theguardian--2020-01-30--Trump impeachment: chief justice again blocks Republican bid to name whistleblower – live

The trial has adjourned for a 45-minute dinner break .
When the senators return , they have about 2 hours @ @ @ @ @ pose questions .
So far , senators have asked nearly 150 questions .
As the @ @ @ @ @ witnesses in the impeachment trial or swiftly acquit the president , crowds in Iowa are @ @ @ @ @ will soon speak at a campaign rally in Des Moines .

Maanvi Singh in San Francisco (now), Joan E Greve in Washington and Paul Owen (earlier)

31 Jan 2020 04.57 GMT Summary The Q&A portion of the Senate impeachment trial concluded, with House Democrats making the case to hear witness testimony and Trump’s legal team arguing for a swift acquittal.
concluded, with House Democrats making the case to hear witness testimony and Trump’s legal team arguing for a swift acquittal. Senator Lamar Alexander — who was considered a swing Republican — announced he intends to vote ‘no’ on witnesses. Republicans Mitt Romney and Susan Collins said they’ll vote in favor of considering additional witnesses, and Lisa Murkowski is undecided.
— who was considered a swing Republican — announced he intends to vote ‘no’ on witnesses. Republicans and said they’ll vote in favor of considering additional witnesses, and is undecided. Despite a couple of defectors, it seems the Republicans have lined up the votes to block additional testimony and evidence, and are headed for acquittal.
have lined up the votes to block additional testimony and evidence, and are headed for acquittal. As Senators considered his fate, Donald Trump raged against what he characterized as a “deranged witch hunt hoax” at a campaign rally in Iowa.
raged against what he characterized as a “deranged witch hunt hoax” at a campaign rally in Iowa. The trial will reconvene at 1pm ET tomorrow. Verge of acquittal: takeaways from day nine of the impeachment trial Read more
Updated at 05.22 GMT
31 Jan 2020 04.38 GMT Even if he’s not called to testify before the senate John Bolton could take matters into his own hands, and present his account in a public interview. He’s unlikely to do so — but at an event earlier today, the former national security adviser praised officials who did testify, even as he hesitated. Speaking at a private event in Texas, Bolton reportedly praised officials who testified in the House impeachment investigation. Fiona Hill, Tim Morrison, Alex Vindman, Bill Taylor, and Marie Yovanovitch “acted in the best interest of the country as they saw it and consistent to what they thought our policies were,” Bolton said, according to KXAN Austin.
31 Jan 2020 04.05 GMT Senator Lamar Alexander — who was considered a key swing vote — decides ‘no’ on witnesses Lamar Alexander as he passes by reporters during a trial recess. Photograph: Samuel Corum/Getty Images “There is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the U.S. Constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense,” Alexander said in a statement. The Tennessee Republican added: “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation.” “But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.” Alexander’s ‘no’ vote means it’s highly unlikely that the Senate would hear additional testimony. Donald Trump could be acquitted as soon as tomorrow. Republican senators Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine have indicated that they’d like to hear from witnesses. But even if Lisa Murkowski, the remaining undecided Republican senator from Alaska, joins them, the senators will likely end up with a tie. Although there is precedent for the Chief Justice to break such a time, John Roberts, who has taken a hands-off approach in the trial so far, is unlikely to interfere.
Updated at 04.42 GMT
31 Jan 2020 04.01 GMT Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Republican of Maine has issued a statement saying she will “vote in support of the motion to allow witnesses and documents to be subpoenaed” I will vote in support of the motion to allow witnesses and documents to be subpoenaed. My full statement: https://t.co/VuhZv6CO5e pic.twitter.com/LhQlnvPaoc — Sen. Susan Collins (@SenatorCollins) January 31, 2020
31 Jan 2020 03.55 GMT Lisa Murkowski, the Republican senator from Alaska who could be a swing vote on the question of witnesses, has said she’s going to “reflect” and decide whether she needs to “hear more”. Murkowski: "I am going to go reflect on what I have heard, re-read my notes and decide whether I need to hear more." — Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett) January 31, 2020 Senator Susan Collins, a Republican of Maine, said she’s decided to vote for witnesses. And Lamar Alexander, a Republican senator from Tennessee, is expected to announce his position on witnesses shortly.
31 Jan 2020 03.44 GMT Trial adjourns for the night The Senate trial has adjourned for the day. Responding to a last question, walked up to the Chief Justice personally by Senator Amy Klobuchar, House manager Jerrold Nadler made one last plea to Senators to call witnesses. The president’s lawyers know that witness testimony “will only strengthen the case” against the president, Nadler said. “The truth can be bolstered,” Nadler said.
31 Jan 2020 03.16 GMT GOP Senators suggest Bolton's testimony 'would add nothing to this case' A view of the Capitol as the trial winds down for the day. Photograph: J Scott Applewhite/AP Republican Senators Graham, Cruz, Portman, Alexander, Toomey, Sullivan and Murkowski (who is still undecided on witnesses) asked the Trump legal team: “Isn’t it true that the allegations would still not rise to the level of an impeachable offense and would add nothing to this case” even if Bolton were to testify. Although Trump’s lawyers have been distancing themselves from Alan Dershowitz’s earlier argument that nothing short of a criminal act is impeachable, White House counsel Patrick Philbin more or less agreed — regardless of what Bolton says, Trump shouldn’t be impeached. “Even if Ambassador Bolton would testify to that, even if you assumed it were true, there is no impeachable offense stated in the articles of impeachment,” he said. House manager Adam Schiff, responding at the request of Democratic senators, said “I don’t think there’s really much question” about what Bolton would say. There’s also little question over what Donald Trump has done wrong, Schiff added. What the president’s defense is saying, Schiff said, is that “the president of the United States can withhold hundreds of millions of dollars in aid that we appropriated, can do so in violation of the law, can do so to coerce an ally in order to help him cheat in an election” but “too bad, there’s nothing you can do”. Senator Lisa Murkowski’s cosign on the leading question from Republican senators may be a sign that despite some vacillation, she’ll ultimately vote against hearing witness testimony.
Updated at 03.37 GMT
31 Jan 2020 02.51 GMT The state department has advised against all travel to China due to coronavirus outbreak A doctor checks CT images of a patient at a hospital in Wuhan, China. Photograph: Yuan Zheng/EPA “Those currently in China should consider departing using commercial means. The Department of State has requested that all non-essential U.S. government personnel defer travel to China in light of the novel coronavirus,” the state department advised. Follow the Guardian’s live coverage of the coronavirus outbreak, which the World Health Organization has declared a global health emergency. Coronavirus live updates: Britons evacuated as US says 'do not travel to China' – latest news Read more
Updated at 03.04 GMT
31 Jan 2020 02.45 GMT Schiff says the White House Counsel saying ‘if their case is so good, let them try it without witnesses,’ is not a valid argument: “That wouldn’t fly before any judge in America and it shouldn’t fly here either” https://t.co/kfaqEJJajc pic.twitter.com/4kaDXyD4o2 — CBS News (@CBSNews) January 31, 2020 With the trial back in session, House manager Adam Schiff said that the Trump team’s justification for not calling witnesses makes no sense.
The argument that “‘if their case is so good, let them try it without witnesses,’ is not a valid argument,” Schiff said. “That wouldn’t fly before any judge in America and it shouldn’t fly here either.” The Trump administration made clear that it wouldn’t cooperate with Congress’ impeachment investigation, Schiff said — making a case for the Senate to get the evidence the House wasn’t able to.
Updated at 02.46 GMT
31 Jan 2020 02.09 GMT Donald Trump: 'We’re having probably the best years we’ve ever had' Trump: Democrats are "obsessed with a deranged witch hunt hoax. We're having probably the best years we've ever had in the history of our country. And I just got impeached!" — David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) January 31, 2020 Impeachment was one of the things on the president’s mind as he addressed the crowd at his campaign rally in Des Moines, Iowa. Democrats are “obsessed with a deranged witch hunt hoax” he said. “We’re having probably the best years we’ve ever had in the history of our country. And I just got impeached!” Trump derided “Crazy Schiff” and “Shifty Schiff” before reassuring the crowd that his poll numbers were up and Republicans would retake the House in November. President Trump: "You know we're having probably the best years that we've ever had in history of our country and I just got impeached!"
Also: "It's a happy period, because we call this Impeachment Lite." pic.twitter.com/sCKAp59rY3 — CSPAN (@cspan) January 31, 2020 He shared a number of his other grievances against the Democrats, including their environmental policies which he said would “kill our cows”. “That means you’re next,” he told his Iowan supporters. He also said that “through a remittance, illegal aliens from Mexico are going to pay for the wall,” without offering any other information about what that means or how it would work. “You’d better let me win!” he yelled out to the crowd.
Updated at 03.22 GMT


theguardian--2020-01-30--Trump to send army of surrogates to Iowa to distract from Democratic caucuses

One observer calls it “ smart ” .
Another brands it “ desperate ” .
Either way , Donald Trump is determined to steal Democrats ’ thunder by sending more than 80 of his best-known – and most controversial – surrogates to Iowa on caucus day .
White House officials , cabinet secretaries , members of Congress and Christian evangelicals will be in the Hawkeye state on Monday , when Democrats take their first step to choosing their 2020 presidential nominee , to offer voters a stark reminder of who and what that candidate will be up against .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ determination to present his campaign as an intimidating juggernaut roaring towards inevitable victory .
His audacious lineup illustrates that , true to form , he will be eager to embrace outrage and division rather than shy away from them like a conventional politician .
“ Our caucus day operation is just a preview of what is to come , ” said Brad Parscale , Trump 2020 campaign manager .
“ This will be the strongest , best-funded , and most organized presidential campaign in history .
We are putting the Democrats on notice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this formidable re-election machine.
” Among the surrogates will be Paula White , a televangelist and religious adviser to the US president , recently caught on video declaring during a church service in Florida : “ In the name of Jesus , we command all satanic pregnancies to miscarry right now.
” White has claimed that she was quoted out of context for political ends .
As Trump seeks to shore up his rightwing religious base , Jerry Falwell Jr , president of Liberty University , one of the world ’ s biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He has previously opined there was nothing that Trump could do that would threaten his support from evangelical leaders .
It has been reported that Trump ’ s longtime lawyer Michael Cohen intervened in 2016 to ensure that racy “ personal ” photographs of Falwell were destroyed .
Ken Blackwell , Penny Nance and Ralph Reed , Pro-Life Voices for Trump advisory board members , will be on the ground , reflecting the president ’ s personal reinvention as a scourge of abortion rights .
Last week he became the first sitting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Washington .
Neil Sroka , a spokesman for the progressive political action committee Democracy for America , said : “ When you have an absolutely amoral , unrepentantly bigoted president , you ’ re going to need to turn out the religious sell-outs to try to hold together the Republican coalition.
” The president ’ s surrogate army , spreading out across the state , will further include Mick Mulvaney , the White House acting chief of staff ; the housing secretary , Ben Carson ; the education secretary , Betsy DeVos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; and the former energy secretary Rick Perry .
And in a glimpse of the coming campaign , some of Trump ’ s biggest defenders during the impeachment hearings in Washington will make his case to voters at Iowa caucus sites .
Among them are Matt Gaetz of Florida , Jim Jordan of Ohio , Mark Meadows of North Carolina , Elise Stefanik of New York and Liz Cheney of Wyoming – daughter of the former vice-president Dick Cheney .
There is also a place for the former White House communications director Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News after being accused in multiple civil lawsuits of covering up sexual misconduct by the channel ’ s founding chairman , Roger Ailes .
He denied any wrongdoing .
Shine ’ s wife , Darla , has made racially incendiary comments and pushed false anti-vaccination claims on Twitter .
As the Democratic candidates Joe Biden , Bernie Sanders , Elizabeth Warren and others gear up for the long-awaited caucuses , the mass deployment could be seen as a sign of fear in the Trump camp .
Sroka , of Democracy for America , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a little worried that somebody else will get press coverage !
They seem to be nervous .
“ It ’ s clear they are absolutely desperate to have themselves injected into a news cycle that wasn ’ t all about Trump .
This level of intervention reeks of desperation and it ’ s only going to get worse for them .
As more people tune in , they will see how weak the arguments are for Trump and how much better the alternatives are.
” A veteran of New York tabloids and reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seizing media attention .
He is due to hold a campaign rally in Iowa on Thursday night – just as the incumbent Ronald Reagan did in 1984 – and another in New Hampshire before next week ’ s first Democratic primary .
Larry Jacobs , director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota , said : “ It shows you the Trump campaign has thought ahead and they don ’ t want the Democrats , during the next six months of primaries , to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It shows you the campaign is going to bust into the Democratic media moments and make sure they steal their time .
It will be impossible for the media not to give them some attention and coverage .
This is about Trump trying to charge up his party , contesting media time and sending a message to his base : it ’ s time to get in order .
It ’ s smart.
” Trump finished runner-up to Senator Ted Cruz of Texas in Iowa in 2016 .
This year the Republican caucuses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challengers , Bill Weld and Joe Walsh , failed to gain traction .
And polls suggest the incumbent will be hard for Democrats to beat in Iowa in the November election .
But some farmers ’ groups have been critical of Trump ’ s trade war and support for big corporations .
Patty Judge , chair of Focus on Rural America and former lieutenant-governor of Iowa , said : “ Iowans aren ’ t interested in hearing Donald Trump offer more promises that he won ’ t keep .
“ Having crafted some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic opportunity in rural Iowa , I ’ m deeply saddened to see him prioritise waivers for Exxon and Chevron over farmers and homegrown biofuel facilities , abandoning the engines that drive many small towns and rural economies .
”

One observer calls it “smart”. Another brands it “desperate”. Either way, Donald Trump is determined to steal Democrats’ thunder by sending more than 80 of his best-known – and most controversial – surrogates to Iowa on caucus day.
White House officials, cabinet secretaries, members of Congress and Christian evangelicals will be in the Hawkeye state on Monday, when Democrats take their first step to choosing their 2020 presidential nominee, to offer voters a stark reminder of who and what that candidate will be up against.
The intervention shows the US president’s determination to present his campaign as an intimidating juggernaut roaring towards inevitable victory. His audacious lineup illustrates that, true to form, he will be eager to embrace outrage and division rather than shy away from them like a conventional politician.
“Our caucus day operation is just a preview of what is to come,” said Brad Parscale, Trump 2020 campaign manager. “This will be the strongest, best-funded, and most organized presidential campaign in history. We are putting the Democrats on notice –good luck trying to keep up with this formidable re-election machine.”
Among the surrogates will be Paula White, a televangelist and religious adviser to the US president, recently caught on video declaring during a church service in Florida: “In the name of Jesus, we command all satanic pregnancies to miscarry right now.” White has claimed that she was quoted out of context for political ends.
As Trump seeks to shore up his rightwing religious base, Jerry Falwell Jr, president of Liberty University, one of the world’s biggest Christian colleges, will also be deployed. He has previously opined there was nothing that Trump could do that would threaten his support from evangelical leaders. It has been reported that Trump’s longtime lawyer Michael Cohen intervened in 2016 to ensure that racy “personal” photographs of Falwell were destroyed.
Ken Blackwell, Penny Nance and Ralph Reed, Pro-Life Voices for Trump advisory board members, will be on the ground, reflecting the president’s personal reinvention as a scourge of abortion rights. Last week he became the first sitting president to address the March for Life in Washington.
Neil Sroka, a spokesman for the progressive political action committee Democracy for America, said: “When you have an absolutely amoral, unrepentantly bigoted president, you’re going to need to turn out the religious sell-outs to try to hold together the Republican coalition.”
The president’s surrogate army, spreading out across the state, will further include Mick Mulvaney, the White House acting chief of staff; the housing secretary, Ben Carson; the education secretary, Betsy DeVos; the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross; and the former energy secretary Rick Perry.
And in a glimpse of the coming campaign, some of Trump’s biggest defenders during the impeachment hearings in Washington will make his case to voters at Iowa caucus sites. Among them are Matt Gaetz of Florida, Jim Jordan of Ohio, Mark Meadows of North Carolina, Elise Stefanik of New York and Liz Cheney of Wyoming – daughter of the former vice-president Dick Cheney.
Trump with and Paula White in Miami this month. Photograph: Larry Marano/Rex/Shutterstock
There is also a place for the former White House communications director Bill Shine, who was ousted from Fox News after being accused in multiple civil lawsuits of covering up sexual misconduct by the channel’s founding chairman, Roger Ailes. He denied any wrongdoing. Shine’s wife, Darla, has made racially incendiary comments and pushed false anti-vaccination claims on Twitter.
As the Democratic candidates Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and others gear up for the long-awaited caucuses, the mass deployment could be seen as a sign of fear in the Trump camp. Sroka, of Democracy for America, commented: “Sounds like someone is a little worried that somebody else will get press coverage! They seem to be nervous.
“It’s clear they are absolutely desperate to have themselves injected into a news cycle that wasn’t all about Trump. This level of intervention reeks of desperation and it’s only going to get worse for them. As more people tune in, they will see how weak the arguments are for Trump and how much better the alternatives are.”
A veteran of New York tabloids and reality TV, Trump is a master of seizing media attention. He is due to hold a campaign rally in Iowa on Thursday night – just as the incumbent Ronald Reagan did in 1984 – and another in New Hampshire before next week’s first Democratic primary.
Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said: “It shows you the Trump campaign has thought ahead and they don’t want the Democrats, during the next six months of primaries, to have massive media hits every week.
“It shows you the campaign is going to bust into the Democratic media moments and make sure they steal their time. It will be impossible for the media not to give them some attention and coverage. This is about Trump trying to charge up his party, contesting media time and sending a message to his base: it’s time to get in order. It’s smart.”
03:13 How the Democrats will decide who fights Trump – video
Trump finished runner-up to Senator Ted Cruz of Texas in Iowa in 2016. This year the Republican caucuses will be spectacularly uncompetitive as the two challengers, Bill Weld and Joe Walsh, failed to gain traction. And polls suggest the incumbent will be hard for Democrats to beat in Iowa in the November election.
But some farmers’ groups have been critical of Trump’s trade war and support for big corporations. Patty Judge, chair of Focus on Rural America and former lieutenant-governor of Iowa, said: “Iowans aren’t interested in hearing Donald Trump offer more promises that he won’t keep.
“Having crafted some of the biofuels policies that have driven economic opportunity in rural Iowa, I’m deeply saddened to see him prioritise waivers for Exxon and Chevron over farmers and homegrown biofuel facilities, abandoning the engines that drive many small towns and rural economies.”


theguardian--2020-01-30--South Dakota lawmakers vote to jail doctors for treating trans teens

South Dakota lawmakers voted in favor of a law that would see doctors jailed for giving puberty-blocking drugs to transgender children , the latest in a slew of such bills sweeping the United States .
The bill , which cleared the South Dakota house of representatives on Wednesday but still has to clear the state ’ s senate , would bar doctors in the state from providing anyone under 16 with the drugs , which can temporarily stop the body from producing the hormones that lead to puberty , a reversible process .
Critics of the proposed ban say the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trans children struggling with the onset of puberty to hit pause .
“ One of the biggest problems for these kids is … their sense of who they are isn ’ t matching their body , ” Anne Dilenschneider , a South Dakota psychologist , told the Thomson Reuters Foundation .
“ They ’ ve got a body developing in a way that is causing a huge crisis .
And they want it to stop , ” said Dilenschneider , warning this could make young people suicidal .
Studies have found that young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate than their peers .
Proponents of the bill , which would also ban treatments rarely performed on children such as sex reassignment surgery and hormone therapy as well as puberty blockers , say these can harm young people , who may not fully grasp the risks .
Fred Deutsch , a South Dakota Republican representative , described the procedures ahead of the vote as “ criminal acts against vulnerable children who are too young to understand the impact ” .
The legislation has sparked national backlash from doctors and activists across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in misinformation and seeks to outlaw standards of care outlined by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other major medical organizations .
The bill follows the introduction in South Carolina of measures that could see the licenses of doctors who treat trans children revoked , one of a series of such measures in conservative US states .
Lawmakers in Missouri are considering a law that would see parents who allowed such treatments reported to child welfare , while Republican legislators in Texas , Georgia and Kentucky have proposed banning gender reassignment treatment for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ launched attacks on trans rights with a number of discriminatory policies .
Experts and parents of trans children warn such restrictions could harm young people already struggling with the challenges of adolescence and gender dysphoria .
A study of 20,619 trans adults published earlier this month found those who wanted and received puberty-blockers were less likely to have a history of suicidal thoughts or suicide attempts by their mid-30s .
South Dakota resident Rob has a 14-year-old daughter who has been on puberty blockers for about a year .
Rob , who asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name , said puberty blockers had “ made all the difference in the world for my child ” , who had been self-harming before she began taking the drugs .
“ She changed as a person , back into this friendly , fun-loving child , ” said Rob , who describes himself as “ 100 % Republican ” but said he was frustrated that politicians would try to prevent his daughter from accessing the treatment .
“ I don ’ t think the government has any right to step in and dictate what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said .
“ They ’ re not protecting anybody.
” The ban passed with 46 votes to 23 in the state ’ s Republican-controlled house of representatives .
It will still have to clear the senate , where it may face greater opposition .
The state ’ s governor would have the final say .

South Dakota lawmakers voted in favor of a law that would see doctors jailed for giving puberty-blocking drugs to transgender children, the latest in a slew of such bills sweeping the United States.
The bill, which cleared the South Dakota house of representatives on Wednesday but still has to clear the state’s senate, would bar doctors in the state from providing anyone under 16 with the drugs, which can temporarily stop the body from producing the hormones that lead to puberty, a reversible process.
Critics of the proposed ban say the drugs play a crucial role in allowing trans children struggling with the onset of puberty to hit pause.
“One of the biggest problems for these kids is … their sense of who they are isn’t matching their body,” Anne Dilenschneider, a South Dakota psychologist, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
“They’ve got a body developing in a way that is causing a huge crisis. And they want it to stop,” said Dilenschneider, warning this could make young people suicidal.
Studies have found that young trans people have a much higher suicide rate than their peers.
Proponents of the bill, which would also ban treatments rarely performed on children such as sex reassignment surgery and hormone therapy as well as puberty blockers, say these can harm young people, who may not fully grasp the risks.
Fred Deutsch, a South Dakota Republican representative, described the procedures ahead of the vote as “criminal acts against vulnerable children who are too young to understand the impact”.
The legislation has sparked national backlash from doctors and activists across the country, who say it is rooted in misinformation and seeks to outlaw standards of care outlined by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other major medical organizations.
The bill follows the introduction in South Carolina of measures that could see the licenses of doctors who treat trans children revoked, one of a series of such measures in conservative US states.
Lawmakers in Missouri are considering a law that would see parents who allowed such treatments reported to child welfare, while Republican legislators in Texas, Georgia and Kentucky have proposed banning gender reassignment treatment for minors. The Trump administration has also launched attacks on trans rights with a number of discriminatory policies.
Experts and parents of trans children warn such restrictions could harm young people already struggling with the challenges of adolescence and gender dysphoria.
A study of 20,619 trans adults published earlier this month found those who wanted and received puberty-blockers were less likely to have a history of suicidal thoughts or suicide attempts by their mid-30s.
South Dakota resident Rob has a 14-year-old daughter who has been on puberty blockers for about a year.
Rob, who asked to be identified only by his first name, said puberty blockers had “made all the difference in the world for my child”, who had been self-harming before she began taking the drugs.
“She changed as a person, back into this friendly, fun-loving child,” said Rob, who describes himself as “100% Republican” but said he was frustrated that politicians would try to prevent his daughter from accessing the treatment.
“I don’t think the government has any right to step in and dictate what a person does with their own body,” he said. “They’re not protecting anybody.”
The ban passed with 46 votes to 23 in the state’s Republican-controlled house of representatives. It will still have to clear the senate, where it may face greater opposition. The state’s governor would have the final say.


theguardian--2020-01-30--Trump to reportedly allow use of landmines, reversing Obama-era policy

The US will end its moratorium on the production and deployment of landmines , in another reversal of Obama-era policies and a further breach with western allies , it has been reported .
The defence secretary , Mark Esper , confirmed that a policy change was imminent but refused to describe it .
Vox published a leaked state department cable rescinding Barack Obama ’ s 2014 ban on production or acquisition of anti-personnel landmines ( APLs ) .
The 2014 directive brought US policy more in line with the 1997 mine ban treaty outlawing the weapons because of their disproportionate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ join the treaty , also known as the Ottawa Convention , reserving the right for the US to use landmines on the Korean peninsula .
The treaty has been signed by 164 countries , including all of America ’ s Nato allies .
“ Mr Trump ’ s policy rollback is a step toward the past , like many of his other decisions , and sends exactly the wrong message to those working to rid the world of the scourge of landmines , ” said Jody Williams , who won the 1997 Nobel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the weapons .
“ Mr Trump ’ s landmine move would be in line with all of his other moves to undercut arms control and disarmament in a world much in need of them.
” CNN reported that the policy change was the result of a Pentagon policy review ordered by the former defence secretary James Mattis , which found that the prohibition “ increased risk to mission success ” and increased danger to US armed forces .
Rob Berschinski , who was in charge of US landmine policy in the Obama White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only a humanitarian threat but also militarily obsolete .
“ The main point is that they ’ re not only massively harmful to civilians after war ’ s end , but they ’ re also of very negligible military utility , ” Berschinski , now at Human Rights First , said on Twitter .
“ In fact , [ defence department ] -commissioned studies have shown that during the Gulf war they mainly served to limit US ground forces ’ maneuver capability.
” The US has not used APLs since 1991 ( with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , it has not produced any since 1997 and has gone a long way towards destroying its stockpile .
The state department cable quoted by Vox said that the US would only consider manufacture and deployment of mines with “ technologically advanced safeguards ” that limit “ the risk of unintended harm to civilians ” .
That could clear the way for mines which can self-destruct .
The US has also developed the Gator landmine replacement munition which can be fired into enemy territory , sense if anything is nearby and then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
An advocacy organisation , Landmine Monitor , has estimated that there have been 130,000 casualties from landmines between 1999 and 2018 , most of them civilians .
The landmine decision is the latest in a long list of instances in which the Trump administration has overturned foreign policy positions adopted by its predecessor , withdrawing from arms control agreements and trade arrangements as well as the Paris climate accord .

The US will end its moratorium on the production and deployment of landmines, in another reversal of Obama-era policies and a further breach with western allies, it has been reported.
The defence secretary, Mark Esper, confirmed that a policy change was imminent but refused to describe it. Vox published a leaked state department cable rescinding Barack Obama’s 2014 ban on production or acquisition of anti-personnel landmines (APLs).
The 2014 directive brought US policy more in line with the 1997 mine ban treaty outlawing the weapons because of their disproportionate harm to civilians. Obama did not join the treaty, also known as the Ottawa Convention, reserving the right for the US to use landmines on the Korean peninsula. The treaty has been signed by 164 countries, including all of America’s Nato allies.
“Mr Trump’s policy rollback is a step toward the past, like many of his other decisions, and sends exactly the wrong message to those working to rid the world of the scourge of landmines,” said Jody Williams, who won the 1997 Nobel peace prize for her work campaigning against the weapons.
“Mr Trump’s landmine move would be in line with all of his other moves to undercut arms control and disarmament in a world much in need of them.”
CNN reported that the policy change was the result of a Pentagon policy review ordered by the former defence secretary James Mattis, which found that the prohibition “increased risk to mission success” and increased danger to US armed forces.
Rob Berschinski, who was in charge of US landmine policy in the Obama White House said that the weapons were not only a humanitarian threat but also militarily obsolete.
“The main point is that they’re not only massively harmful to civilians after war’s end, but they’re also of very negligible military utility,” Berschinski, now at Human Rights First, said on Twitter. “In fact, [defence department]-commissioned studies have shown that during the Gulf war they mainly served to limit US ground forces’ maneuver capability.”
The US has not used APLs since 1991 (with a single exception in Afghanistan in 2002), it has not produced any since 1997 and has gone a long way towards destroying its stockpile.
The state department cable quoted by Vox said that the US would only consider manufacture and deployment of mines with “technologically advanced safeguards” that limit “the risk of unintended harm to civilians”.
That could clear the way for mines which can self-destruct. The US has also developed the Gator landmine replacement munition which can be fired into enemy territory, sense if anything is nearby and then can be detonated remotely by an operator.
An advocacy organisation, Landmine Monitor, has estimated that there have been 130,000 casualties from landmines between 1999 and 2018, most of them civilians.
The landmine decision is the latest in a long list of instances in which the Trump administration has overturned foreign policy positions adopted by its predecessor, withdrawing from arms control agreements and trade arrangements as well as the Paris climate accord.


theguardian--2020-01-30--Wilbur Ross says coronavirus outbreak could bring back jobs to the US

The US commerce secretary , Wilbur Ross , said in an interview on Thursday that the coronavirus outbreak could bring back jobs to America .
In controversial comments on morning TV , Ross remarked that the deadly illness that has broken out in China and is spreading internationally could lead to job growth for businesses in the US and Mexico .
He was speaking during a segment on Fox Business Network .
Ross began by saying he did not “ want to talk about a victory lap over a very unfortunate , very malignant disease ” before discussing the potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think it will help to accelerate the return of jobs to North America , some to [ the ] US , probably some to Mexico as well , ” Ross said .
He then likened the outbreak to other global health crises including the “ African swine virus ” and the 2003 Sars epidemic as “ another risk factor that people need to take into account ” .
The coronavirus has killed more than 170 people in China and infected more than 8,000 people across several countries .
World Health Organization officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outbreak constitutes a global health emergency .
An estimated 200 Americans have been evacuated from the Wuhan region of China , considered the epicenter of the virus .
The US has confirmed five cases of the coronavirus stateside thus far , and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed at least 165 people are currently under screening .
Vice-President Mike Pence was on hand at a White House event celebrating the Lunar New Year on Monday , and said the administration “ has taken strong action to deal with this virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people of China confront ” it .
Trump also tweeted his support the of the “ efforts and transparency ” of Chinese health officials , thanking President Xi Jinping for China ’ s cooperation .
Ross echoed the White House message of support , but then prioritized American interests .
“ Every American ’ s heart has to go out to the victims , ” he said .
“ But the fact is , it does give businesses yet another thing to consider when they go through their review of their supply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new for Ross .
After learning cash-strapped federal workers were using food banks during the 2019 government shutdown , he encouraged employees to take out loans from credit unions to pay bills in the interim .
Meanwhile , US health secretary Alex Azar said the US will participate alongside WHO experts planning to visit China to help combat the coronavirus .

The US commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, said in an interview on Thursday that the coronavirus outbreak could bring back jobs to America.
In controversial comments on morning TV, Ross remarked that the deadly illness that has broken out in China and is spreading internationally could lead to job growth for businesses in the US and Mexico. He was speaking during a segment on Fox Business Network.
Ross began by saying he did not “want to talk about a victory lap over a very unfortunate, very malignant disease” before discussing the potential economic benefits of the virus.
“I think it will help to accelerate the return of jobs to North America, some to [the] US, probably some to Mexico as well,” Ross said. He then likened the outbreak to other global health crises including the “African swine virus” and the 2003 Sars epidemic as “another risk factor that people need to take into account”.
Wilbur Ross saying the coronavirus would boost the American economy and bring more jobs makes me wonder if he’s the grandson of the dude who gave smallpox blankets to the Native Americans. — Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) January 30, 2020
The coronavirus has killed more than 170 people in China and infected more than 8,000 people across several countries. World Health Organization officials will meet on Thursday to determine whether the outbreak constitutes a global health emergency.
An estimated 200 Americans have been evacuated from the Wuhan region of China, considered the epicenter of the virus. The US has confirmed five cases of the coronavirus stateside thus far, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed at least 165 people are currently under screening.
Just received a briefing on the Coronavirus in China from all of our GREAT agencies, who are also working closely with China. We will continue to monitor the ongoing developments. We have the best experts anywhere in the world, and they are on top of it 24/7! pic.twitter.com/rrtF1Stk78 — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 30, 2020
Vice-President Mike Pence was on hand at a White House event celebrating the Lunar New Year on Monday, and said the administration “has taken strong action to deal with this virus” and stands “ready to help the people of China confront” it.
Trump also tweeted his support the of the “efforts and transparency” of Chinese health officials, thanking President Xi Jinping for China’s cooperation. Ross echoed the White House message of support, but then prioritized American interests.
“Every American’s heart has to go out to the victims,” he said. “But the fact is, it does give businesses yet another thing to consider when they go through their review of their supply chain.”
Contradicting official messaging is not new for Ross. After learning cash-strapped federal workers were using food banks during the 2019 government shutdown, he encouraged employees to take out loans from credit unions to pay bills in the interim.
Meanwhile, US health secretary Alex Azar said the US will participate alongside WHO experts planning to visit China to help combat the coronavirus.


theguardian--2020-01-30--'We want to know who you are’: Trump’s campaign manager reveals his 2020 plan

Donald Trump ’ s election campaign manager has told of his ambition to build a data-gathering juggernaut based around the principle : “ We want to know who you are and how you think.
” Brad Parscale , regarded by critics as an apologist for a uniquely dangerous and divisive US president , described to the Guardian a targeted advertising operation immensely more sophisticated than four years ago .
Every time someone donates to the Trump re-election campaign , buys some of its merchandise , registers on its mailing list , enters one of its competitions or attends one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an opportunity to hoover up an email address and other details that will come in useful later .
“ The campaign is all about data collection , ” Parscale said in a phone interview with the Guardian .
“ Every aspect of this campaign .
Everything we do , if you go to a coalition event , you sign up for a thing , you touch it .
“ If we touch you digitally , we want to know who you are and how you think and get you into our databases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and relearn and understand what ’ s happening.
” Parscale , who in 2016 was digital director of the insurgent Trump campaign , offered a metaphor .
“ Imagine it like it ’ s a gigantic highway but the only time people drive down it is when there ’ s a big event .
Say you live on the north side , all you do is go to the grocery store but every once in a while there ’ s a huge football game and that ’ s the time you drive downtown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run a billboard at that time for my best sporting thing when we know all the sports people are coming down the street .
It ’ s the same principle , right ?
And so what we want to do is blow things up when we know the people are on the highway.
” Parscale ’ s efforts , including ads that make misleading claims and clickbait that exploits voters ’ grievances , pose a hefty challenge to Democrats .
Michael Slaby , who was Barack Obama campaign ’ s chief technology officer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officer in 2012 , recently warned the left had suffered “ over-confidence ” while Trump ’ s social media strategy forged ahead .
Asked if he believes Democrats will try to assemble a similar model , Parscale replied : “ We have no idea what they ’ re going to build .
That ’ s up to you guys to go figure out .
We do have an advantage in time .
The president was extremely smart the day after the election to say why take our foot off the gas ?
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of the fight .
It was the start of the fight .
And let ’ s just keep going .
Let ’ s keep fundraising .
Let ’ s keep building .
This is a fight for eight years .
This isn ’ t a fight just for a few months.
” At 44 years of age , and 6ft 8in in height , the bearded Parscale , who was born in Topeka , Kansas , and spent his working life in San Antonio , Texas , has become an improbable and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the crowd before Trump ’ s arrival .
He said he has three objectives there .
“ I ’ m the first one that ’ s getting up there and saying , we ’ re almost there , hang with us .
It takes hours to get all those people through all the mags [ metal detector ] .
Two , is to rah rah them a little bit , get them pumped up , help them understand the importance of their state and give them just a little bit of boost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to get the data so I make them try to all memorise 88022 .
I make them chant it and memorise it and my goal is to make everybody in America know that number 88022 .
There is no better methodology to contact voters and raise money than cellphone text messaging.
” For all the tools and screens of the digital age , it was clear in 2016 that Trump ’ s rallies carried an old-fashioned power of live theatre .
People in long-forgotten small towns queued for hours to see him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remembered at last .
He encouraged them to tell their friends and neighbors about the “ once in a lifetime ” experience .
Yet the crowds at Trump rallies are overwhelmingly white .
The president has sometimes fired them up with racist rhetoric towards immigrants or Ilhan Omar , one of the first Muslim women in Congress .
He stands accused of deepening divisions in what some have called a cold civil war .
Parscale denies the premise and blames the media .
“ The news and the media has one job : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ re not there to give us news .
They ’ re there to make money and they have stock prices now and they have ratings reviews and they have everything and telling that America is boring doesn ’ t sell anything .
People turn off the news.
” But is Trump racist ?
“ Well , 100 % he ’ s not a racist .
It ’ s upsetting , obviously , when someone tells you something that is demeaning and almost vulgar to say about you.
” Last month the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Representatives for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress after pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden , one of his 2020 election rivals .
His Senate trial is currently under way , putting his misconduct under a microscope .
But Parscale does not believe it will inflict lasting political damage .
“ I ’ ll tell you that nothing that ’ s occurred over the last couple of months has driven down his numbers at all .
According to the numbers , he ’ s actually gone up from this and his approval @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Donald Trump’s election campaign manager has told of his ambition to build a data-gathering juggernaut based around the principle: “We want to know who you are and how you think.”
Brad Parscale, regarded by critics as an apologist for a uniquely dangerous and divisive US president, described to the Guardian a targeted advertising operation immensely more sophisticated than four years ago.
Every time someone donates to the Trump re-election campaign, buys some of its merchandise, registers on its mailing list, enters one of its competitions or attends one of the president’s rallies, there is an opportunity to hoover up an email address and other details that will come in useful later.
“The campaign is all about data collection,” Parscale said in a phone interview with the Guardian. “Every aspect of this campaign. Everything we do, if you go to a coalition event, you sign up for a thing, you touch it.
“If we touch you digitally, we want to know who you are and how you think and get you into our databases so that we can model off it and relearn and understand what’s happening.”
Parscale, who in 2016 was digital director of the insurgent Trump campaign, offered a metaphor. “Imagine it like it’s a gigantic highway but the only time people drive down it is when there’s a big event. Say you live on the north side, all you do is go to the grocery store but every once in a while there’s a huge football game and that’s the time you drive downtown.
“Well, we want to run a billboard at that time for my best sporting thing when we know all the sports people are coming down the street. It’s the same principle, right? And so what we want to do is blow things up when we know the people are on the highway.”
Parscale’s efforts, including ads that make misleading claims and clickbait that exploits voters’ grievances, pose a hefty challenge to Democrats.
Michael Slaby, who was Barack Obama campaign’s chief technology officer in 2008 and chief integration and innovation officer in 2012, recently warned the left had suffered “over-confidence” while Trump’s social media strategy forged ahead.
Asked if he believes Democrats will try to assemble a similar model, Parscale replied: “We have no idea what they’re going to build. That’s up to you guys to go figure out. We do have an advantage in time. The president was extremely smart the day after the election to say why take our foot off the gas?
“Election day 2016 wasn’t the end of the fight. It was the start of the fight. And let’s just keep going. Let’s keep fundraising. Let’s keep building. This is a fight for eight years. This isn’t a fight just for a few months.”
At 44 years of age, and 6ft 8in in height, the bearded Parscale, who was born in Topeka, Kansas, and spent his working life in San Antonio, Texas, has become an improbable and recognizable figure at campaign rallies, warming up the crowd before Trump’s arrival. He said he has three objectives there.
“I’m the first one that’s getting up there and saying, we’re almost there, hang with us. It takes hours to get all those people through all the mags [metal detector]. Two, is to rah rah them a little bit, get them pumped up, help them understand the importance of their state and give them just a little bit of boost right before.
“And then lastly is to get the data so I make them try to all memorise 88022. I make them chant it and memorise it and my goal is to make everybody in America know that number 88022. There is no better methodology to contact voters and raise money than cellphone text messaging.”
For all the tools and screens of the digital age, it was clear in 2016 that Trump’s rallies carried an old-fashioned power of live theatre. People in long-forgotten small towns queued for hours to see him, saying they were grateful to be remembered at last. He encouraged them to tell their friends and neighbors about the “once in a lifetime” experience.
Yet the crowds at Trump rallies are overwhelmingly white. The president has sometimes fired them up with racist rhetoric towards immigrants or Ilhan Omar, one of the first Muslim women in Congress. He stands accused of deepening divisions in what some have called a cold civil war. Parscale denies the premise and blames the media.
“The news and the media has one job: to sensationalise everything to make money. They’re not there to give us news. They’re there to make money and they have stock prices now and they have ratings reviews and they have everything and telling that America is boring doesn’t sell anything. People turn off the news.”
But is Trump racist? “Well, 100% he’s not a racist. It’s upsetting, obviously, when someone tells you something that is demeaning and almost vulgar to say about you.”
Last month the president was impeached by the House of Representatives for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress after pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, one of his 2020 election rivals. His Senate trial is currently under way, putting his misconduct under a microscope. But Parscale does not believe it will inflict lasting political damage.
“I’ll tell you that nothing that’s occurred over the last couple of months has driven down his numbers at all. According to the numbers, he’s actually gone up from this and his approval numbers have [too].”


theguardian--2020-01-30--How the Democrats will decide who fights Trump – video

More than a dozen candidates are running to take on Donald Trump in the presidential election this year .
But @ @ @ @ @ Democratic nomination .
Lauren Gambino explains the process • How the impeachment trial is upending @ @ @ @ @ • Who is running for president ?
The full list of 2020 candidates

Lauren Gambino, Tom Silverstone, Tim Marriott, Alex Healey and Katie Lamborn

More than a dozen candidates are running to take on Donald Trump in the presidential election this year. But first they must win the Democratic nomination. Lauren Gambino explains the process


theguardian--2020-02-05--Iowa and the grand tradition of election tech mishaps

The great Iowa caucus meltdown of 2020 may be triggering anguish , anger and , on the Republican side of the political fence , expressions of unalloyed glee ; but for one Miami lawyer and voting rights activist it is also bringing back vivid memories of another high-profile primary contest that fell victim to untested new technology and administrative incompetence .
The year was 2002 , and the race was a hotly contested Florida gubernatorial election in which Janet Reno , the former US attorney general , was vying for the Democratic party nomination against a prominent lawyer from Tampa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Systems & Software ( ES & S ) was rolling out new touchscreen technology to replace the punch card machines that were widely blamed for the meltdown in the presidential election two years earlier between George W Bush and Al Gore .
ES & S , though , was very far from ready for prime time .
Many of the machines in Miami-Dade county took so long to boot up that polling stations could not open before lunchtime .
When a freak storm caused power blackouts , the battery backup on many machines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % turnout ; another showed just one ballot cast .
The governor declared a state of emergency , and Reno – who was trailing narrowly – demanded a re-examination of the ballots , only to realize that the new technology made recounts impossible .
At the time , Lida Rodriguez-Taseff of the Miami-Dade Electoral Reform Coalition raged that the voters were being treated as guinea pigs for a system that was no better than a prototype .
Eighteen years later , she can only look back and marvel at how little has changed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technology issues are back , and back with a vengeance , ” she told the Guardian .
“ The technology we use on a daily basis may be incredibly advanced and sophisticated … but voting has been left to bottom-feeding companies that have not adhered to the highest standards and have often gotten to where they are because of political connections , not the quality of their product.
” Rodriguez-Taseff , a commercial lawyer still deeply involved in elections work , was particularly stunned to learn that even after the new app introduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the backup phone lines went down .
“ The fact that these counties are not even prepared with basic technology from the 1960s to report results in a timely basis using a backup hard line is shocking , ” she said .
“ I can ’ t believe it ’ s even an issue .
Every election I work , the first thing we do is test our land lines.
” While it is far from clear what exactly caused the breakdown in Iowa , early reporting suggests that the new app , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ties to the Democratic party named Shadow , was not tested adequately ahead of time .
It ’ s a story that sounds maddeningly familiar to veterans of America ’ s never-ending wars over voting rules , ballot access and voting technology .
It ’ s hard to look back , in fact , without concluding that election day meltdowns of inadequately tested or inadequately monitored machinery are as American as apple pie .
When punch cards were the hot new thing , in the late 1960s and early 1970s , they failed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Los Angeles in 1970 , ballot cards jammed , candidates ’ names were found to be misaligned or missing and computer malfunctions prevented any vote count at all in more than 500 precincts .
When a competitor to ES & S introduced touchscreens in Riverside county , California , in the early 2000s , it led to at least two instances – one a school board race and the other a county supervisor contest – where the count had to be halted on election night and the result mysteriously changed once the machines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ competitor whose name became briefly synonymous with election machine dysfunction – Diebold Election Systems – mangled its rollout in Georgia in 2002 so badly that questions still linger about the reliability of the results in closely fought general election races for the Senate and for the governorship .
The company then wreaked havoc in California presidential primary season two years later , in part because of battery drainage problems that knocked machines out of service even before the polls opened .
“ We did not realize , ” the company ’ s chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ that when we have an off button on this machine , that it does not turn the system off.
” More recently , the problems inherent in poorly designed voting machines have been compounded by their age .
Election officials in Georgia have been entirely unable to explain why , in 2018 , tens of thousands of voters who cast a ballot for governor and for every other statewide race mysteriously omitted to mark a choice for lieutenant governor .
In one precinct , the votes collected on some machines showed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while a different machine showed Republicans winning every statewide race .
Where elections generally can be vulnerable to either incompetence , corruption or both , the problem can sometimes be magnified when it comes to party primaries because they are subject to lower scrutiny from state officials – and sometimes no scrutiny at all .
The Utah Republican caucus in 2016 raised few eyebrows because it produced a clear winner in Ted Cruz , but an online registration system intended to make it easier for eligible voters to participate failed dramatically , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever able to issue a complete results tally .
Again and again , going back to the 1890s , America ’ s loosely regulated election officials have been dazzled by the promise of new technology without understanding that the key to clean , accurate and transparent elections lies with competent , honest managers much more than the machines they use .
“ Technology alone does not eliminate the possibility of corruption and incompetence in elections , ” the elections expert and computer scientist Rebecca Mercuri wrote in 1993 .
“ It merely changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” While many jurisdictions across the country are competently run , the country ’ s history is littered with colorful and alarming examples of the opposite : the corrupt elections supervisor in Tampa , Florida , who in the early 1970s used a giant lever voting machine to smoke fish in his backyard , the uncounted paper ballots in San Francisco that had to be dried off in microwave ovens in 1997 after they were left unsecured in the rain , or the other uncounted paper ballots in San Francisco that , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a garbage can .
For years , the Brennan Center for Justice and others have warned that ageing , poorly programmed machines constitute a serious security risk , particularly in an age where the fear of foreign hackers and other forms of outside interference has changed from a theoretical possibility into a documented reality .
While there is no indication that the integrity of the Iowa caucus results has been compromised or otherwise corrupted , the episode nevertheless illustrates the shoddiness with which many election officials across many jurisdictions go about their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solve the problem overnight , but the United States is notorious for its failure to establish any central electoral authority with real teeth and its preference to leave election management in the hands of thousands of state and county offices , each subject to its own political pressures and competence problems .
“ Election supervisors generally rely on their vendors , ” Rodriguez-Taseff said .
“ They do not have the knowledge they need and in many cases are not even given access to the software so they can learn the technology , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own fixes.
” Since the disastrous rollout of electronic touch screen machines in the early 2000s – largely financed by a federal law that was cobbled together at high speed in response to the Florida primary debacle of 2002 – many election supervisors have understood that low-tech voting systems are the easiest , cheapest and most reliable to operate .
That , however , has not stopped some states including Georgia from ordering expensive new systems that raise more questions than they answer – or to yield to the temptations of online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scientists of major , insurmountable security concerns .
Even before Monday ’ s caucuses , Politico described Iowa as the “ first election security test ” of an anxiety-ridden 2020 election season .
And it is now apparent it has failed the test .

The great Iowa caucus meltdown of 2020 may be triggering anguish, anger and, on the Republican side of the political fence, expressions of unalloyed glee; but for one Miami lawyer and voting rights activist it is also bringing back vivid memories of another high-profile primary contest that fell victim to untested new technology and administrative incompetence.
The year was 2002, and the race was a hotly contested Florida gubernatorial election in which Janet Reno, the former US attorney general, was vying for the Democratic party nomination against a prominent lawyer from Tampa. A politically connected company called Electronic Systems & Software (ES&S) was rolling out new touchscreen technology to replace the punch card machines that were widely blamed for the meltdown in the presidential election two years earlier between George W Bush and Al Gore.
ES&S, though, was very far from ready for prime time.
Many of the machines in Miami-Dade county took so long to boot up that polling stations could not open before lunchtime. When a freak storm caused power blackouts, the battery backup on many machines failed. One Miami precinct reported 900% turnout; another showed just one ballot cast. The governor declared a state of emergency, and Reno – who was trailing narrowly – demanded a re-examination of the ballots, only to realize that the new technology made recounts impossible.
‘Not even prepared with basic technology’
At the time, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff of the Miami-Dade Electoral Reform Coalition raged that the voters were being treated as guinea pigs for a system that was no better than a prototype. Eighteen years later, she can only look back and marvel at how little has changed.
“It is striking that these technology issues are back, and back with a vengeance,” she told the Guardian. “The technology we use on a daily basis may be incredibly advanced and sophisticated … but voting has been left to bottom-feeding companies that have not adhered to the highest standards and have often gotten to where they are because of political connections, not the quality of their product.”
Iowa caucus precinct workers count paper ballots after a Democratic presidential caucus at West Des Moines Christian church in West Des Moines, Iowa. Photograph: Jim Bourg/Reuters
Rodriguez-Taseff, a commercial lawyer still deeply involved in elections work, was particularly stunned to learn that even after the new app introduced to report results in Iowa failed, the backup phone lines went down.
“The fact that these counties are not even prepared with basic technology from the 1960s to report results in a timely basis using a backup hard line is shocking,” she said. “I can’t believe it’s even an issue. Every election I work, the first thing we do is test our land lines.”
While it is far from clear what exactly caused the breakdown in Iowa, early reporting suggests that the new app, developed by a technology firm with close ties to the Democratic party named Shadow, was not tested adequately ahead of time.
A history of technical difficulties
It’s a story that sounds maddeningly familiar to veterans of America’s never-ending wars over voting rules, ballot access and voting technology. It’s hard to look back, in fact, without concluding that election day meltdowns of inadequately tested or inadequately monitored machinery are as American as apple pie.
When punch cards were the hot new thing, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, they failed repeatedly. In one primary election in Los Angeles in 1970, ballot cards jammed, candidates’ names were found to be misaligned or missing and computer malfunctions prevented any vote count at all in more than 500 precincts.
When a competitor to ES&S introduced touchscreens in Riverside county, California, in the early 2000s, it led to at least two instances – one a school board race and the other a county supervisor contest – where the count had to be halted on election night and the result mysteriously changed once the machines were fired up again.
Yet another competitor whose name became briefly synonymous with election machine dysfunction – Diebold Election Systems – mangled its rollout in Georgia in 2002 so badly that questions still linger about the reliability of the results in closely fought general election races for the Senate and for the governorship. The company then wreaked havoc in California presidential primary season two years later, in part because of battery drainage problems that knocked machines out of service even before the polls opened. “We did not realize,” the company’s chief executive later told a state oversight panel, “that when we have an off button on this machine, that it does not turn the system off.”
It is striking that these technology issues are back, and back with a vengeance Lida Rodriguez-Taseff
More recently, the problems inherent in poorly designed voting machines have been compounded by their age. Election officials in Georgia have been entirely unable to explain why, in 2018, tens of thousands of voters who cast a ballot for governor and for every other statewide race mysteriously omitted to mark a choice for lieutenant governor. In one precinct, the votes collected on some machines showed the Democrats winning every statewide race, while a different machine showed Republicans winning every statewide race.
Where elections generally can be vulnerable to either incompetence, corruption or both, the problem can sometimes be magnified when it comes to party primaries because they are subject to lower scrutiny from state officials – and sometimes no scrutiny at all. The Utah Republican caucus in 2016 raised few eyebrows because it produced a clear winner in Ted Cruz, but an online registration system intended to make it easier for eligible voters to participate failed dramatically, and it is unclear whether the party was ever able to issue a complete results tally.
‘Technology does not eliminate incompetence’
Again and again, going back to the 1890s, America’s loosely regulated election officials have been dazzled by the promise of new technology without understanding that the key to clean, accurate and transparent elections lies with competent, honest managers much more than the machines they use.
“Technology alone does not eliminate the possibility of corruption and incompetence in elections,” the elections expert and computer scientist Rebecca Mercuri wrote in 1993. “It merely changes the platform on which they may occur.”
While many jurisdictions across the country are competently run, the country’s history is littered with colorful and alarming examples of the opposite: the corrupt elections supervisor in Tampa, Florida, who in the early 1970s used a giant lever voting machine to smoke fish in his backyard, the uncounted paper ballots in San Francisco that had to be dried off in microwave ovens in 1997 after they were left unsecured in the rain, or the other uncounted paper ballots in San Francisco that, a few years later, were found dumped in a garbage can.
For years, the Brennan Center for Justice and others have warned that ageing, poorly programmed machines constitute a serious security risk, particularly in an age where the fear of foreign hackers and other forms of outside interference has changed from a theoretical possibility into a documented reality.
Bernie Sanders precinct captain Steven Meier tabulates results during the Democratic caucus at the UAW Hall in Dubuque, Iowa, on 3 February 2020. Photograph: Eileen Meslar/AP
While there is no indication that the integrity of the Iowa caucus results has been compromised or otherwise corrupted, the episode nevertheless illustrates the shoddiness with which many election officials across many jurisdictions go about their business. More rigid oversight could potentially solve the problem overnight, but the United States is notorious for its failure to establish any central electoral authority with real teeth and its preference to leave election management in the hands of thousands of state and county offices, each subject to its own political pressures and competence problems.
“Election supervisors generally rely on their vendors,” Rodriguez-Taseff said. “They do not have the knowledge they need and in many cases are not even given access to the software so they can learn the technology, know how to operate it and develop their own fixes.”
Since the disastrous rollout of electronic touch screen machines in the early 2000s – largely financed by a federal law that was cobbled together at high speed in response to the Florida primary debacle of 2002 – many election supervisors have understood that low-tech voting systems are the easiest, cheapest and most reliable to operate.
That, however, has not stopped some states including Georgia from ordering expensive new systems that raise more questions than they answer – or to yield to the temptations of online voting, despite repeated warnings from computer scientists of major, insurmountable security concerns.
Even before Monday’s caucuses, Politico described Iowa as the “first election security test” of an anxiety-ridden 2020 election season. And it is now apparent it has failed the test.


theguardian--2020-02-05--Senate prepares to acquit Trump and end impeachment process

The US Senate prepared on Wednesday to acquit Donald Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , ending the impeachment process and further clearing the skies over the White House as the president angles for re-election .
The Senate was scheduled to vote separately on the two articles of impeachment beginning at 4pm .
The vote was prefaced by a third day of speeches by senators arguing their views .
“ The Senate will vote to acquit the president tomorrow , ” said Republican Ted Cruz of Texas in a speech Tuesday .
“ It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policies they want to continue.
” An out-of-reach two-thirds majority of senators would be required to remove Trump from office .
Trump would become the third president in US history to be impeached and then survive a Senate trial .
Even before his acquittal , Trump was enjoying a run of positive political news .
At his State of the Union address Tuesday night , he touted strong economic data and new international trade deals .
Botched vote reporting in the Iowa Democratic party caucuses on Monday night meant that no opposition candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the party emerged with a black eye and a damaging internal fight on its hands .
A Gallup poll published on Tuesday , meanwhile , indicated Trump ’ s approval rating is at or near all-time highs , including 94 % approval among Republicans and rising support among independents .
With the momentum seemingly on Trump ’ s side , the chances improved that the Senate majority leader , Mitch McConnell , would deliver a clean party-line acquittal vote for the president on Wednesday afternoon .
The Republicans hold a 53-seat majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine , broke with the party during the trial to vote in favor of calling witnesses and issuing subpoenas for documents blocked by the Trump administration .
On Tuesday afternoon , Collins announced she would vote to acquit on both articles of impeachment .
“ I do not believe that the House has met its burden in showing that the president ’ s conduct , however flawed , warrants the extreme step of removal from office , ” she said .
Romney had given no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote .
Three Democrats were likewise in the spotlight as potential swing votes .
Doug Jones of Alabama , who faces a difficult election in November , has joined Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia in calling for a censure of Trump – a possible indication that one or both viewed the prospective removal of Trump as a step too far .
Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona , a moderate Democrat in a state that supported Trump in 2016 , has not indicated how she is planning to vote .
House Democrats found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military aid and a White House meeting for Ukraine on the receipt of personal political favors , and had obstructed Congress by issuing a blanket refusal to comply with requests including subpoenas for witnesses and documents .
The Tennessee senator Lamar Alexander explained last week why he voted against hearing fresh testimony from witnesses , a move that helped speed the trial ’ s end but displayed a rare public criticism of Trump by a Republican and a boost for the Democrats ’ presentation of the facts .
“ There is no need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has already been proven and that does not meet the US constitution ’ s high bar for an impeachable offense , ” Alexander said in a statement .
He added : “ It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation .
But the constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year ’ s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate .
”

The US Senate prepared on Wednesday to acquit Donald Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, ending the impeachment process and further clearing the skies over the White House as the president angles for re-election.
The Senate was scheduled to vote separately on the two articles of impeachment beginning at 4pm. The vote was prefaced by a third day of speeches by senators arguing their views.
“When the framers wrote the constitution, they did not think of someone like me as being a United States Senator,” said Democrat Kamala Harris of California, urging Trump’s removal. “But they did envision someone like Donald Trump being president.”
“Donald Trump is going to get away with abusing his position of power for personal gain, and falsely claim he’s been exonerated,” Harris said. “He’s going to escape accountability because a majority of senators have decided to let him.”
An out-of-reach two-thirds majority of senators would be required to remove Trump from office. Trump would become the third president in US history to be impeached and then survive a Senate trial.
Even before his acquittal, Trump was enjoying a run of positive political news. At his State of the Union address Tuesday night, he touted strong economic data and new international trade deals, skipping mention of impeachment.
Botched vote reporting in the Iowa Democratic party caucuses on Monday night meant that no opposition candidate was clearly boosted in the process, while the party emerged with a black eye and a damaging internal fight on its hands.
A Gallup poll published on Tuesday, meanwhile, indicated Trump’s approval rating is at or near all-time highs, including 94% approval among Republicans and rising support among independents.
With the momentum seemingly on Trump’s side, the chances improved that the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, would deliver a clean party-line acquittal vote for the president on Wednesday afternoon. The Republicans hold a 53-seat majority in the Senate.
Two Republicans, Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine, broke with the party during the trial to vote in favor of calling witnesses and issuing subpoenas for documents blocked by the Trump administration.
On Tuesday afternoon, Collins announced she would vote to acquit on both articles of impeachment. “I do not believe that the House has met its burden in showing that the president’s conduct, however flawed, warrants the extreme step of removal from office,” she said.
Romney had given no public indication of how he planned to vote.
Two Democrats were likewise in the spotlight as potential swing votes. Joe Manchin of West Virginia called for a censure of Trump – a possible indication that he viewed the prospective removal of Trump as a step too far. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, a moderate Democrat in a state that supported Trump in 2016, has not indicated how she is planning to vote.
A third Democrat, Doug Jones of Alabama, who faces a difficult election in November in a heavily pro-Trump state, declared on the Senate floor on Wednesday morning that he would vote to convict on both articles of impeachment.
“I cannot and will not shrink from my duty to defend the constitution and to do impartial justice,” Jones said. “These actions were more than simply inappropriate, they were an abuse of power.”
House Democrats found that Trump had abused his power by conditioning military aid and a White House meeting for Ukraine on the receipt of personal political favors, and had obstructed Congress by issuing a blanket refusal to comply with requests including subpoenas for witnesses and documents.
The Tennessee senator Lamar Alexander explained on the Senate floor on Wednesday why he voted against hearing fresh testimony from witnesses, a move that helped speed the trial’s end but displayed a rare public criticism of Trump by a Republican and a boost for the Democrats’ presentation of the facts.
“There is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the US constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense,” Alexander said.
He added: “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. But the constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”


theguardian--2020-02-05--What do previous impeachment cases spell for Trump’s future?

Donald Trump on Wednesday appeared en route to becoming the third US president to remain in office following acquittal in a Senate impeachment trial .
But what might it mean for Trump ’ s future that he was impeached at all ?
Here ’ s a look at the two previous impeachment cases , and at the one case in which a president resigned in the face of impeachment .
Visit our previous coverage for more details of why past presidents were impeached .
Even if Trump does not win re-election in 2020 , he will be hard-pressed to match @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Republican party ’ s embrace of Trump has only grown with impeachment .
By contrast , the Democratic party turned its back on Johnson in 1868 , declining to nominate him for a new term .
( As Abraham Lincoln ’ s vice-president , Johnson was elevated to the presidency in 1865 after Lincoln ’ s assassination . )
Johnson ’ s return to private life was rocky .
His son committed suicide , he mounted a failed US Senate bid and he contracted cholera .
But then , six years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the US Senate from Tennessee , only to die later that year from multiple strokes at 66 .
He is a mainstay on lists of history ’ s worst American presidents .
Bill Clinton has the distinction of being the most popular US president at the time to be impeached .
He enjoyed a 61 % approval rating in January 1998 , before his denial in a sworn deposition that he had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky .
A month later , benefiting from “ widespread support for his policies and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the allegations ” , according to a Pew Research study , Clinton ’ s approval rating was 10 points higher at 71 % .
While Clinton at the time of his impeachment was leagues ahead of Trump in terms of popularity , a Gallup poll published on Tuesday indicated that Trump ’ s approval rating has likewise climbed to near all-time highs post-impeachment , with 49 % of respondents giving him good marks .
However , a renewed focus on past sexual assault allegations against Clinton in the # MeToo era and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his relationship with Lewinsky have diminished his public standing in recent years .
“ I now see how problematic it was that the two of us even got to a place where there was a question of consent , ” Lewinsky wrote in Vanity Fair in 2018 .
“ Instead , the road that led there was littered with inappropriate abuse of authority , station and privilege.
” Richard Nixon resigned under pressure from fellow Republicans before he could be impeached .
But the story of his near-impeachment , in terms of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Clinton case .
Post-re-election in 1972 , Nixon enjoyed a 68 % approval rating .
But a break-in at the Watergate hotel engineered by members of his re-election team had planted the seeds for his downfall .
By April 1973 , Nixon ’ s approval had fallen to 48 % , still higher than Trump ’ s average .
But unlike Trump , Nixon kept dropping , to hit 24 % approval by the time he resigned .
A few years after receiving a pardon from Gerald Ford , Nixon granted a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Frost , telling him : “ When the president does it , that means that it is not illegal ” – but also admitting : “ I let down the country.
” Nixon lived for 20 years after his resignation , mixing semi-official travel with book-writing , speeches and other public appearances .
He won the occasional White House invitation and opened a presidential library .
His face is tattooed on Roger Stone ’ s back .

Donald Trump on Wednesday appeared en route to becoming the third US president to remain in office following acquittal in a Senate impeachment trial. But what might it mean for Trump’s future that he was impeached at all?
Here’s a look at the two previous impeachment cases, and at the one case in which a president resigned in the face of impeachment. Visit our previous coverage for more details of why past presidents were impeached.
Impeachment No 1: Andrew Johnson (1868)
Even if Trump does not win re-election in 2020, he will be hard-pressed to match Andrew Johnson for a disastrous post-impeachment career. The Republican party’s embrace of Trump has only grown with impeachment. By contrast, the Democratic party turned its back on Johnson in 1868, declining to nominate him for a new term. (As Abraham Lincoln’s vice-president, Johnson was elevated to the presidency in 1865 after Lincoln’s assassination.)
Johnson’s return to private life was rocky. His son committed suicide, he mounted a failed US Senate bid and he contracted cholera. But then, six years after leaving office, he won election to the US Senate from Tennessee, only to die later that year from multiple strokes at 66. He is a mainstay on lists of history’s worst American presidents.
Impeachment No 2: Bill Clinton (1999)
Bill Clinton has the distinction of being the most popular US president at the time to be impeached. He enjoyed a 61% approval rating in January 1998, before his denial in a sworn deposition that he had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
A month later, benefiting from “widespread support for his policies and skepticism about the media’s coverage of the allegations”, according to a Pew Research study, Clinton’s approval rating was 10 points higher at 71%.
While Clinton at the time of his impeachment was leagues ahead of Trump in terms of popularity, a Gallup poll published on Tuesday indicated that Trump’s approval rating has likewise climbed to near all-time highs post-impeachment, with 49% of respondents giving him good marks.
However, a renewed focus on past sexual assault allegations against Clinton in the #MeToo era and a reconsideration of the power dynamics of his relationship with Lewinsky have diminished his public standing in recent years.
“I now see how problematic it was that the two of us even got to a place where there was a question of consent,” Lewinsky wrote in Vanity Fair in 2018. “Instead, the road that led there was littered with inappropriate abuse of authority, station and privilege.”
Near miss: Richard Nixon (1974)
Richard Nixon resigned under pressure from fellow Republicans before he could be impeached. But the story of his near-impeachment, in terms of his personal popularity, runs exactly counter to the Clinton case.
Post-re-election in 1972, Nixon enjoyed a 68% approval rating. But a break-in at the Watergate hotel engineered by members of his re-election team had planted the seeds for his downfall. By April 1973, Nixon’s approval had fallen to 48%, still higher than Trump’s average. But unlike Trump, Nixon kept dropping, to hit 24% approval by the time he resigned.
A few years after receiving a pardon from Gerald Ford, Nixon granted a series of interviews to the journalist David Frost, telling him: “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” – but also admitting: “I let down the country.”
Nixon lived for 20 years after his resignation, mixing semi-official travel with book-writing, speeches and other public appearances. He won the occasional White House invitation and opened a presidential library. His face is tattooed on Roger Stone’s back.