leaving Iowa and elsewhere to everyone else. Impeachment's also not really a voting issue in the Dem primary, so whatever coverage the senators get off of the hearings wouldn't matter much. We would much rather be doing local events in the early states and talking about healthcare jobs, educations, etc.," said an aide to an unnamed campaign.
Some Democrats who spoke with the Washington Examiner feared Pelosi could deliver the articles of impeachment this week, meaning a Senate trial could start as soon as next Monday. The first Democratic primary debate of the year, also in Iowa, is Jan. 14.
"The Democratic campaigns have gotten a lot trickier given the news of the last few weeks. The reality is, they’re going to have to be in D.C. for the impeachment process, no matter what. For me, it’s going to be interesting to see what happens with the debate among other things," said Democratic strategist Jim Manley. "It all depends on when the Senate process is up and running, but for any candidate looking to have some downtime for debate prep, they might be pulling an all-nighter."
Since the impeachment proceedings against Trump began, Democratic senators running for president had been aware that a trial would likely interfere with their campaigning. Before Pelosi's gambit of holding onto the articles of impeachment, however, the conventional wisdom for White House hopefuls was that the trial would start shortly after the New Year, which would give their campaigns a sense of when to plan campaign stops.
"This is a big plus for Biden. People like Klobuchar who depend on in-person events for fundraising are going to face real issues," said former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Biden supporter. "If you're someone like Sanders, who makes most of their money through email, you can afford to fly to Iowa for a quick day trip and then back to D.C. All of this is happening while Biden is coming back in Iowa, if you look at the polls, and that's a state he doesn't even need to win, just have a strong finish."
For candidates who are strapped for cash or facing diminishing fundraising, that means their staffs will have to make hard choices about when they're certain a candidate's Senate duties won't conflict with a campaign stop. Alternative methods of campaigning, such as Skype chats or relying on surrogates, may become the norm.
On Monday, failed presidential candidate Julian Castro announced his support for Warren. The two have already planned rallies together later this month. Other candidates, meanwhile, rely on surrogates; Sanders has Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York to campaign on his behalf.
Sanders, Buttigieg, and Biden are currently in a three-way virtual tie at 22%, 21.7%, and 20.3% support, respectively, according to a RealClearPolitics average of polls conducted in the last 30 days. For Iowa voters, who are notorious for not firmly settling on a candidate weeks before the caucuses, a candidate's absence in the state could hold major consequences for how he or she finishes.
"Any good staffer is going to have a hell of a lot of options to deal with what’s going on. I can only assume you’re going to have to make some bets on when and where to campaign. Folks are going to lose some money sometimes when things don’t pan out," Manley said.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-06--'I am NOT running for President': CNBC confuses Andrew Yang with Asian businessman Geoff Yang

Only weeks ahead of the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses , CNBC displayed a fundraising graphic on its morning show Squawk @ @ @ @ @ Andrew Yang with Asian businessman Geoff Yang .
The graphic also confused Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand @ @ @ @ @ president , with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard , who is still in the race .
This @ @ @ @ @ Yang , who has complained about unfair coverage by media outlets , has been part @ @ @ @ @ identity .
At the 6th Democratic debate in December , moderator Judy Woodruff repeatedly referred @ @ @ @ @ Andrew Yang during one sequence .
Yang clapped his hands and exclaimed , ' I @ @ @ @ @ Redpoint Ventures partner Geoff Yang confirmed on Twitter that the picture CNBC published was a @ @ @ @ @ Ummm , '' tweeted Yang .
`` This is @ geoff_yang and I am NOT @ @ @ @ @ Yang is polling at 2.5 % and Gabbard at 2 % in the latest Iowa @ @ @ @ @ .

Only weeks ahead of the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses, CNBC displayed a fundraising graphic on its morning show Squawk Box which mixed-up presidential candidate Andrew Yang with Asian businessman Geoff Yang.
The graphic also confused Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a former candidate for president, with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who is still in the race.
This isn't the first time Yang, who has complained about unfair coverage by media outlets, has been part of a mix-up regarding his identity.
At the 6th Democratic debate in December, moderator Judy Woodruff repeatedly referred to candidate Tom Steyer as Andrew Yang during one sequence. Yang clapped his hands and exclaimed, 'I'm over here!'
Redpoint Ventures partner Geoff Yang confirmed on Twitter that the picture CNBC published was a photo of himself. "Ummm," tweeted Yang. "This is @geoff_yang and I am NOT running for President."
Yang is polling at 2.5% and Gabbard at 2% in the latest Iowa polling, according to RealClearPolitics.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-06--'No combat veterans left in the race': War hero Democrat jabs 'analyst' Buttigieg on military servic

'No combat veterans left in the race': War hero Democrat jabs 'analyst' Buttigieg on military service

Decorated Marine combat veteran and congressman Seth Moulton downplayed the importance of Pete Buttigieg 's military experience in the wake of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani 's death .
“ There ’ s no combat veterans left in the race .
I have tremendous respect for Pete ’ s service as an analyst , but analysts don ’ t make decisions , ” Moulton told the New York Times .
A House representative from Massachusetts , Moulton also briefly sought the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination .
Buttigieg , 37 , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has stressed his Navy background when criticizing the strategy behind President Trump ’ s ordered killing of Soleimani and to blunt criticism that he is too young and inexperienced to be in the Oval Office .
“ As a military intelligence officer on the ground in Afghanistan , ” Buttigieg said in Iowa on Friday , “ I was trained to ask these questions before a decision is made.
” While Buttigieg has been described as a combat veteran because he was deployed to a war zone , he never fired his weapon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in battle .
He served in the Navy Reserve from 2009 to 2017 and attained the rank of lieutenant .
During his first mayoral term in 2014 , Buttigieg served about six months in Kabul , Afghanistan .
He spent much of his time behind a desk as an intelligence officer but has often mentioned that he left the safety of the military base and `` crossed the wire '' 119 times , by his own count , while driving an armored vehicle .
Moulton , 41 , served four tours in Iraq @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from 2001 to 2008 and was awarded two bronze stars and a Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal for valor .
Part of one of the first American units to reach Baghdad in 2003 , Moulton led troops into battles where some were wounded or killed .
Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard , 38 , is another veteran still seeking the Democratic presidential nomination who was deployed to a combat zone .
She deployed to Iraq for 12 months with the Hawaii Army National Guard starting in 2004 and was awarded a Combat Medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ combat .
In 2009 , she led a military police platoon in Kuwait .
Gabbard is still in the Hawaii Army National Guard , where she is a major .
Presidential candidates have often come under fire for embellishing or avoiding military service .
Last May , Buttigieg went after Trump for receiving a diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels from his father 's doctor in 1968 to avoid the Vietnam draft .
When John Kerry was the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee , a Republican-funded group highlighted veterans who alleged that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decorations .
President Bill Clinton took heat during his 1992 campaign for enrolling in but not joining the ROTC as a way to avoid the draft , and President George W. Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard days before his student draft deferment expired , which allowed him to fulfill service in Texas rather than Vietnam .
Moulton has not endorsed any of his former competitors in the Democratic presidential field , but he has hinted preference toward former Vice President Joe Biden .
“ There ’ s only one candidate who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American lives , and that ’ s Vice President Biden , ” Moulton said .
Moulton stressed how much he values hands-on military experience in an interview with the Washington Examiner days after he ended his presidential bid in August 2019 .
“ I have a lot of respect for Tulsi and Pete for their service , ” Moulton said .
“ They did incredibly important service overseas .
But I also think that the on-the-ground leadership experience that I uniquely had in this race should be valued for making our commander in @ @ @

Decorated Marine combat veteran and congressman Seth Moulton downplayed the importance of Pete Buttigieg's military experience in the wake of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani's death.
“There’s no combat veterans left in the race. I have tremendous respect for Pete’s service as an analyst, but analysts don’t make decisions,” Moulton told the New York Times. A House representative from Massachusetts, Moulton also briefly sought the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.
Buttigieg, 37, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and a leading Democratic presidential candidate, has stressed his Navy background when criticizing the strategy behind President Trump’s ordered killing of Soleimani and to blunt criticism that he is too young and inexperienced to be in the Oval Office.
“As a military intelligence officer on the ground in Afghanistan,” Buttigieg said in Iowa on Friday, “I was trained to ask these questions before a decision is made.”
While Buttigieg has been described as a combat veteran because he was deployed to a war zone, he never fired his weapon, came under fire, or fought in battle. He served in the Navy Reserve from 2009 to 2017 and attained the rank of lieutenant. During his first mayoral term in 2014, Buttigieg served about six months in Kabul, Afghanistan. He spent much of his time behind a desk as an intelligence officer but has often mentioned that he left the safety of the military base and "crossed the wire" 119 times, by his own count, while driving an armored vehicle.
Moulton, 41, served four tours in Iraq while he was a Marine Corps officer from 2001 to 2008 and was awarded two bronze stars and a Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal for valor. Part of one of the first American units to reach Baghdad in 2003, Moulton led troops into battles where some were wounded or killed.
Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, 38, is another veteran still seeking the Democratic presidential nomination who was deployed to a combat zone. She deployed to Iraq for 12 months with the Hawaii Army National Guard starting in 2004 and was awarded a Combat Medical Badge for supporting infantry engaged in active combat. In 2009, she led a military police platoon in Kuwait. Gabbard is still in the Hawaii Army National Guard, where she is a major.
Presidential candidates have often come under fire for embellishing or avoiding military service.
Last May, Buttigieg went after Trump for receiving a diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels from his father's doctor in 1968 to avoid the Vietnam draft. When John Kerry was the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, a Republican-funded group highlighted veterans who alleged that he lied to get some of his military decorations. President Bill Clinton took heat during his 1992 campaign for enrolling in but not joining the ROTC as a way to avoid the draft, and President George W. Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard days before his student draft deferment expired, which allowed him to fulfill service in Texas rather than Vietnam.
Moulton has not endorsed any of his former competitors in the Democratic presidential field, but he has hinted preference toward former Vice President Joe Biden.
“There’s only one candidate who has had to make life-or-death decisions involving American lives, and that’s Vice President Biden,” Moulton said.
Moulton stressed how much he values hands-on military experience in an interview with the Washington Examiner days after he ended his presidential bid in August 2019.
“I have a lot of respect for Tulsi and Pete for their service,” Moulton said. “They did incredibly important service overseas. But I also think that the on-the-ground leadership experience that I uniquely had in this race should be valued for making our commander in chief.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-06--Former Republican, independent, and Democrat Lincoln Chafee vies to become Libertarian candidate for

Former Republican, independent, and Democrat Lincoln Chafee vies to become Libertarian candidate for president

Lincoln Chafee , the former Republican governor and senator for Rhode Island who later became an independent , has filed paperwork to run for the White House as the Libertarian Party 's 2020 presidential nominee .
Chafee , 66 , registered as a Libertarian last June after moving to Wyoming , sparking speculation he would seek the party 's nod to challenge President Trump in the fall .
He could be joined in the race by Michigan Rep. Justin Amash , 39 , who has been openly considering contesting the party 's nomination after leaving the Republican Party last summer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Federal Election Commission filing , made late Sunday , reads , `` Lincoln leads with truth . ''
Chafee has flirted with both the major parties over the course of his political career , representing his state in the Senate as a Republican from 1999 to 2007 , in the governor 's mansion as an independent from 2011 to 2015 , before launching a failed White House bid as a 2016 Democratic presidential candidate .
His foray into national politics began when the then mayor of Warwick , Rhode Island , was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Republican Rhode Island senator and governor , as well as secretary of the U.S. Navy , in the Senate after his death .
Lincoln Chafee was reelected to Congress ' upper chamber in 2000 .
Chafee is n't the only 2020 presidential candidate to change parties ahead of their latest White House campaign .
Former Massachusetts Gov .
Bill Weld , 74 , who represented the state from 1991 to 1997 , left the GOP in 2016 to become former New Mexico Gov .
Gary Johnson 's running mate on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he announced he would try to primary Trump as a Republican .
Members of the Libertarian Party are expected to gather in Austin , Texas , from May 21 to 25 , 2020 , to elect their presidential nominee .

Lincoln Chafee, the former Republican governor and senator for Rhode Island who later became an independent, has filed paperwork to run for the White House as the Libertarian Party's 2020 presidential nominee.
Chafee, 66, registered as a Libertarian last June after moving to Wyoming, sparking speculation he would seek the party's nod to challenge President Trump in the fall. He could be joined in the race by Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, 39, who has been openly considering contesting the party's nomination after leaving the Republican Party last summer over Trump.
A website linked to the Federal Election Commission filing, made late Sunday, reads, "Lincoln leads with truth."
Chafee has flirted with both the major parties over the course of his political career, representing his state in the Senate as a Republican from 1999 to 2007, in the governor's mansion as an independent from 2011 to 2015, before launching a failed White House bid as a 2016 Democratic presidential candidate.
His foray into national politics began when the then mayor of Warwick, Rhode Island, was appointed to replace his father John Chafee, a Republican Rhode Island senator and governor, as well as secretary of the U.S. Navy, in the Senate after his death. Lincoln Chafee was reelected to Congress' upper chamber in 2000.
Chafee isn't the only 2020 presidential candidate to change parties ahead of their latest White House campaign. Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, 74, who represented the state from 1991 to 1997, left the GOP in 2016 to become former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson's running mate on the Libertarian Party's ticket. In April, he announced he would try to primary Trump as a Republican.
Members of the Libertarian Party are expected to gather in Austin, Texas, from May 21 to 25, 2020, to elect their presidential nominee.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-06--Bernie Sanders, 78 and a heart attack survivor, keeping health details under wraps

Democratic White House candidates and President Trump provided skimpy details in recent months about their health , renewing questions about how much voters should know about the medical histories of politicians .
Presidential candidates since Ronald Reagan have released some medical records to the public , but no law demands their release , and no candidate has disclosed a full medical history .
That has resulted in a huge amount of variability among candidates ’ records and painted an incomplete picture of those vying for the White House .
“ I find the whole state of affairs about the medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice presidency to be driven purely by politics , not making any medical sense , and then leaving us wondering all the time what ’ s going on , ” said Arthur Caplan , founding head of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU School of Medicine .
Last week , Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders became the latest presidential candidate to release medical records .
The details , in the form of of doctors ' notes , came three months after Sanders , 78 , suffered a heart attack in Las Vegas .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ ” be releasing all of his medical records , despite promising otherwise a few months ago .
Three other Democratic presidential candidates have released doctor letters : , 77 , Massachusetts Sen. , 70 , and , 77 .
The letters were three pages , two pages , and one page , respectively .
Trump , 73 , recently took an unscheduled visit to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , and the White House released a short memo saying he had an “ interim checkup , ” an uncommon occurrence for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any findings from the exam .
A short doctor letter is on par with what presidential candidates have provided over the years , though there have been exceptions .
When Biden ran as Barack Obama ’ s running mate 11 years ago , he released 49 pages of medical history to reporters .
Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain made more than 1,500 pages of medical and psychiatric available when he ran for president in 2008 because he had a history of cancer and had been a prisoner of war .
Some people believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exams for such a high office .
Caplan has , for decades , said Congress should establish a law that would set up a medical panel to independently evaluate candidates and the president because otherwise , patients control what gets out .
Under the status quo , he said , “ We keep staggering from election to election with a mix of testimonials , censored statements , and a guy who is your personal doctor saying you ’ re wonderful.
” Proponents of evaluating politicians for physical and mental fitness are commonplace in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top executives to undergo a physical to ensure they don ’ t have a condition that would interfere with their ability to do a job .
Members of the military who handle nuclear weapons are assessed for mental fitness .
Airline pilots and truck drivers need to be cleared , too .
The job of commander in chief , however , has no such requirement .
Just as with private citizens , doctors are barred by confidentiality laws from releasing information without patient consent .
Medical information is highly confidential , and people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consent are likely to lose their licenses , their jobs , and to go to jail .
“ When you hit a core set of medical issues , it ’ s hard to argue the public doesn ’ t have an interest in knowing about them when they ’ re casting their vote .
At some level , it ’ s unarguable that they can ’ t disclose a certain base of facts , ” said University of Wisconsin bioethicist Robert Streiffer .
“ There is an ethical dilemma for the doctor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are acting as an agent of the candidate but also an obligation to the public with who they are sharing information with .
If we could legally mandate a set of tests and a set of information that candidates are required to allow to be disclosed , as a condition of their candidacy , that would then sidestep that dilemma.
” Throughout American history , presidents have been far from forthcoming about their health .
Woodrow Wilson 's wife , for a time , decided which decision got brought to his attention because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dwight D. Eisenhower ’ s White House said he was hospitalized because of an upset stomach , when in fact , he had a heart attack .
But in later years , candidates did disclose some information , partly because the public and media demanded it .
“ In the 1960s and 1970s , there was a new sense of openness , with public officials needing to be more transparent , not just what they ’ re doing as president , but who they were as a person , ” said Rutgers University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reagan had a number of health scares as president , in a time when journalists were becoming increasingly inquisitive about all kinds of elements of a candidate — their graft record , their affairs , their recreational drug use in the past — this was another thing that people paid a lot of attention to.
” One of the more dramatic instances of questions about a candidate ’ s health in the modern era came during the 1992 Democratic presidential primary .
That cycle , former Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Paul Tsongas staked a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pitching himself as an honest broker willing to make politically unpopular choices such as cutting federal spending and raising taxes to curb the growing budget deficit , in contrast to questions about the integrity of Democratic Arkansas Gov .
Bill Clinton .
Yet , questions about Tsongas ’ s previous battles with cancer plagued his campaign , even after the public received assurances from two doctors that a 1986 bone marrow transplant had been successful .
Tsongas 's campaign even filmed him swimming to prove his health and vitality .
But after Tsongas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race , his doctors admitted that they had discovered a cancerous lymph node in his armpit years prior .
Tsongas would later apologize for misleading the public .
Tsongas died on Jan. 18 , 1997 , of complications from pneumonia and non-Hodgkin 's lymphoma — two days before the end of the presidential term he had sought .
The Tsongas incident sparked public debate over the independence of a candidate ’ s doctors and their ethical obligations .
Before he died , Tsongas called for a national commission on a universal standard for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a condition for running .
“ The issue is about privacy versus the public ’ s right to know , ” said Dr. David Scheiner , the Chicago physician who wrote a letter about Obama , his longtime patient , when he ran for president in the 2008 cycle .
“ Does the right to know supersede privacy ?
I think the public has a right to know , but I don ’ t know if the public wants to know or cares to know.
” That question came to renewed attention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , despite suffering a heart attack , Sanders brought in a of $ 25.3 million in the third quarter of 2019 .
The Sanders campaign raised all of that campaign cash before his heart attack .
In the next fundraising quarter , covering October through December 2019 , and with contributors fully aware of Sanders 's health condition , his campaign did even better .
The Sanders campaign last week said it raised $ 34.5 million , the highest-reported quarter yet of a 2020 Democrat in the race so far .
All of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll at the top of the crowded Democratic field .
Aging candidates are more likely to face scrutiny about their health , given that as people get older , the probability of illness , disability , and death increases , as do the chances of cognitive impairment .
But age isn ’ t the only factor that determines good health .
John F. Kennedy had Addison 's disease , an endocrine disorder that can be life-threatening , and it only became more public after he was elected president at age 43 .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ailments could get in the way of people doing their jobs , or whether voters might perceive a diagnosis as debilitating when it ’ s not .
Abraham Lincoln , for instance , had depression while in office .
Reagan , who was 77 when he left office , disclosed five years later that he was diagnosed with Alzheimer ’ s disease , and questions over the extent to which the illness affected his judgment while he was in office have persisted .
“ There are all kinds of things that you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is : Does the public need to know ?
I do n't know the answer to that question , ” said S. Jay Olshansky , a leading researcher on aging from the University of Illinois at Chicago who stressed candidates ’ ideas , , should matter in elections .
“ I ’ m a fan of privacy , but then again , we are talking about a very unique position , and maybe there should be an exemption .
”

Democratic septuagenarian White House candidates and President Trump provided skimpy details in recent months about their health, renewing questions about how much voters should know about the medical histories of politicians.
Presidential candidates since Ronald Reagan have released some medical records to the public, but no law demands their release, and no candidate has disclosed a full medical history. That has resulted in a huge amount of variability among candidates’ records and painted an incomplete picture of those vying for the White House.
“I find the whole state of affairs about the medical fitness of candidates for the presidency and vice presidency to be driven purely by politics, not making any medical sense, and then leaving us wondering all the time what’s going on,” said Arthur Caplan, founding head of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU School of Medicine.
Last week, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders became the latest presidential candidate to release medical records. The details, in the form of four pages of doctors' notes, came three months after Sanders, 78, suffered a heart attack in Las Vegas. He told reporters afterward that he would “ probably not ” be releasing all of his medical records, despite promising otherwise a few months ago.
Three other Democratic presidential candidates have released doctor letters: Joe Biden , 77, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , 70, and Michael Bloomberg , 77. The letters were three pages, two pages, and one page, respectively. Trump, 73, recently took an unscheduled visit to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, and the White House released a short memo saying he had an “interim checkup,” an uncommon occurrence for presidents, and didn’t provide any findings from the exam.
A short doctor letter is on par with what presidential candidates have provided over the years, though there have been exceptions. When Biden ran as Barack Obama’s running mate 11 years ago, he released 49 pages of medical history to reporters.
Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain made more than 1,500 pages of medical and psychiatric records available when he ran for president in 2008 because he had a history of cancer and had been a prisoner of war.
Some people believe it’s time to standardize medical exams for such a high office. Caplan has, for decades, said Congress should establish a law that would set up a medical panel to independently evaluate candidates and the president because otherwise, patients control what gets out. Under the status quo, he said, “We keep staggering from election to election with a mix of testimonials, censored statements, and a guy who is your personal doctor saying you’re wonderful.”
Proponents of evaluating politicians for physical and mental fitness are commonplace in other jobs. Large companies require their top executives to undergo a physical to ensure they don’t have a condition that would interfere with their ability to do a job. Members of the military who handle nuclear weapons are assessed for mental fitness. Airline pilots and truck drivers need to be cleared, too.
The job of commander in chief, however, has no such requirement.
Just as with private citizens, doctors are barred by confidentiality laws from releasing information without patient consent. Medical information is highly confidential, and people who access or share it without patient consent are likely to lose their licenses, their jobs, and to go to jail.
“When you hit a core set of medical issues, it’s hard to argue the public doesn’t have an interest in knowing about them when they’re casting their vote. At some level, it’s unarguable that they can’t disclose a certain base of facts,” said University of Wisconsin bioethicist Robert Streiffer. “There is an ethical dilemma for the doctor, or there could be, because they are acting as an agent of the candidate but also an obligation to the public with who they are sharing information with. If we could legally mandate a set of tests and a set of information that candidates are required to allow to be disclosed, as a condition of their candidacy, that would then sidestep that dilemma.”
Throughout American history, presidents have been far from forthcoming about their health. Woodrow Wilson's wife, for a time, decided which decision got brought to his attention because he was paralyzed following a stroke. Dwight D. Eisenhower’s White House said he was hospitalized because of an upset stomach, when in fact, he had a heart attack.
But in later years, candidates did disclose some information, partly because the public and media demanded it.
“In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a new sense of openness, with public officials needing to be more transparent, not just what they’re doing as president, but who they were as a person,” said Rutgers University presidential historian David Greenberg. “Ronald Reagan had a number of health scares as president, in a time when journalists were becoming increasingly inquisitive about all kinds of elements of a candidate — their graft record, their affairs, their recreational drug use in the past — this was another thing that people paid a lot of attention to.”
One of the more dramatic instances of questions about a candidate’s health in the modern era came during the 1992 Democratic presidential primary. That cycle, former Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Paul Tsongas staked a longshot bid for the White House by pitching himself as an honest broker willing to make politically unpopular choices such as cutting federal spending and raising taxes to curb the growing budget deficit, in contrast to questions about the integrity of Democratic Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton.
Yet, questions about Tsongas’s previous battles with cancer plagued his campaign, even after the public received assurances from two doctors that a 1986 bone marrow transplant had been successful. Tsongas's campaign even filmed him swimming to prove his health and vitality.
But after Tsongas, 50, dropped out of the race, his doctors admitted that they had discovered a cancerous lymph node in his armpit years prior. Tsongas would later apologize for misleading the public. Tsongas died on Jan. 18, 1997, of complications from pneumonia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma — two days before the end of the presidential term he had sought.
The Tsongas incident sparked public debate over the independence of a candidate’s doctors and their ethical obligations. Before he died, Tsongas called for a national commission on a universal standard for how much information presidential candidates must disclose as a condition for running.
“The issue is about privacy versus the public’s right to know,” said Dr. David Scheiner, the Chicago physician who wrote a letter about Obama, his longtime patient, when he ran for president in the 2008 cycle. “Does the right to know supersede privacy? I think the public has a right to know, but I don’t know if the public wants to know or cares to know.”
That question came to renewed attention this week when it was revealed that, despite suffering a heart attack, Sanders brought in a massive fundraising haul of $25.3 million in the third quarter of 2019. The Sanders campaign raised all of that campaign cash before his heart attack. In the next fundraising quarter, covering October through December 2019, and with contributors fully aware of Sanders's health condition, his campaign did even better. The Sanders campaign last week said it raised $34.5 million, the highest-reported quarter yet of a 2020 Democrat in the race so far.
All of the oldest candidates have also continued to poll at the top of the crowded Democratic field.
Aging candidates are more likely to face scrutiny about their health, given that as people get older, the probability of illness, disability, and death increases, as do the chances of cognitive impairment.
But age isn’t the only factor that determines good health. John F. Kennedy had Addison's disease, an endocrine disorder that can be life-threatening, and it only became more public after he was elected president at age 43.
And it’s not always clear which ailments could get in the way of people doing their jobs, or whether voters might perceive a diagnosis as debilitating when it’s not. Abraham Lincoln, for instance, had depression while in office. Reagan, who was 77 when he left office, disclosed five years later that he was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease, and questions over the extent to which the illness affected his judgment while he was in office have persisted.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--Justice Department reverses itself on Michael Flynn, asking for up to six months in prison

The Justice Department asked a federal judge to sentence Michael Flynn to up to six months in prison on Tuesday in a reversal of its previous request that the former national security adviser get no time .
The DOJ said Flynn no longer deserved any credit for providing substantial assistance in its investigations or for accepting responsibility for his false statements to the FBI about discussions he had with Russia ’ s ambassador and his work for Turkey .
“ The defendant monetized his power and influence over our government , and lied to mask it , ” the DOJ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DOJ needed information that only the defendant could provide , because of that power and influence , he denied them that information .
And so an official tasked with protecting our national security , instead compromised it.
” The U.S. attorney ’ s office for D.C. said the “ complete record ” showed actions by Flynn which “ negate the benefits of much of the defendant ’ s earlier cooperation , ” pointing specifically to Flynn ’ s “ affirmative efforts to undermine the prosecution ” of his former business partner , Bijan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act for lucrative work done for the government of Turkey .
Prosecutors also said Flynn ’ s behavior since his sentencing hearing in 2018 , which was delayed until later this month , led prosecutors to believe “ through representations by the defendant ’ s counsel , that the defendant has retreated from his acceptance of responsibility in this case regarding his lies to the FBI.
” Prosecutors pressed the judge to ask Flynn “ whether he maintains those apparent statements of innocence or whether he disavows them and fully accepts responsibility for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2017 for lying to investigators about his conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak regarding U.S. sanctions and a U.N. Security Council vote .
Former FBI Director James Comey admitted he took advantage of the chaos in the early days of the Trump administration when he sent special agent Peter Strzok and another FBI agent to talk to Flynn .
Flynn agreed to cooperate with special counsel Robert Mueller 's Russia investigation , admitting then reaffirming his guilt in 2017 and 2018 .
The defense team that negotiated the plea deal was later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s defense this summer , former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell has argued “ there never would ’ ve been a plea to begin with ” if Flynn knew how much information the DOJ was hiding from him .
Flynn ’ s new lawyers had claimed DOJ “ affirmatively suppressed evidence ” that “ impugned their entire case ” against Flynn while at the same time “ putting excruciating pressure on him to enter his guilty plea and manipulating or controlling the press to their advantage to extort that plea ” and accused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not immediately return the Washington Examiner ’ s request for comment .
Prosecutors claimed that “ the only reason the Russian Ambassador contacted the defendant about the sanctions is because the defendant was the incoming National Security Advisor , and thus would soon wield influence and control over the United States ’ foreign policy , ” and said , “ That is the same reason the defendant ’ s fledgling company was paid over $ 500,000 to work on issues for Turkey.
” “ The defendant monetized his power and influence over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , ” DOJ lawyers said .
“ When the FBI and DOJ needed information that only the defendant could provide , because of that power and influence , he denied them that information .
And so an official tasked with protecting our national security , instead compromised it.
” Judge Emmet Sullivan , who has been presiding over the case , said last month “ the court summarily disposes of Mr. Flynn ’ s arguments that the FBI conducted an ambush interview for the purpose of trapping him into making false statements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enter a guilty plea ” because “ the record proves otherwise.
” Flynn ’ s lawyers will have a chance to file their own sentencing memo with the court , and the final sentencing hearing before Sullivan is scheduled for late January .
The sentencing hearing had been scheduled for late last year but was postponed until after the release of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz ’ s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse report , which found , among other things , that the FBI ’ s Trump-Russia counterintelligence team used an intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , his foreign policy adviser , as a “ pretext ” to gather information for their inquiry .

The Justice Department asked a federal judge to sentence Michael Flynn to up to six months in prison on Tuesday in a reversal of its previous request that the former national security adviser get no time.
The DOJ said Flynn no longer deserved any credit for providing substantial assistance in its investigations or for accepting responsibility for his false statements to the FBI about discussions he had with Russia’s ambassador and his work for Turkey.
“The defendant monetized his power and influence over our government, and lied to mask it,” the DOJ said. “When the FBI and DOJ needed information that only the defendant could provide, because of that power and influence, he denied them that information. And so an official tasked with protecting our national security, instead compromised it.”
The U.S. attorney’s office for D.C. said the “complete record” showed actions by Flynn which “negate the benefits of much of the defendant’s earlier cooperation,” pointing specifically to Flynn’s “affirmative efforts to undermine the prosecution” of his former business partner, Bijan Rafiekian, under the Foreign Agent Registration Act for lucrative work done for the government of Turkey.
Prosecutors also said Flynn’s behavior since his sentencing hearing in 2018, which was delayed until later this month, led prosecutors to believe “through representations by the defendant’s counsel, that the defendant has retreated from his acceptance of responsibility in this case regarding his lies to the FBI.” Prosecutors pressed the judge to ask Flynn “whether he maintains those apparent statements of innocence or whether he disavows them and fully accepts responsibility for his criminal conduct.”
Flynn pleaded guilty in 2017 for lying to investigators about his conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak regarding U.S. sanctions and a U.N. Security Council vote. Former FBI Director James Comey admitted he took advantage of the chaos in the early days of the Trump administration when he sent special agent Peter Strzok and another FBI agent to talk to Flynn.
Flynn agreed to cooperate with special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, admitting then reaffirming his guilt in 2017 and 2018. The defense team that negotiated the plea deal was later fired and, since taking over Flynn’s defense this summer, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell has argued “there never would’ve been a plea to begin with” if Flynn knew how much information the DOJ was hiding from him.
The DOJ called Flynn’s claims of innocence “an extraordinary reversal.”
Flynn’s new lawyers had claimed DOJ “affirmatively suppressed evidence” that “impugned their entire case” against Flynn while at the same time “putting excruciating pressure on him to enter his guilty plea and manipulating or controlling the press to their advantage to extort that plea” and accused prosecutors of “malevolent conduct.”
Powell did not immediately return the Washington Examiner’s request for comment.
Prosecutors claimed that “the only reason the Russian Ambassador contacted the defendant about the sanctions is because the defendant was the incoming National Security Advisor, and thus would soon wield influence and control over the United States’ foreign policy,” and said, “That is the same reason the defendant’s fledgling company was paid over $500,000 to work on issues for Turkey.”
“The defendant monetized his power and influence over our government, and lied to mask it,” DOJ lawyers said. “When the FBI and DOJ needed information that only the defendant could provide, because of that power and influence, he denied them that information. And so an official tasked with protecting our national security, instead compromised it.”
Judge Emmet Sullivan, who has been presiding over the case, said last month “the court summarily disposes of Mr. Flynn’s arguments that the FBI conducted an ambush interview for the purpose of trapping him into making false statements and that the government pressured him to enter a guilty plea” because “the record proves otherwise.”
Flynn’s lawyers will have a chance to file their own sentencing memo with the court, and the final sentencing hearing before Sullivan is scheduled for late January. The sentencing hearing had been scheduled for late last year but was postponed until after the release of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse report, which found, among other things, that the FBI’s Trump-Russia counterintelligence team used an intelligence briefing of then-candidate Donald Trump and Flynn, his foreign policy adviser, as a “pretext” to gather information for their inquiry.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--Rachel Maddow: Documents suggest Mike Pence played role in brokering Ukraine bribe

An MSNBC host raised questions about whether Vice President Mike Pence was involved in the Trump administration 's delayed release of military aid to Ukraine .
Rachel Maddow said on her show Tuesday that unredacted documents , reviewed by Just Security , suggest Pence played a role in brokering a deal in which millions of dollars of congressionally approved funds would be released if Ukrainian officials announced investigations into his political rivals .
She referred to an email exchange in which Eric Chewning , Defense Secretary Mark Esper ’ s chief of staff , told the acting Pentagon comptroller , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they expected the issue to get `` resolved '' during a planned Sept. 1 meeting in Poland between Pence and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky .
`` Why did he think it was all going to get sorted ?
... We now know that , in the defense secretary 's office , they thought that that would all click into place as soon as this meeting between Mike Pence and the Ukrainian president took place .
So , it was Mike Pence who was supposed to personally get the assurance from the Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to announce the investigations ? ''
Maddow told her audience .
`` Because that was the deal , right ?
That 's what everybody was waiting on , '' Maddow added .
Gordon Sondland , the U.S. ambassador to the European Union , testified in a November impeachment hearing that he raised concerns to Pence about Ukraine aid being tied to President Trump 's push for investigations .
Pence 's office denied such a conversation ever taking place and noted that other witnesses denied under oath that the vice president ever broached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ukrainians .
The hold on the military aid continued for more than a week after the Pence-Zelensky meeting , and it was finally lifted on Sept. 11 .
The Ukrainians have not announced any investigations that Trump desired , including one into former Vice President Joe Biden , who is a candidate for president , and his son Hunter Biden .
After testimony by dozens of witnesses on the Ukraine matter , the Democrat-led House passed two articles of impeachment nearly three weeks ago that charged Trump with abuse of power in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a Democrat from California , is withholding articles of impeachment because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has signaled he may not call any witnesses .
The Kentucky Republican plans to move ahead with rules for an impeachment trial without an agreement from Democrats .
The Pentagon announced on Monday that Chewning is leaving his post at the end of the month .
He plans to return to the private sector .
Maddow , a vocal critic of Trump , has been criticized for using her MSNBC show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump-Russia collusion theory and British ex-spy Christopher Steele 's anti-Trump dossier .

An MSNBC host raised questions about whether Vice President Mike Pence was involved in the Trump administration's delayed release of military aid to Ukraine.
Rachel Maddow said on her show Monday that unredacted documents, reviewed by Just Security, suggest Pence played a role in brokering a deal in which millions of dollars of congressionally approved funds would be released if Ukrainian officials announced investigations into his political rivals.
She referred to an email exchange in which Eric Chewning, Defense Secretary Mark Esper’s chief of staff, told the acting Pentagon comptroller, who raised concerns about the hold, that they expected the issue to get "resolved" during a planned Sept. 1 meeting in Poland between Pence and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
"Why did he think it was all going to get sorted? ... We now know that, in the defense secretary's office, they thought that that would all click into place as soon as this meeting between Mike Pence and the Ukrainian president took place. So, it was Mike Pence who was supposed to personally get the assurance from the Ukrainian government at that meeting that they were going to announce the investigations?" Maddow told her audience.
"Because that was the deal, right? That's what everybody was waiting on," Maddow added.
Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, testified in a November impeachment hearing that he raised concerns to Pence about Ukraine aid being tied to President Trump's push for investigations. Pence's office denied that such a conversation ever took place and noted that other witnesses denied under oath that the vice president ever broached "potential investigations" in conversations with the Ukrainians.
The hold on the military aid continued for more than a week after the Pence-Zelensky meeting, and it was finally lifted on Sept. 11. The Ukrainians have not announced any investigations that Trump desired, including one into former Vice President Joe Biden, who is a candidate for president, and his son Hunter Biden.
After testimony by dozens of witnesses on the Ukraine matter, the Democrat-led House passed two articles of impeachment nearly three weeks ago that charged Trump with abuse of power in dealing with Ukraine and obstruction of Congress. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from California, is withholding articles of impeachment because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has signaled he may not call any witnesses. The Kentucky Republican plans to move ahead with rules for an impeachment trial without an agreement from Democrats.
The Pentagon announced on Monday that Chewning is leaving his post at the end of the month. He plans to return to the private sector.
Maddow, a vocal critic of Trump, has been criticized for using her MSNBC show to give overly gratuitous attention to the Trump-Russia collusion theory and British ex-spy Christopher Steele's anti-Trump dossier.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-01-07--White House confident John Bolton will not testify at Senate impeachment trial

White House officials are confident that President Trump ’ s former national security adviser John Bolton will not appear as a witness during a Senate impeachment trial .
Bolton threatened to upend Republicans ’ careful strategy for a speedy trial on Monday when he announced that he was willing to testify if subpoenaed .
He is one of a number of witnesses with direct knowledge of Trump ’ s actions toward Ukraine that Democrats believe could prove crucial in understanding the arc of events that led to impeachment .
However , a senior administration source said Bolton was unlikely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the White House would move to block his testimony if they did .
“ There is a very clear case that his conversations with the president are covered by executive privilege , ” a senior administration official said , adding that any legal case to settle the question could take months , making it unlikely that he would ever appear during a trial .
Bolton ’ s surprise intervention has confounded pundits , who have spent the past 24 hours trying to work out his motive .
He was one of four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from testifying during House hearings .
“ I have concluded that , if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony , I am prepared to testify , ” Bolton said Monday .
Trump ’ s opponents welcomed Bolton ’ s announcement and called on Senate Republicans to ensure he had a chance to reveal what he knew about the White House 's thinking on Ukraine .
“ McConnell and his Republican colleagues are the only ones standing in the way of the American people hearing what John Bolton has to say , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stand Up America , which advocates for Trump 's impeachment .
`` Will they hold a fair trial that airs the evidence against Trump , or will they enable Trump ’ s cover-up ?
” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has forged an impeachment strategy with the White House aiming for a rapid resolution .
Only after both sides ' lawyers had set out their respective cases would they even consider calling witnesses — a similar procedure to that of President Bill Clinton 's impeachment trial .
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allies , said Bolton ’ s announcement changed nothing and that he was ready to vote on the evidence presented by the House .
He said : “ I 'm ready to vote ... just like we did in Clinton — hear the House out , let the president 's team speak , then people can decide based on what you heard , do you want evidence , do you want witnesses ?
” Influential Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said both sides should make their case before deciding on witnesses .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearing from him , but I think what we ought to do is hear from both of the parties , as we did in Clinton , ” he said , “ and then decide whether there 's a desire on the part of 51 senators for more . ''

White House officials are confident that President Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton will not appear as a witness during a Senate impeachment trial.
Bolton threatened to upend Republicans’ careful strategy for a speedy trial on Monday when he announced that he was willing to testify if subpoenaed. He is one of a number of witnesses with direct knowledge of Trump’s actions toward Ukraine that Democrats believe could prove crucial in understanding the arc of events that led to impeachment.
However, a senior administration source said Bolton was unlikely to be subpoenaed by the Republican-dominated Senate and that the White House would move to block his testimony if they did.
“There is a very clear case that his conversations with the president are covered by executive privilege,” a senior administration official said, adding that any legal case to settle the question could take months, making it unlikely that he would ever appear during a trial.
Bolton’s surprise intervention has confounded pundits, who have spent the past 24 hours trying to work out his motive. He was one of four administration officials blocked by the White House from testifying during House hearings.
“I have concluded that, if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify,” Bolton said Monday.
Trump’s opponents welcomed Bolton’s announcement and called on Senate Republicans to ensure he had a chance to reveal what he knew about the White House's thinking on Ukraine.
“McConnell and his Republican colleagues are the only ones standing in the way of the American people hearing what John Bolton has to say," said Sean Eldridge, president of Stand Up America, which advocates for Trump's impeachment. "Will they hold a fair trial that airs the evidence against Trump, or will they enable Trump’s cover-up?”
[Byron York: ANALYSIS: Behind Bolton's decision]
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has forged an impeachment strategy with the White House aiming for a rapid resolution. Only after both sides' lawyers had set out their respective cases would they even consider calling witnesses — a similar procedure to that of President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of Trump’s closest Republican allies, said Bolton’s announcement changed nothing and that he was ready to vote on the evidence presented by the House. He said: “I'm ready to vote ... just like we did in Clinton — hear the House out, let the president's team speak, then people can decide based on what you heard, do you want evidence, do you want witnesses?”
Influential Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said both sides should make their case before deciding on witnesses.
"I wouldn't have any objection to hearing from him, but I think what we ought to do is hear from both of the parties, as we did in Clinton,” he said, “and then decide whether there's a desire on the part of 51 senators for more."
David Drucker contributed to this report.