theguardian--2020-01-10--Boeing: internal emails reveal chaos and incompetence at 737 Max factory

Boeing is more than a year into the worst crisis in its 103-year history and it just got worse .
The fatal crashes of two of company ’ s 737 Max jets – which claimed 346 lives – have already shone a harsh light on Boeing ’ s corporate culture and its cosy relationship with its regulator .
Then on Thursday hundreds of pages of internal messages were delivered to congressional investigators in which Boeing executives mocked their regulator , joked about safety and said the Max had been “ designed by clowns ” .
Shocking as the emails are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those following the Boeing story .
Last month Edward Pierson , a former senior manager at Boeing ’ s 737 factory in Renton , Washington , told Congress he had witnessed “ chaos ” at the factory where the Max was built and had warned management that “ Boeing was prioritizing production speed over quality and safety ” .
His warnings were ignored .
Lawmakers also heard the Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) , Boeing ’ s regulator , allowed the Max to keep flying even after its own analysis found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crash about every two or three years without intervention .
That decision came a month after the Lion Air crash in October 2018 that claimed 189 lives , and four months before an Ethiopian Airlines crash that killed another 157 people .
New software meant to prevent stalling has been blamed for both crashes and it is now clear training on that software could well have prevented them .
But training costs money and the release of the latest messages shows Boeing was doing all it could to block any regulatory requirement for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the differences between the 737 Max and its predecessor the 737 NG .
Boeing claimed the planes were so similar that experienced pilots could be trained on the differences in a one-hour lesson on an iPad .
Avoiding extra training was a big cost saving .
Before the grounding Boeing promised to offer Southwest Airlines a $ 1m discount per plane if regulators required simulator training .
What will happen now ?
Senator Richard Blumenthal has called the emails “ astonishing and appalling ” and called for more congressional hearings .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to address the structural issues that led to these tragedies .
Boeing is simply too big to fail .
The company is the US ’ s largest export manufacturer , it supports 8,000 suppliers across the US and its woes are big enough to trim the economic fortunes of the entire country .
In a clear sign of the scandal ’ s impact , on Friday aircraft parts maker Spirit AeroSystems announced it is laying off 2,800 employees at its facility in Wichita , Kansas , due to the grounding of the plane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Economic Advisers , last year Boeing ’ s troubles cut gross domestic product from March through June by 0.4 percentage points .
Nor is oversight likely to get much of a boost from the Trump administration .
Donald Trump has used two executive orders to cut regulatory oversight and hand more of that supervision over to businesses .
Trump ’ s 2019 budget proposed an 18 % cut to the transportation department .
Boeing sacked Dennis Muilenberg , its CEO , in December .
The FAA has a relatively new administrator .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is still little sign that Boeing , the FAA or the Trump administration are really prepared to put human lives ahead of the bottom line .

Boeing is more than a year into the worst crisis in its 103-year history and it just got worse.
The fatal crashes of two of company’s 737 Max jets – which claimed 346 lives – have already shone a harsh light on Boeing’s corporate culture and its cosy relationship with its regulator. Then on Thursday hundreds of pages of internal messages were delivered to congressional investigators in which Boeing executives mocked their regulator, joked about safety and said the Max had been “designed by clowns”.
Shocking as the emails are, they will come as no surprise to those following the Boeing story. Last month Edward Pierson, a former senior manager at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, Washington, told Congress he had witnessed “chaos” at the factory where the Max was built and had warned management that “Boeing was prioritizing production speed over quality and safety”.
His warnings were ignored.
Lawmakers also heard the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Boeing’s regulator, allowed the Max to keep flying even after its own analysis found the plane could have averaged one fatal crash about every two or three years without intervention.
That decision came a month after the Lion Air crash in October 2018 that claimed 189 lives, and four months before an Ethiopian Airlines crash that killed another 157 people.
New software meant to prevent stalling has been blamed for both crashes and it is now clear training on that software could well have prevented them. But training costs money and the release of the latest messages shows Boeing was doing all it could to block any regulatory requirement for airlines to train pilots in a simulator on the differences between the 737 Max and its predecessor the 737 NG.
Boeing claimed the planes were so similar that experienced pilots could be trained on the differences in a one-hour lesson on an iPad.
Avoiding extra training was a big cost saving. Before the grounding Boeing promised to offer Southwest Airlines a $1m discount per plane if regulators required simulator training.
What will happen now? Senator Richard Blumenthal has called the emails “astonishing and appalling” and called for more congressional hearings.
But the outrage over the emails is unlikely to address the structural issues that led to these tragedies. Boeing is simply too big to fail. The company is the US’s largest export manufacturer, it supports 8,000 suppliers across the US and its woes are big enough to trim the economic fortunes of the entire country. In a clear sign of the scandal’s impact, on Friday aircraft parts maker Spirit AeroSystems announced it is laying off 2,800 employees at its facility in Wichita, Kansas, due to the grounding of the plane. According to the White House Council of Economic Advisers, last year Boeing’s troubles cut gross domestic product from March through June by 0.4 percentage points.
Nor is oversight likely to get much of a boost from the Trump administration. Donald Trump has used two executive orders to cut regulatory oversight and hand more of that supervision over to businesses. Trump’s 2019 budget proposed an 18% cut to the transportation department.
Boeing sacked Dennis Muilenberg, its CEO, in December. The FAA has a relatively new administrator. Both organisations have promised change but there is still little sign that Boeing, the FAA or the Trump administration are really prepared to put human lives ahead of the bottom line.


theguardian--2020-01-10--If you thought Zuckerberg would ever rein in rightwing demagogues, think again

In Silicon Valley , the first week of January is reliably bookmarked by two news stories : the latest absurd and amusing products at the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas , and Mark Zuckerberg ’ s announcement of his new year resolutions , which he annoyingly persists in calling “ personal challenges ” .
Zuckerberg ’ s resolutions have evolved in tandem with Facebook itself , from the domestic and human-sized ( go running , eat less meat ) to the global and unwieldy ( “ fixing ” Facebook ) .
So it seems worth noting that 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officially giving up .
It ’ s not just that Zuck announced that he is no longer going to announce new personal challenges every January ( and believe me , as someone who made it eight hours into the new year before I gave in and had a piece of toast , I feel him ) .
It ’ s that the longer-term goals he outlined for 2030 represent a move away from the hard work of fixing Facebook before Facebook destroys liberal democracy .
After three years of at least paying lip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something about the way in which its products and staff have helped elevate rightwing demagogues into positions of power around the world , Zuckerberg appears to have decided enough is enough .
Facebook is not going to change , and he ’ s not going to pretend that he wants it to .
Instead , Zuckerberg wrote in a lengthy Facebook post , he plans to focus his efforts on five major areas in the next decade , in the hopes that by 2030 ( a year whose significance to impending climate catastrophe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be attending high school , virtual reality tech will be really good and the average life expectancy will have increased by two and a half years .
Three of the five areas of focus are simply to continue working on Facebook ’ s major business aims ( private messaging , e-commerce , and VR/AR ) ; the personal challenge version of deciding that , screw the diet-book industrial complex , you ’ re beautiful just as you are .
A fourth , entitled “ New forms of governance ” is to continue working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook content moderation , another project already long in the works .
The fifth , which Zuckerberg entitled “ generational change ” , appears to encapsulate his desire to see more millennials take positions of power in institutions over the next decade .
Considering that many millennials will be approaching their mid-40s by 2030 , this is the equivalent of resolving to experience the passage of time .
So no , if you thought that Zuckerberg was going to spend the next decade grappling with the question of what Donald Trump , Narendra @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ m sorry to disappoint you .
Please join me instead in imagining Zuck in his bathroom , crooning to himself in the mirror : “ You ’ re beautiful , you ’ re beautiful , you ’ re beautiful , it ’ s true.
” Zuckerberg ’ s decision to turn his attention away from the political problems his company has created was telegraphed throughout the week .
A pair of policy announcements epitomized the new take-me-as-I-am attitude : Facebook will only attempt to police doctored video designed to misinform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AI tools , and it will not reverse its decision to allow politicians to advertise lies , nor will it implement any new restrictions on micro-targeting for political advertisements .
Meanwhile , the timely leak of a 2,500 word “ memo ” by Facebook executive and Zuckerberg “ proxy ” Andrew Bosworth provided the less-varnished-than-Zuck-can-be explanation for the policy decisions .
In the extraordinary document , which Bosworth published to his internal Facebook page on 30 December , the executive who ran Facebook ’ s advertising business during the 2016 election asserted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reason Trump won the US presidency .
It wasn ’ t a question of Russian interference or Cambridge Analytica , Bosworth said .
“ Parscale and Trump just did unbelievable work .
They weren ’ t running misinformation or hoaxes .
They weren ’ t microtargeting or saying different things to different people .
They just used the tools we had to show the right creative to each person.
” From this basis , Bosworth draws the conclusion that it would be immoral to change any of Facebook ’ s rules to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2020 , a frankly astonishing feat of pseudo-intellectualized mental gymnastics .
Let ’ s just walk through this again .
Bosworth is a self-declared liberal and “ no fan of Trump ” who believes Facebook ’ s tools were so powerful that they secured a long-shot victory for a presidential campaign that was principally animated by racist xenophobia .
And in reflecting on the machine that made that extremely unlikely outcome possible , Bosworth concluded not that it should be dismantled or radically reformed , but that the only “ moral ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intact .
“ If we change the outcomes without winning the minds of the people who will be ruled then we have a democracy in name only , ” he added , in a chilling impersonation of Donald Rumsfeld expressing dangerously misplaced confidence about the invasion of Iraq .
If there is any good news to be found in this ideologically bankrupt morass , it is that finally , the mask has dropped .
Facebook is done pretending to be a social good .
It ’ s just sugar , Bosworth wrote .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ good .
And while it will eventually kill you , it will be a slow death .
• None “ Technology in 2050 : will it save humanity – or destroy us ?
” by the Guardian ’ s Alex Hern • None “ Facebook Is Running Anti-Vax Ads , Despite Its Ban On Vaccine Misinformation , ” by BuzzFeed News ’ Caroline Haskins • None “ Major union launches campaign to organize video game and tech workers , ” by the Los Angeles Times ’ Sam Dean • None “ Scientists give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vision study , ” by the Guardian ’ s Ian Sample

In Silicon Valley, the first week of January is reliably bookmarked by two news stories: the latest absurd and amusing products at the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, and Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement of his new year resolutions, which he annoyingly persists in calling “personal challenges”.
Zuckerberg’s resolutions have evolved in tandem with Facebook itself, from the domestic and human-sized (go running, eat less meat) to the global and unwieldy (“fixing” Facebook). So it seems worth noting that 2020 is apparently the year that Zuckerberg is officially giving up.
It’s not just that Zuck announced that he is no longer going to announce new personal challenges every January (and believe me, as someone who made it eight hours into the new year before I gave in and had a piece of toast, I feel him). It’s that the longer-term goals he outlined for 2030 represent a move away from the hard work of fixing Facebook before Facebook destroys liberal democracy.
After three years of at least paying lip service to demands that Facebook please do something about the way in which its products and staff have helped elevate rightwing demagogues into positions of power around the world, Zuckerberg appears to have decided enough is enough. Facebook is not going to change, and he’s not going to pretend that he wants it to.
Instead, Zuckerberg wrote in a lengthy Facebook post, he plans to focus his efforts on five major areas in the next decade, in the hopes that by 2030 (a year whose significance to impending climate catastrophe goes unmentioned), his daughter will be attending high school, virtual reality tech will be really good and the average life expectancy will have increased by two and a half years.
Three of the five areas of focus are simply to continue working on Facebook’s major business aims (private messaging, e-commerce, and VR/AR); the personal challenge version of deciding that, screw the diet-book industrial complex, you’re beautiful just as you are. A fourth, entitled “New forms of governance” is to continue working on the “supreme court” of Facebook content moderation, another project already long in the works.
The fifth, which Zuckerberg entitled “generational change”, appears to encapsulate his desire to see more millennials take positions of power in institutions over the next decade. Considering that many millennials will be approaching their mid-40s by 2030, this is the equivalent of resolving to experience the passage of time.
So no, if you thought that Zuckerberg was going to spend the next decade grappling with the question of what Donald Trump, Narendra Modi and Rodrigo Duterte have in common, I’m sorry to disappoint you. Please join me instead in imagining Zuck in his bathroom, crooning to himself in the mirror: “You’re beautiful, you’re beautiful, you’re beautiful, it’s true.”
Zuckerberg’s decision to turn his attention away from the political problems his company has created was telegraphed throughout the week. A pair of policy announcements epitomized the new take-me-as-I-am attitude: Facebook will only attempt to police doctored video designed to misinform voters if the video is manipulated with AI tools, and it will not reverse its decision to allow politicians to advertise lies, nor will it implement any new restrictions on micro-targeting for political advertisements.
Meanwhile, the timely leak of a 2,500 word “memo” by Facebook executive and Zuckerberg “proxy” Andrew Bosworth provided the less-varnished-than-Zuck-can-be explanation for the policy decisions. In the extraordinary document, which Bosworth published to his internal Facebook page on 30 December, the executive who ran Facebook’s advertising business during the 2016 election asserted that the company was, in fact, the reason Trump won the US presidency.
It wasn’t a question of Russian interference or Cambridge Analytica, Bosworth said. “Parscale and Trump just did unbelievable work. They weren’t running misinformation or hoaxes. They weren’t microtargeting or saying different things to different people. They just used the tools we had to show the right creative to each person.”
From this basis, Bosworth draws the conclusion that it would be immoral to change any of Facebook’s rules to make it harder for Trump to win in 2020, a frankly astonishing feat of pseudo-intellectualized mental gymnastics.
Let’s just walk through this again. Bosworth is a self-declared liberal and “no fan of Trump” who believes Facebook’s tools were so powerful that they secured a long-shot victory for a presidential campaign that was principally animated by racist xenophobia. And in reflecting on the machine that made that extremely unlikely outcome possible, Bosworth concluded not that it should be dismantled or radically reformed, but that the only “moral” course of action was to leave it intact.
“If we change the outcomes without winning the minds of the people who will be ruled then we have a democracy in name only,” he added, in a chilling impersonation of Donald Rumsfeld expressing dangerously misplaced confidence about the invasion of Iraq.
If there is any good news to be found in this ideologically bankrupt morass, it is that finally, the mask has dropped. Facebook is done pretending to be a social good. It’s just sugar, Bosworth wrote. It tastes good; really, really good. And while it will eventually kill you, it will be a slow death.
What I’m reading …


theguardian--2020-01-10--So far, all impeachment has done is make Donald Trump more popular | Thomas Meaney

Impeachment was never going to deliver the president ’ s scalp .
“ We all know how this is going to end , ” Mitch McConnell , the Republican senate majority leader , told Fox News on 12 December , shortly before the House of Representatives voted 230-197 to impeach Donald Trump .
“ There ’ s no chance the president is going to be removed from office.
” This common knowledge – that a Republican-controlled Senate would never vote to eject Trump – has gone missing among some US Democrats .
In March last year , Nancy Pelosi , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , advised her fellow Democrats against impeachment : “ I don ’ t think we should go down that path.
” After three years of declaring Trump an existential threat to the nation , Pelosi knew that the Democrats would only help the president if they took action that was not only guaranteed to fail to remove him , but which would allow Trump to reprise his favourite role : Phoenix Rising from the Headlines .
But Pelosi was in a bind .
Like Theresa May , she has become the manager of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Faced with a revolt among Democratic lawmakers who need strong anti-Trump credentials to win their congressional primaries , she eventually yielded to their determination to remove Trump via legal means .
Trump ’ s 25 July phone call to the Ukrainian president , Volodymyr Zelensky , seemed to provide all the ingredients that the soup of the Mueller report lacked : a Mafioso-style quid-pro-quo ; a tampering with the US electoral process during , as opposed to before , Trump ’ s presidency ; and , on top of it all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump – with his consideration of delaying the delivery of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Kiev – was endangering national security by not sufficiently escalating tensions with Russia .
There is little question that Trump committed an impeachable offence by encouraging the Ukrainians to publicise an investigation into Joe Biden ’ s dealings in Ukraine .
But impeachable relative to what ?
Many presidents have committed impeachable offences in office – whether Franklin Roosevelt ’ s IRS auditing of political opponents , Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush ’ s Iran-Contra scandal , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ignite the Iraq war ( a 2008 CNN interview has been making the rounds , in which the civilian Trump expresses disappointment that Pelosi did not try harder to impeach Bush for the Iraq war ) .
These comparisons make Democratic claims that to not impeach Trump would effectively mean shredding the constitution seem more than a little over-heated .
However much constitutional obligation may appear to necessitate impeachment , in the end it is always a political choice .
The irony is that Trump is now impatient for his own Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expects will bring the public more to his side .
During the House ’ s impeachment proceedings , Trump ’ s approval ratings rose six points .
McConnell has not so much as bothered with the usual lip service about conducting an impartial trial .
On 12 December , he told Fox News , “ We ’ ll be working through this process , hopefully in a fairly short period of time , in total coordination with the White House counsel ’ s office.
” On 3 January , he made the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the US constitution had always intended impeachment to be a deeply political affair , which is why they designated the Senate to try presidents instead of the judiciary .
Pelosi , sensing the depth of the opposition , has delayed sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate , which has raised the legal question of whether Trump has in fact been impeached at all .
Either way , the circling tactic appears doomed to fail .
Even if they are armed with court orders to make crucial witnesses appear , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resource – sensational television – for much longer without wearying the public ’ s patience and taking the sting out of their original intent to remove him .
In 2001 , the historian Perry Anderson argued that critics of US empire should have embraced the impeachment of Bill Clinton : any body blow against the imperial presidency was surely something good for the rest of the world .
Today , liberals and legal scholars argue that impeachment will at least weaken the forward march of Trumpism , much as Clinton ’ s impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gore .
The trouble is that the impeachment of Clinton resulted in the opposite of presidential impairment : his approval reached an all-time postwar high of 73 % during his Senate trial .
Like Clinton ’ s bombing of a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal , Trump may have diverted some attention away from his impeachment with the assassination of Qassem Suleimani .
Yet this impeachable offence – engaging in an act of war without Congress ’ s approval – is unlikely to be added to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The presidency has accrued war powers at a rate since 9/11 that only accelerated under Obama .
It would now take sweeping congressional legislation to reverse the tide .
In the absence of this political will , Pelosi and the Democrats have proposed an emergency bill to make any Trump-led war on Iran only slightly more difficult .
Trump may not enjoy a popularity bump like Clinton ’ s during his own Senate carnival , even with McConnell as ringmaster .
But however much less mystique Americans attach to their presidents since Nixon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an aura .
For the Democrats to set themselves against it , instead of concentrating their fire on an electoral victory in November , could further inflate the executive .
Their best chance for cutting the imperial presidency down to size is for them to back a presidential challenger who is dedicated to the cause of restoring Congress ’ s war powers .
• Thomas Meaney is a fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft , Washington DC

Impeachment was never going to deliver the president’s scalp. “We all know how this is going to end,” Mitch McConnell, the Republican senate majority leader, told Fox News on 12 December, shortly before the House of Representatives voted 230-197 to impeach Donald Trump. “There’s no chance the president is going to be removed from office.”
This common knowledge – that a Republican-controlled Senate would never vote to eject Trump – has gone missing among some US Democrats. In March last year, Nancy Pelosi, the veteran Democratic leader of the House, advised her fellow Democrats against impeachment: “I don’t think we should go down that path.” After three years of declaring Trump an existential threat to the nation, Pelosi knew that the Democrats would only help the president if they took action that was not only guaranteed to fail to remove him, but which would allow Trump to reprise his favourite role: Phoenix Rising from the Headlines.
But Pelosi was in a bind. Like Theresa May, she has become the manager of a process she never wanted to happen. Faced with a revolt among Democratic lawmakers who need strong anti-Trump credentials to win their congressional primaries, she eventually yielded to their determination to remove Trump via legal means. Trump’s 25 July phone call to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, seemed to provide all the ingredients that the soup of the Mueller report lacked: a Mafioso-style quid-pro-quo; a tampering with the US electoral process during, as opposed to before, Trump’s presidency; and, on top of it all, the irresistible charge of cold war vintage that Trump – with his consideration of delaying the delivery of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Kiev – was endangering national security by not sufficiently escalating tensions with Russia.
Pelosi: I'll send impeachment articles to Senate 'when I'm ready' – video
There is little question that Trump committed an impeachable offence by encouraging the Ukrainians to publicise an investigation into Joe Biden’s dealings in Ukraine. But impeachable relative to what? Many presidents have committed impeachable offences in office – whether Franklin Roosevelt’s IRS auditing of political opponents, Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush’s Iran-Contra scandal, or George W Bush’s lying to ignite the Iraq war (a 2008 CNN interview has been making the rounds, in which the civilian Trump expresses disappointment that Pelosi did not try harder to impeach Bush for the Iraq war).
These comparisons make Democratic claims that to not impeach Trump would effectively mean shredding the constitution seem more than a little over-heated. However much constitutional obligation may appear to necessitate impeachment, in the end it is always a political choice.
The irony is that Trump is now impatient for his own Senate trial to start, which he reasonably expects will bring the public more to his side. During the House’s impeachment proceedings, Trump’s approval ratings rose six points. McConnell has not so much as bothered with the usual lip service about conducting an impartial trial. On 12 December, he told Fox News, “We’ll be working through this process, hopefully in a fairly short period of time, in total coordination with the White House counsel’s office.” On 3 January, he made the case on the Senate floor that the authors of the US constitution had always intended impeachment to be a deeply political affair, which is why they designated the Senate to try presidents instead of the judiciary. Pelosi, sensing the depth of the opposition, has delayed sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate, which has raised the legal question of whether Trump has in fact been impeached at all.
‘Mitch McConnell, the Republican senate majority leader, has not so much as bothered with the usual lip service about conducting an impartial trial.’ Photograph: UPI/Barcroft Media
Either way, the circling tactic appears doomed to fail. Even if they are armed with court orders to make crucial witnesses appear, the Democrats cannot deny Trump his favourite resource – sensational television – for much longer without wearying the public’s patience and taking the sting out of their original intent to remove him.
In 2001, the historian Perry Anderson argued that critics of US empire should have embraced the impeachment of Bill Clinton: any body blow against the imperial presidency was surely something good for the rest of the world. Today, liberals and legal scholars argue that impeachment will at least weaken the forward march of Trumpism, much as Clinton’s impeachment supposedly hobbled his chosen successor, Al Gore. The trouble is that the impeachment of Clinton resulted in the opposite of presidential impairment: his approval reached an all-time postwar high of 73% during his Senate trial.
Like Clinton’s bombing of a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Trump may have diverted some attention away from his impeachment with the assassination of Qassem Suleimani. Yet this impeachable offence – engaging in an act of war without Congress’s approval – is unlikely to be added to Trump’s bill of offences. The presidency has accrued war powers at a rate since 9/11 that only accelerated under Obama. It would now take sweeping congressional legislation to reverse the tide. In the absence of this political will, Pelosi and the Democrats have proposed an emergency bill to make any Trump-led war on Iran only slightly more difficult.
Trump may not enjoy a popularity bump like Clinton’s during his own Senate carnival, even with McConnell as ringmaster. But however much less mystique Americans attach to their presidents since Nixon and Clinton, the office still retains an aura. For the Democrats to set themselves against it, instead of concentrating their fire on an electoral victory in November, could further inflate the executive. Their best chance for cutting the imperial presidency down to size is for them to back a presidential challenger who is dedicated to the cause of restoring Congress’s war powers.


theguardian--2020-01-11--How to dump Trump: Rick Wilson on Running Against the Devil

Democratic voters should read Rick Wilson ’ s new book , he says , and heed his advice about how to beat Donald Trump .
Why ?
“ Unless your candidate is a generational superstar like Barack Obama or Bill Clinton ” – and it ’ s not a push to say there is no such Democrat this year – “ we know all the tricks to beating them and we ’ ve used them over and over again.
” By “ we ” he means the Republican party .
Wilson is a top Republican strategist with 30 years ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ads , notorious among them efforts in support of Rudy Giuliani in New York in 1998 and against Obama 10 years later .
But Wilson ’ s first book , a bestseller released in 2018 , was called Everything Trump Touches Dies .
The sequel , out next week , is Running Against the Devil .
The GOP enjoyed success after success but it has fallen under the sway of Trump .
Wilson wants no more .
“ We control 38 state legislatures right now and there ’ s a reason for that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like me , ” he says , on the phone from Florida .
“ I helped to build some of the tools in the toolbox for how you go out and exploit the cultural divisions in the country , and the political divisions , to win for Republicans in blue and purple areas .
On paper it looks hard but we worked hard and recognised that the way to win is sometimes to not tell people who you really are.
” Wilson ’ s new book is a guide to how he thinks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way to do it , he says , is to make the election a referendum on the president .
He thinks impeachment and the Iran crisis , which happened after he went to press , only help prove Trump isn ’ t fit for office .
He thinks Democrats are making a huge mistake in the campaign so far – by telling voters who they really are .
The main candidates are veering too far left , he thinks , away from the disaffected Trump voters they will have to turn .
Among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is praised for her detailed policy plans .
But to Wilson , Democratic “ policy is the enemy ” , whether it concerns Medicare for All , gun control or women ’ s right to choose .
“ Guys like me who still work on the Trump side of the fence can always turn it into something that is a millstone around their neck .
It ’ s not even that hard .
Elizabeth Warren produces a 600-page healthcare plan and my research geeks can ’ t find , I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can ’ t demagogue the hell out of ?
Because I can .
Or the guys that are me now can.
” Away from the coasts and the college towns , Wilson contends , America is still a conservative place .
Accordingly , Running Against the Devil contains a lot of what its author calls “ tough love ” , telling harsh truths and demanding Democrats put party purity aside .
After all , the general election against Trump is going to be dirty as hell .
“ Democrats tend to believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Wilson says .
“ No matter how meritorious their position may be on gun control , for example , or not , it just kills them in rural areas .
It just destroys them .
“ No matter how much they want to talk about choice and reproductive rights , when you go into Catholic communities it is still a burden on them and they don ’ t have this ability to say , ‘ Maybe rural Michigan isn ’ t the same thing as San Jose , California.
’ ” Prodding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s defeat in the popular vote in 2016 – by nearly 3 million votes to Hillary Clinton – didn ’ t matter .
Nor will it matter if Trump wins in the electoral college again .
Them ’ s the rules , they ain ’ t changing soon and if a state doesn ’ t help paint the college blue , no Democrat should visit it for anything other than dollars .
“ You ’ ve got to run where the game is played and fight where the fight is , which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and those states are not as woke and liberal as other parts of the country.
” He means places like Michigan , Wisconsin and Pennsylvania , where Trump won , and Nevada and Colorado and his home state , Florida .
“ This isn ’ t rocket science .
How did we Republicans elect guys in Wisconsin and Vermont and other places in recent years ?
We did it because we weren ’ t running them as national Republican figures .
We helped elect a Republican governor in Vermont , four times .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wow , Vermont , super liberal , how did that happen ?
’ Well , our guy was out there saying the Bush administration was wrong on climate change .
“ Try a Democrat in rural Pennsylvania , say , who comes out and says , ‘ Yes , I want to seize all automatic weapons , I want to make third trimester abortions fully taxpayer funded .
That may work , that may provoke hosannas in San Francisco or Los Angeles .
But out there ?
Not as much .
They ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
’ ” Wilson is as blunt and funny as he is on the page or Twitter , relentlessly irreverent and breathtakingly brutal .
Take Bernie Sanders .
Wilson doesn ’ t just say he thinks the democratic socialist from Vermont would be the opponent of Trump ’ s dreams , “ the easiest person in the world to turn into the comic opera villain Republicans love to hate , the Castro sympathiser , the socialist , the Marxist , the guy who wants to put the aristos in the tumbril as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He also hits Sanders for echoing Trump in harking back to an America that never was – “ only with more unions ” – and pillories him for his reaction to defeat in 2016 .
In Wilson ’ s view , Sanders damaged Clinton at the polls and then , after she “ beat him fair and square , he took his ball and went home ” , failing to support her in November .
Wilson contrasts that starkly with Republican support for Trump .
The president has the “ awesome ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ a completely unified party apparatus .
There ’ s no sniping in the background ; there ’ s no Bernie out there after the nomination is done , like in the old days with George HW Bush and Pat Buchanan.
” It ’ s provocative to compare Sanders the socialist to the paleo-conservative proto-Trump who played spoiler in 92 .
But there ’ s always the happy distraction of listening to Wilson turn his guns on Trump .
Running Against the Devil is pugnacious and profane .
Before a break so Wilson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tech billionaire ” he ’ s sadly reluctant to name , he calls the president “ a liar and a corrupt asshole and a scumbag ” .
He marvels at Trump ’ s graft , at the way a billionaire who claimed to be un-buyable turned out to be so cheap .
He does seem to think Trump is the devil .
But then , the devil gets the best lines and “ plenty of smart , evil guys ” are working on his re-election push .
Asked which Democrat is best suited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being impressed by Warren ’ s willingness to work hard and how she champions the little guy .
But he still goes for Joe Biden .
“ I think it will be Biden because name ID is very powerful , ” he says of the former senator and vice-president .
“ He is the one candidate who has shown the most ability to contrast with Trump in terms of a broader , bigger picture that isn ’ t just locked into what ’ s the hot flavor of Democratic messaging this year .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ big American sense of unity and reconciliation and saying we ’ ve got to work with Republicans too.
” It ’ s true you don ’ t get much policy detail at a Biden rally , but you do see plenty of slightly hokey appeals to the better angels of America ’ s nature .
“ There ’ s nothing in Joe Biden that scans as evil or dark or weird or out of touch , ” Wilson says .
“ He can be a little goofy but that ’ s not bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world right now .
“ I think neither Warren nor Sanders and certainly not Pete Buttigieg have ever had a breakthrough with African American voters sufficient to eliminate Biden ’ s advantage .
And also , Biden ’ s got the secret weapon .
“ If Barack Obama is free to get out there and do the campaigning that only he can do in American political life , I think that would be a meaningful lift for the Democrats.
” Wilson may not favor Obama ideologically but Obama beat his man twice and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear .
Even more so , No 16 .
Wilson is a co-founder of the Lincoln Project , a Super Pac named for the party ’ s greatest leader and meant to persuade loyalists away from a man many consider its worst .
Steve Bannon , the Trump whisperer , has noted that if the project achieves even slight success in key electoral college states , it could prove fatal .
Wilson , the proudly ruthless ad man , cheerfully admits turning the lethal amorality of his craft to a distinctly moral end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and hard women to do tough things , ” he says .
In that sense , the name of his project is fitting .
Lincoln saved the union and ended slavery with all the guile and will of the most ruthless , when necessary the most dirty politician .
“ That ’ s where we ’ re at .
We are people who unsentimentally love this country and who recognise that it is fabulously resilient and powerful as an idea and a nation but that it is also fragile , and can be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ careful.
” Given that , what would Wilson say to a Guardian reader who asked why she should listen to the guy who attacked Jeremiah Wright , Obama ’ s pastor , or shamelessly but successfully linked Max Cleland , a popular senator who lost three limbs in Vietnam , to Osama bin Laden .
“ You don ’ t have to like me .
You don ’ t have to think I ’ m the guy you want to have over for a beer .
But when it comes to being somebody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , how to do it , even if you have to hold your nose to do it , I ’ ll tell you how to get there.
” He means it , his tone growing stern , the words rapped out .
“ And this time I am putting my ideological priors and my preferences aside , because I think that Donald Trump is an existential threat to the Republic .
I ’ ll do anything I can to help ensure that he is not president for another four years .
”

Democratic voters should read Rick Wilson’s new book, he says, and heed his advice about how to beat Donald Trump.
Why? “Unless your candidate is a generational superstar like Barack Obama or Bill Clinton” – and it’s not a push to say there is no such Democrat this year – “we know all the tricks to beating them and we’ve used them over and over again.”
By “we” he means the Republican party. Wilson is a top Republican strategist with 30 years’ experience. He has made myriad attack ads, notorious among them efforts in support of Rudy Giuliani in New York in 1998 and against Obama 10 years later.
But Wilson’s first book, a bestseller released in 2018, was called Everything Trump Touches Dies. The sequel, out next week, is Running Against the Devil. The GOP enjoyed success after success but it has fallen under the sway of Trump. Wilson wants no more.
“We control 38 state legislatures right now and there’s a reason for that: it’s because of guys like me,” he says, on the phone from Florida. “I helped to build some of the tools in the toolbox for how you go out and exploit the cultural divisions in the country, and the political divisions, to win for Republicans in blue and purple areas. On paper it looks hard but we worked hard and recognised that the way to win is sometimes to not tell people who you really are.”
Rick Wilson. Photograph: Courtesy Rick Wilson
Wilson’s new book is a guide to how he thinks Trump can be beaten. The chief way to do it, he says, is to make the election a referendum on the president. He thinks impeachment and the Iran crisis, which happened after he went to press, only help prove Trump isn’t fit for office.
He thinks Democrats are making a huge mistake in the campaign so far – by telling voters who they really are. The main candidates are veering too far left, he thinks, away from the disaffected Trump voters they will have to turn. Among progressives, the Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren is praised for her detailed policy plans. But to Wilson, Democratic “policy is the enemy”, whether it concerns Medicare for All, gun control or women’s right to choose.
“Guys like me who still work on the Trump side of the fence can always turn it into something that is a millstone around their neck. It’s not even that hard. Elizabeth Warren produces a 600-page healthcare plan and my research geeks can’t find, I don’t know, 30 things in there that I can’t demagogue the hell out of? Because I can. Or the guys that are me now can.”
Away from the coasts and the college towns, Wilson contends, America is still a conservative place. Accordingly, Running Against the Devil contains a lot of what its author calls “tough love”, telling harsh truths and demanding Democrats put party purity aside. After all, the general election against Trump is going to be dirty as hell.
“Democrats tend to believe the country is completely homogenous politically,” Wilson says. “No matter how meritorious their position may be on gun control, for example, or not, it just kills them in rural areas. It just destroys them.
“No matter how much they want to talk about choice and reproductive rights, when you go into Catholic communities it is still a burden on them and they don’t have this ability to say, ‘Maybe rural Michigan isn’t the same thing as San Jose, California.’”
Prodding a sore, Wilson insists Trump’s defeat in the popular vote in 2016 – by nearly 3 million votes to Hillary Clinton – didn’t matter. Nor will it matter if Trump wins in the electoral college again. Them’s the rules, they ain’t changing soon and if a state doesn’t help paint the college blue, no Democrat should visit it for anything other than dollars.
You’ve got to fight where the fight is, which is these 15 electoral college swing states
“You’ve got to run where the game is played and fight where the fight is, which is these 15 electoral college swing states, and those states are not as woke and liberal as other parts of the country.”
He means places like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where Trump won, and Nevada and Colorado and his home state, Florida.
“This isn’t rocket science. How did we Republicans elect guys in Wisconsin and Vermont and other places in recent years? We did it because we weren’t running them as national Republican figures. We helped elect a Republican governor in Vermont, four times. And you’re thinking, ‘Wow, Vermont, super liberal, how did that happen?’ Well, our guy was out there saying the Bush administration was wrong on climate change.
“Try a Democrat in rural Pennsylvania, say, who comes out and says, ‘Yes, I want to seize all automatic weapons, I want to make third trimester abortions fully taxpayer funded. That may work, that may provoke hosannas in San Francisco or Los Angeles. But out there? Not as much. They’re like … ‘Wait, what?’”
From Buchanan to Bernie
Wilson is as blunt and funny as he is on the page or Twitter, relentlessly irreverent and breathtakingly brutal.
Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary Clinton at an event in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in July 2016. Photograph: Justin Saglio/AFP via Getty Images
Take Bernie Sanders. Wilson doesn’t just say he thinks the democratic socialist from Vermont would be the opponent of Trump’s dreams, “the easiest person in the world to turn into the comic opera villain Republicans love to hate, the Castro sympathiser, the socialist, the Marxist, the guy who wants to put the aristos in the tumbril as they cart them off to the guillotine”.
He also hits Sanders for echoing Trump in harking back to an America that never was – “only with more unions” – and pillories him for his reaction to defeat in 2016. In Wilson’s view, Sanders damaged Clinton at the polls and then, after she “beat him fair and square, he took his ball and went home”, failing to support her in November. Wilson contrasts that starkly with Republican support for Trump.
The president has the “awesome” advantage of incumbency and money but also “a completely unified party apparatus. There’s no sniping in the background; there’s no Bernie out there after the nomination is done, like in the old days with George HW Bush and Pat Buchanan.”
It’s provocative to compare Sanders the socialist to the paleo-conservative proto-Trump who played spoiler in 92. But there’s always the happy distraction of listening to Wilson turn his guns on Trump.
Running Against the Devil is pugnacious and profane. Before a break so Wilson can take a call from a “tech billionaire” he’s sadly reluctant to name, he calls the president “a liar and a corrupt asshole and a scumbag”. He marvels at Trump’s graft, at the way a billionaire who claimed to be un-buyable turned out to be so cheap. He does seem to think Trump is the devil. But then, the devil gets the best lines and “plenty of smart, evil guys” are working on his re-election push.
If Obama campaigns as only he can do in American political life, that would be a meaningful lift for the Democrats
Asked which Democrat is best suited for the fight, Wilson admits to being impressed by Warren’s willingness to work hard and how she champions the little guy. But he still goes for Joe Biden.
“I think it will be Biden because name ID is very powerful,” he says of the former senator and vice-president. “He is the one candidate who has shown the most ability to contrast with Trump in terms of a broader, bigger picture that isn’t just locked into what’s the hot flavor of Democratic messaging this year.
“He’s talking about that big American sense of unity and reconciliation and saying we’ve got to work with Republicans too.”
It’s true you don’t get much policy detail at a Biden rally, but you do see plenty of slightly hokey appeals to the better angels of America’s nature.
“There’s nothing in Joe Biden that scans as evil or dark or weird or out of touch,” Wilson says. “He can be a little goofy but that’s not bad, not the worst thing in the world right now.
“I think neither Warren nor Sanders and certainly not Pete Buttigieg have ever had a breakthrough with African American voters sufficient to eliminate Biden’s advantage. And also, Biden’s got the secret weapon.
“If Barack Obama is free to get out there and do the campaigning that only he can do in American political life, I think that would be a meaningful lift for the Democrats.”
Barack Obama waves to the crowd during a rally for Wisconsin Democratic candidates in Milwaukee in October 2018. Photograph: Sara Stathas/Reuters
‘You sometimes need hard men’
Wilson may not favor Obama ideologically but Obama beat his man twice and his respect for the 44th president is clear. Even more so, No 16.
Wilson is a co-founder of the Lincoln Project, a Super Pac named for the party’s greatest leader and meant to persuade loyalists away from a man many consider its worst. Steve Bannon, the Trump whisperer, has noted that if the project achieves even slight success in key electoral college states, it could prove fatal. Wilson, the proudly ruthless ad man, cheerfully admits turning the lethal amorality of his craft to a distinctly moral end.
“You sometimes need hard men and hard women to do tough things,” he says. In that sense, the name of his project is fitting. Lincoln saved the union and ended slavery with all the guile and will of the most ruthless, when necessary the most dirty politician.
“That’s where we’re at. We are people who unsentimentally love this country and who recognise that it is fabulously resilient and powerful as an idea and a nation but that it is also fragile, and can be taken away if we are not very careful.”
Given that, what would Wilson say to a Guardian reader who asked why she should listen to the guy who attacked Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor, or shamelessly but successfully linked Max Cleland, a popular senator who lost three limbs in Vietnam, to Osama bin Laden.
“You don’t have to like me. You don’t have to think I’m the guy you want to have over for a beer. But when it comes to being somebody who will tell you where to go, how to do it, even if you have to hold your nose to do it, I’ll tell you how to get there.”
He means it, his tone growing stern, the words rapped out.
“And this time I am putting my ideological priors and my preferences aside, because I think that Donald Trump is an existential threat to the Republic. I’ll do anything I can to help ensure that he is not president for another four years.”


theguardian--2020-01-11--'Does daddy have to go to war?': Iranian Americans fear for family left behind by travel ban

Sorena Amirkhani has spent half his life struggling to understand why his father must live in a country on the other side of the world .
This week , the 11 year-old ’ s questions about his dad took on new urgency : he wanted to know if he would lose him in a third world war .
Amirkhani lives in Lexington , Kentucky , with his mother and sister , while his father lives in Tehran , Iran ’ s capital , and has been barred from the United States for years under Donald Trump ’ s travel ban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the US this week has spread anxiety among Iranian Americans across the United States , the international crisis has created particular uncertainty for families torn apart by Trump ’ s immigration policies , with rising fears about a potential war permanently separating loved ones .
“ My kids cry so much , ” said Fatemeh Karimi Alamdari , Sorena ’ s mother .
She said she struggled to respond when her panicked son asked her : “ ‘ World War III has started .
What will happen to daddy ?
Does he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ I try to calm them down … but they are stressed .
It ’ s a really hard time , ” she said .
The US assassination of the senior Iranian general Qassem Suleimani on the third day of the new year sparked rapidly intensifying tensions in the Middle East .
Five days later , Iran retaliated , launching more than a dozen missiles at Iraqi bases hosting US troops .
After there were no reports of casualties , Trump announced he would back away from further strikes .
A day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death a theme at his first re-election rally of 2020 .
Persian communities across America read the dizzying headlines with a sense of dread , some reliving painful memories of war , others growing afraid of a new wave of discrimination in the US , and many concerned about the safety of loved ones in Iran .
Families ripped apart : ‘ I can ’ t take this anymore ’ Some Iranian American families have been caught in an agonizing waiting game for three years .
In his first week in office , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a travel ban against several Muslim-majority countries .
The policy , upheld by the US supreme court , created harsh restrictions blocking travelers from the targeted countries that require people in the US to apply for waivers and argue it would cause “ undue hardship ” if they were denied and that it ’ s in the “ national interest ” of the US to let them in .
That process has been marked by long delays , and Iranians are the largest group affected .
More than 30,000 Iranians seeking visitor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been denied since 2017 .
Roughly 10,000 of them are now stuck in an indefinite administrative process , still hoping waivers will grant them visas .
That means Iranians with spouses , children , parents , and other relatives in the US can not live their lives in America as they had planned , many forced to live thousands of miles apart with no opportunity for a visit .
The US is home to an estimated 1m Iranian Americans .
“ I can ’ t take this anymore , ” said Kia Nasseri @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rancho Santa Margarita in southern California , a region home to the largest Iranian population outside of Iran .
Nasseri was born in Iran and has lived in the US for 40 years .
He married his wife , an Iranian woman , in 2016 , and she secured a green card to live here .
But the couple has been unable to get approval for her teenage daughter to join them .
They applied in June 2017 , when she was 17 years old .
The daughter , now 19 , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Turkey , Armenia and Ecuador to not overstay visas .
Her mother joins her when she can .
“ I ’ m a US citizen .
Why are you doing this to your own citizens ?
” said Nasseri this week , noting that his wife and stepdaughter both suffer from depression and anxiety .
America is the home he has known most of his life , and he loves California , but with news of potential war in recent days , Nasseri said at times he felt like he wanted to give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America I used to know … I told my wife , ‘ If this is going to be war , should I put the house up for sale , stop everything , and we move to another country ?
’ ” Seyed Amin Sam Motaghedi , a 33-year-old specialist at a biotech laboratory in Belmont , in northern California , said he often wakes up in the middle of the night plagued by anxiety about the safety of his fiancee , Roya Ghobadi .
She is stuck in Malayer , a small city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ travel ban .
This week was especially painful for the couple as they contemplated the potential hardships of war during their daily video calls , said Motaghedi , who fears the region would suffer severe consequences and his fiancée would experience even more difficulties traveling : “ If war happens , they are not going to have food , not going to have water , they may not have electricity.
” Ghobadi , who interviewed with the US embassy in August 2018 , is eager to leave Iran , and when Iran-US conflicts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said : “ She says , ‘ Why am I not there to be with you and to have a regular life ?
’ ” They don ’ t know when they will see each other next .
No relief in sight , no sympathy from the US government Curtis Morrison , a California attorney representing Nasseri , Motaghedi and other families in ongoing lawsuits against the US state department , said the threats of war could make the travel ban cases even harder .
As conflicts erupt , courts are more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims about national security , he said : “ I worry they are going to tighten restrictions at a time they should be loosening them.
” When he argued in court this week that his clients ’ cases should be expedited as the conflict threatened their loved ones , a US attorney for the state department responded that “ distress over what will happen to family members in Iran given recent US military action ” did not justify speeding up the process .
“ It just makes me angry , ” said Morrison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in travel ban cases .
“ We can ’ t tell people that are terrified for their families in a war zone we are getting ready to bomb , who they may not see again , that there is no urgency.
” A state department spokesperson declined to comment on the litigation and individual cases .
In court filings , the government recently argued that the lawyers ’ cases were “ far from stalled or inactive ” , noting that some of plaintiffs have had their visas approved since the suits were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comfort to Masoud Abdi , who hasn ’ t seen his wife , Shima Montakhabi , in three years .
Abdi , a 43-year-old Champaign , Illinois , resident , said he can ’ t afford to go to Tehran to visit her , and his wife , a veterinarian , can ’ t come to the US while her case is pending .
They video chat as much as possible , and when Iran blocked the internet during protests last year , it was horrible to lose contact , he said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Abdi .
He said he gets so depressed sometimes that he has no energy to leave his home .
“ New Year ’ s , birthdays , anniversaries – we don ’ t have these good times with each other.
” Fatemeh Karimi Alamdari , the Kentucky mother , noted that her son was six and daughter was nine when they first moved to the US , believing her husband would not be far behind .
Now , they have started middle school and high school , graduating without their father to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s dream is to come here , ” she said .
“ We came for a better life , a better future , but after five years we couldn ’ t make that happen .
”

Sorena Amirkhani has spent half his life struggling to understand why his father must live in a country on the other side of the world. This week, the 11-year-old’s questions about his dad took on new urgency: he wanted to know if he would lose him in a third world war.
Amirkhani lives in Lexington, Kentucky, with his mother and sister, while his father lives in Tehran, Iran’s capital, and has been barred from the United States for years under Donald Trump’s travel ban. While the renewed conflict between Iran and the US this week has spread anxiety among Iranian Americans across the United States, the international crisis has created particular uncertainty for families torn apart by Trump’s immigration policies, with rising fears about a potential war permanently separating loved ones.
“My kids cry so much,” said Fatemeh Karimi Alamdari, Sorena’s mother. She said she struggled to respond when her panicked son asked her: “‘World War III has started. What will happen to daddy? Does he have to go to war?’”
“I try to calm them down … but they are stressed. It’s a really hard time,” she said.
It has been five years since Fatemeh Karimi Alamdari and her family, son Sorena Amirkhani (now 11), left, and daughter Sabrina (now 14), right, have lived with their father, Farshad Amirkhani. Photograph: The Guardian
The US assassination of the senior Iranian general Qassem Suleimani on the third day of the new year sparked rapidly intensifying tensions in the Middle East. Five days later, Iran retaliated, launching more than a dozen missiles at Iraqi bases hosting US troops.
After there were no reports of casualties, Trump announced he would back away from further strikes. A day later, Trump made Suleimani’s death a theme at his first re-election rally of 2020.
Persian communities across America read the dizzying headlines with a sense of dread, some reliving painful memories of war, others growing afraid of a new wave of discrimination in the US, and many concerned about the safety of loved ones in Iran.
Families ripped apart: ‘I can’t take this any more’
Some Iranian American families have been caught in an agonizing waiting game for three years. In his first week in office, Trump implemented his signature anti-immigrant campaign promise, a travel ban against several Muslim-majority countries. The policy, upheld by the US supreme court, created harsh restrictions blocking travelers from the targeted countries that require people in the US to apply for waivers and argue it would cause “undue hardship” if they were denied and that it’s in the “national interest” of the US to let them in. That process has been marked by long delays, and Iranians are the largest group affected.
More than 30,000 Iranians seeking visitor and permanent visas to the US have been denied since 2017. Roughly 10,000 of them are now stuck in an indefinite administrative process, still hoping waivers will grant them visas. That means Iranians with spouses, children, parents and other relatives in the US cannot live their lives in America as they had planned, many forced to live thousands of miles apart with no opportunity for a visit. The US is home to an estimated 1 million Iranian Americans.
Protesters denounce the president’s travel ban outside of the Los Angeles international airport in 2017. Photograph: Eugene Garcia/EPA
“I can’t take this any more,” said Kia Nasseri, a 61-year-old engineer who lives in Rancho Santa Margarita in southern California, a region home to the largest Iranian population outside of Iran.
Nasseri was born in Iran and has lived in the US for 40 years. He married his wife, an Iranian woman, in 2016, and she secured a green card to live here. But the couple has been unable to get approval for her teenage daughter to join them. They applied in June 2017, when she was 17 years old.
The daughter, now 19, has left Iran and is stuck traveling between Turkey, Armenia and Ecuador to not overstay visas. Her mother joins her when she can.
“I’m a US citizen. Why are you doing this to your own citizens?” said Nasseri this week, noting that his wife and stepdaughter both suffer from depression and anxiety.
America is the home he has known most of his life, and he loves California, but with news of potential war in recent days, Nasseri said at times he felt like he wanted to give up: “This is not the America I used to know … I told my wife, ‘If this is going to be war, should I put the house up for sale, stop everything, and we move to another country?’”
Roya Ghobadi, left, is stuck in Iran, blocked by the travel ban, while her fiance, Seyed Amin Sam Motaghedi, lives in California. Photograph: The Guardian
Seyed Amin Sam Motaghedi, a 33-year-old specialist at a biotech laboratory in Belmont, in northern California, said he often wakes up in the middle of the night plagued by anxiety about the safety of his fiancee, Roya Ghobadi. She is stuck in Malayer, a small city in western Iran, blocked by the travel ban.
This week was especially painful for the couple as they contemplated the potential hardships of war during their daily video calls, said Motaghedi, who fears the region would suffer severe consequences and his fiancee would experience even more difficulties traveling: “If war happens, they are not going to have food, not going to have water, they may not have electricity.”
Ghobadi, who interviewed with the US embassy in August 2018, is eager to leave Iran, and when Iran-US conflicts boil over, she craves normalcy, he said: “She says, ‘Why am I not there to be with you and to have a regular life?’”
They don’t know when they will see each other next.
No relief in sight, no sympathy from the US government
Curtis Morrison, a California attorney representing Nasseri, Motaghedi and other families in ongoing lawsuits against the US state department, said the threats of war could make the travel ban cases even harder. As conflicts erupt, courts are more likely to consider the US’s broad claims about national security, he said: “I worry they are going to tighten restrictions at a time they should be loosening them.”
When he argued in court this week that his clients’ cases should be expedited as the conflict threatened their loved ones, a US attorney for the state department responded that “distress over what will happen to family members in Iran given recent US military action” did not justify speeding up the process.
“It just makes me angry,” said Morrison, who has represented more than 80 people in travel ban cases. “We can’t tell people that are terrified for their families in a war zone we are getting ready to bomb, who they may not see again, that there is no urgency.”
Masoud Abdi hasn’t seen his wife, Shima Montakhabi, in three years. Photograph: The Guardian
A state department spokesperson declined to comment on the litigation and individual cases. In court filings, the government recently argued that the lawyers’ cases were “far from stalled or inactive”, noting that some of plaintiffs have had their visas approved since the suits were filed.
That’s of little comfort to Masoud Abdi, who hasn’t seen his wife, Shima Montakhabi, in three years. Abdi, a 43-year-old Champaign, Illinois, resident, said he can’t afford to go to Tehran to visit her, and his wife, a veterinarian, can’t come to the US while her case is pending. They video chat as much as possible, and when Iran blocked the internet during protests last year, it was horrible to lose contact, he said.
“We need each other,” said Abdi. He said he gets so depressed sometimes that he has no energy to leave his home. “New Year’s, birthdays, anniversaries – we don’t have these good times with each other.”
Fatemeh Karimi Alamdari, the Kentucky mother, noted that her son was six and daughter was nine when they first moved to the US, believing her husband would not be far behind. Now, they have started middle school and high school, graduating without their father to cheer them on.
“My husband’s dream is to come here,” she said. “We came for a better life, a better future, but after five years we couldn’t make that happen.”


theguardian--2020-01-11--Trump impeachment: Senator Collins working to allow witnesses at trial – as it happened

Two parents whose children were separated from them as a result of the Trump administration ’ s “ zero tolerance ” border policies are suing the federal government for $ 12m , claiming the children were subject to abuse and neglect while in federal custody .
“ The United States government tore these families apart pursuant to a cruel and unconstitutional policy : The government intended to inflict terror and harm on these small children and their fathers , as a means of deterring others from seeking to enter the United States ” , said the lawsuit , which was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arizona .
The families bringing the lawsuit said they were fleeing violence in Guatemala when they were detained in 2018 after crossing into the US border from Mexico .
From the Hill : According to the lawsuit , the fathers were separated from their children for more than two months , and the federal government gave little , if any , information regarding the location and safety of the children .
The families “ suffered , and continue to suffer , physical , mental , and emotional harm , ” the lawsuit states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were reunited , the lawsuit says the children exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder .
One of the plaintiffs , who is referred to in the lawsuit by the pseudonym Abel , described his ordeal in a statement released by the Southern Poverty Law Center .
“ We came looking for safety , and instead , we were caged like animals .
[ My son ] was taken from me and I had no idea what was happening to him .
When I learned that he was abused by other boys , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deserves this cruelty , ” Abel said .

Lauren Gambino in Washington (earlier) and Kari Paul in San Francisco (now)

11 Jan 2020 01.25 GMT Evening Summary Kari Paul here, logging off for the weekend! Here is a summary of the key events of the last few hours: In a court filing on Friday, the Trump administration said it does not want the Supreme Court to hear its appeal of the Affordable Care Act any time soon, to give lower courts time to make rulings on it.
Bernie Sanders is leading the latest polls in Iowa, with 20% of the vote. Warren follows close behind at 17%.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defended her decision on Friday not to pay dues to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).
Two parents who were separated from their children as a result of zero-tolerance immigration policies have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration alleging child abuse over family separations.
11 Jan 2020 00.53 GMT Lawsuit against Trump administration alleges child abuse over family separations Two parents whose children were separated from them as a result of the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” border policies are suing the federal government for $12m, claiming the children were subject to abuse and neglect while in federal custody. “The United States government tore these families apart pursuant to a cruel and unconstitutional policy: The government intended to inflict terror and harm on these small children and their fathers, as a means of deterring others from seeking to enter the United States”, said the lawsuit, which was filed Friday in U.S. District Court of Arizona. The families bringing the lawsuit said they were fleeing violence in Guatemala when they were detained in 2018 after crossing into the US border from Mexico. From the Hill: According to the lawsuit, the fathers were separated from their children for more than two months, and the federal government gave little, if any, information regarding the location and safety of the children. The families “suffered, and continue to suffer, physical, mental, and emotional harm,” the lawsuit states. More than a year after they were reunited, the lawsuit says the children exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. One of the plaintiffs, who is referred to in the lawsuit by the pseudonym Abel, described his ordeal in a statement released by the Southern Poverty Law Center. “We came looking for safety, and instead, we were caged like animals. [My son] was taken from me and I had no idea what was happening to him. When I learned that he was abused by other boys, I was sick with grief. No one deserves this cruelty,” Abel said.
11 Jan 2020 00.40 GMT Hollywood stars including activist and actor Jane Fonda and Joaquin Phoenix gathered at the U.S. Capitol building in Washington on Friday to demand action on climate change alongside other protesters.
“The climate crisis makes our nation and all nations less secure,” said Fonda. She referenced fires in Australia, which have ravaged tens of thousands of square miles of bushland and caused at least 27 deaths. The action Friday is part of Fonda’s ongoing climate crisis protest series in DC, which is in its 14th week and have been attended by everyone from Ted Danson to Iain Armitage.
Updated at 00.42 GMT
11 Jan 2020 00.25 GMT Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defended her decision on Friday not to pay dues to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), saying she donates “quite a bit” to fellow democrats in other ways. “DCCC made clear that they will blacklist any org that helps progressive candidates like me”, the New York representative wrote on Twitter. “I can choose not to fund that kind of exclusion”. Fox News reported Ocasio-Cortez was withholding $250,000 in dues from the DCCC. The group reported it raised $14.4m in Decemberto elect Democratic candidates.
Updated at 00.26 GMT
11 Jan 2020 00.18 GMT The number of Canadian passengers killed in the Ukrainian Airlines crash in Iran has been revised from 63 to 57, the Canada foreign minister announced on Friday. The plane crashed shortly after takeoff from Tehran on Wednesday, killing 176 people total. Security officials believe it was shot down by an Iranian anti-aircraft missile on accident.
10 Jan 2020 23.11 GMT Bernie Sanders leads in Iowa, according to new polls Bernie Sanders is now in the lead candidate in Iowa as the Feb. 3 caucus vote there quickly approaches. New numbers out on Friday from Selzer & Co. showed the Vermont senator in the lead for the first time in the state, surging up five points to 20%. Meanwhile, 17% of likely Democratic caucus voters cited Senator Elizabeth Warren as their first choice, 16% cited Pete Buttigieg, and 15% chose Joe Biden. “There’s no denying that this is a good poll for Bernie Sanders”, pollster J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co., which conducted the poll said according to the Des Moines Register. “He leads, but it’s not an uncontested lead. He’s got a firmer grip on his supporters than the rest of his compatriots.”
10 Jan 2020 22.49 GMT In a court filing on Friday, the Trump administration said it does not want the Supreme Court to hear its appeal of the Affordable Care Act any time soon. That’s because the key issue at the heart of the case - how much of the law should remain in effect - is still being litigated, CNN reports. “As the case comes to this Court, no lower-court ruling exists on severability or the appropriate remedy. Far from being urgently needed, this Court’s review thus would be premature,” the filing stated. The Supreme Court generally does not hear cases unless they have made their way through lower courts first, but if a majority votes it can be expedited.
10 Jan 2020 22.30 GMT Singer Mandy Moore will join Pete Buttigieg at an Ames, Iowa town hall event on January 13, the campaign announced on Friday. Moore is perhaps best known for her 1999 hit Candy and is reigniting her career in recent months after coming forward with sexual harassment allegations against her ex husband Ryan Adams, whom she said prevented her from recording music. The pop star said in November she backs Buttigieg, saying “he is overwhelmingly qualified” and “brilliant”. “He’s my boy”, she said of the former South Bend mayor. Buttigieg is making a number of appearances in the state ahead of the caucuses there on Feb. 3.
Updated at 22.40 GMT
10 Jan 2020 22.20 GMT Hello, Kari Paul on the West Coast here, taking over the blog for the next few hours. Stay tuned for updates.
10 Jan 2020 21.57 GMT Afternoon in Washington It’s been a steady news day in Washington dominated by the “two Is” – impeachment and Iran. But there was plenty else to follow, even some Megxit news.
Pelosi announced she would hold a vote to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate next week after nearly a month-long standoff between the chambers over next steps.
The White House announced a fresh wave of sanctions against Iran, targeting key sectors – construction, manufacturing, textiles and mining – and eight top officials. The administration says the sanctions will “cut off billions of support to the Iranian regime.”
Author and spiritual guru Marianne Williamson ended her campaign for president, conceding that she did not have enough support to win the Democratic nomination.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo backed Trump’s assertion that the US was justified in killing Suleimani because of an “imminent threat” to American embassies and interests.
Republican senator Susan Collins says she is quietly working with colleagues to pave the way for witnesses in the chamber’s impeachment trial, which could begin as early as next week.
Trump is reportedly considering expanding his controversial travel ban to include additional countries, the Associated Press reports.
10 Jan 2020 21.45 GMT Texas to stop accepting new refugees in 2020 Texas governor Greg Abbott, a staunch ally of the president, said the state will no participate in the federal refugee resettlement program citing security concerns. Texas is the first state to reject refugees under the president’s new executive order requiring written consent before refugees are resettled in the state.
In a letter to Pompeo released on Friday, Abbott wrote that Texas “has been left by Congress to deal with disproportionate migration issues resulting from a broken federal immigration system.”
The state has long led the nation in refugee resettlement, a fact Abbott cites in the letter.
Texas, he wrote, has done “more than its share.” Texas congressman Joaquin Castro, a Democrat, called the move “disgraceful” and accused Abbot of “bigotry and xenophobia”.
This is a disgraceful move by Texas Governor Greg Abbott. He has completely submitted to bigotry and xenophobia. https://t.co/gbmtHWksId — Joaquin Castro (@JoaquinCastrotx) January 10, 2020
Updated at 21.59 GMT
10 Jan 2020 21.26 GMT Trump on #Megxit: 'I just have such respect for the Queen' Trump apparently covered a prolific number of topics in his sit down interview with Ingraham, which is due to air tonight. Among them, he was asked to weigh in on the “rouge royals” – namely, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle – whose decision to step away from House Windsor stunned Buckingham Palace and divided the country, nay, the world.
In the interview, Trump appears torn. But his thoughts are with the Queen.
“I think it’s sad. I do. She’s a great woman. She’s never made a mistake, if you look. She’s had, like, a flawless time,” he said. “I just have such respect for the Queen. I don’t think this should be happening to her.”
Allow content provided by a third party? This article includes content hosted on video.foxnews.com. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as the provider may be using cookies and other technologies. To view this content, click 'Allow and continue'. Allow and continue
10 Jan 2020 21.07 GMT Report: US unsuccessfully targeted second Iranian military official The New York Times is reporting that the US failed an attempt to strike a top Iranian military official on the same day it killed Suleimani.
Citing American officials, the Times writes: The unsuccessful airstrike in Yemen was aimed at Abdul Reza Shahlai, an official with Iran’s Quds Force, a potent paramilitary organization. He was known as a key financier for Iran’s proxy wars. President Trump approved the strike against Mr. Shahlai at the same time as he authorized the strike against General Suleimani, although it is unclear if the American attack in Yemen occurred at precisely the same time. The report is yet another indication that the public’s understanding of a military strike that brought the US to the edge of war with Iran is far from complete. The administration is facing mounting questions about its justification for carrying out the drone strike, which triggered a retaliatory attack from Iran earlier this week.
Read the whole story here.


theguardian--2020-01-11--'Politics of love': the end of Marianne Williamson's bizarre and mesmerizing campaign

Marianne Williamson announced the end of her 2020 presidential campaign on the day of the wolf moon eclipse , as the year ’ s first full moon moved into the Earth ’ s outer shadow .
The self-help author and spiritual adviser to Oprah , who as a presidential candidate charmed and confused Americans with her “ politics of love ” , told supporters that though her path had diverged from the campaign trail , “ a politics of conscience is still yet possible ” .
Even before she announced in January 2018 that she was jumping in the race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a mysterious job listing for a social media director to join a presidential bid that was “ part campaign ” but also “ part startup , part spiritual movement ” .
If the 2020 Democratic presidential field was broad , Williamson ’ s campaign was so out there she may as well have been on another astral plane .
On the one hand , Williamson , 67 , was the only candidate to strongly advocate for reparations for African Americans .
She advocated for stronger environmental protections , in discussing the water crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ due to Donald Trump ’ s rollback of environmental protections , “ we have communities , particularly communities of color and disadvantaged communities all over this country , who are suffering from environmental injustice ” , she said during the first Democratic primary debate in July .
Her contributions were unexpectedly lucid at times , though she often distracted from the otherwise strictly structured debate .
Williamson discussed Trump ’ s legacy as a “ dark psychic force of collectivized hatred ” .
She referred to “ toxicity ” and “ emotional turbulence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She flouted norms by referring to the New Zealand prime minister , Jacinda Ardern , as “ girlfriend ” .
While Elizabeth Warren , Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden presented policy proposals , Williamson dismissed such discourse as “ wonkiness ” .
In this way , she was not unlike candidate Trump , who favored provocative but vague missives and catchphrases over carefully laid plans .
Williamson ’ s own views were scrutinized as not just wonky , but sometimes dangerous .
Critics worried that her vacillating over vaccines – she fashioned herself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” rather than an anti-vaxxer – could mislead families .
And when Hurricane Dorian hit the Bahamas , Williamson was criticized for implying that prayer was a substitute for policy in suggesting that people could harness “ the power of the mind ” to pray away the storm .
“ Millions of us seeing Dorian turn away from land is not a wacky idea , ” she wrote in a tweet that she later deleted .
“ Two minutes of prayer , visualization , meditation for those in the way of the storm.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Williamson remained eminently watchable , her throaty voice enthralling audiences of presidential debates and Goop conventions alike .
Till the end , she remained both befuddlingly practical and mesmerizingly odd .
In a sign-off statement on her campaign website , Williamson listed among her proudest moments “ proactively waging an agenda for peace and making humanity itself America ’ s greatest ally ” .
She said she was dropping out because she didn ’ t want to “ get in the way of a progressive candidate winning ” the Democratic nomination .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ put her year-long campaign to rest , “ I have faith that something is awakening among us … And yes … love will prevail .
”

Marianne Williamson announced the end of her 2020 presidential campaign on the day of the wolf moon eclipse, as the year’s first full moon moved into the Earth’s outer shadow. The self-help author and spiritual adviser to Oprah, who as a presidential candidate charmed and confused Americans with her “politics of love”, told supporters that though her path had diverged from the campaign trail, “a politics of conscience is still yet possible”.
Even before she announced in January 2018 that she was jumping in the race to unseat Donald Trump, she floated a mysterious job listing for a social media director to join a presidential bid that was “part campaign” but also “part startup, part spiritual movement”. If the 2020 Democratic presidential field was broad, Williamson’s campaign was so out there she may as well have been on another astral plane.
On the one hand, Williamson, 67, was the only candidate to strongly advocate for reparations for African Americans. She advocated for stronger environmental protections, in discussing the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. In part due to Donald Trump’s rollback of environmental protections, “we have communities, particularly communities of color and disadvantaged communities all over this country, who are suffering from environmental injustice”, she said during the first Democratic primary debate in July.
Her contributions were unexpectedly lucid at times, though she often distracted from the otherwise strictly structured debate.
Williamson discussed Trump’s legacy as a “dark psychic force of collectivized hatred”. She referred to “toxicity” and “emotional turbulence” that required “healing”. She flouted norms by referring to the New Zealand prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, as “girlfriend”.
While Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden presented policy proposals, Williamson dismissed such discourse as “wonkiness”. In this way, she was not unlike candidate Trump, who favored provocative but vague missives and catchphrases over carefully laid plans.
Williamson’s own views were scrutinized as not just wonky, but sometimes dangerous. Critics worried that her vacillating over vaccines – she fashioned herself as a supporter of “safe pharmaceuticals” rather than an anti-vaxxer – could mislead families. And when Hurricane Dorian hit the Bahamas, Williamson was criticized for implying that prayer was a substitute for policy in suggesting that people could harness “the power of the mind” to pray away the storm.
“Millions of us seeing Dorian turn away from land is not a wacky idea,” she wrote in a tweet that she later deleted. “Two minutes of prayer, visualization, meditation for those in the way of the storm.”
Still, throughout her complicated candidacy, Williamson remained eminently watchable, her throaty voice enthralling audiences of presidential debates and Goop conventions alike.
Till the end, she remained both befuddlingly practical and mesmerizingly odd. In a sign-off statement on her campaign website, Williamson listed among her proudest moments “proactively waging an agenda for peace and making humanity itself America’s greatest ally”.
She said she was dropping out because she didn’t want to “get in the way of a progressive candidate winning” the Democratic nomination. She also said that though she had put her year-long campaign to rest, “I have faith that something is awakening among us … And yes … love will prevail.”


theguardian--2020-01-11--John Bolton impeachment testimony will be blocked, Donald Trump says

John Bolton will be blocked from testifying at Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial , the president has indicated , despite the former national security adviser insisting he would do so if he received a subpoena .
Trump claimed in an interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham on Friday night he would “ love everybody to testify ” , including Bolton , secretary of state Mike Pompeo and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney .
But he went on to say “ there are things that you can ’ t do from the standpoint of executive privilege ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump added .
“ You can ’ t have him explaining all of your statements about national security concerning Russia , China and North Korea , everything .
You just can ’ t do that.
” Asked if that meant he would invoke executive privilege to prevent Bolton from testifying , Trump said : “ I think you have to for the sake of the office.
” Democrats believe Bolton , ousted by Trump last September , has key insight into the president ’ s failed efforts to secure a so-called quid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump is alleged to have demanded investigations into a conspiracy theory about election interference and unsubstantiated allegations of corruption involving Joe Biden , a possible rival in November ’ s election , in return for almost $ 400m in crucial military aid and a White House meeting .
Those efforts led to impeachment hearings in the Democrat-led House and ultimately two articles of impeachment , for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , that House speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Friday she would send to the Senate early next week .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ House aides , including that Bolton had referred to approaches to Ukraine as a “ drug deal ” and refused to get involved .
Bolton , who was ambassador to the United Nations under George W Bush , surprised the White House earlier this week by announcing he would testify at Trump ’ s Senate trial if subpoenaed to do so .
In a statement he said he had tried to “ resolve serious competing issues ” in weighing “ my obligations both as a citizen and as a former national security adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to testify .
There remains significant doubt , however , that the issue will come to a head , irrespective of Trump ’ s pronouncement .
Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has joined other leading Republicans in asserting that no witnesses should be called , and claimed on Thursday to have enough votes to start the trial on that basis .
Democrats need to persuade four Senate Republicans to join them in a vote on trial rules to allow witnesses .
They received a glimmer of hope Friday when Susan Collins , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been working with a small group of colleagues to find a compromise .
“ We should be completely open to calling witnesses , ” Collins said , according to the Bangor Daily News .
Trump ’ s removal is a long shot .
A two-thirds majority of 100 senators is required for a conviction and there are few indications any Republicans are likely to break ranks .
Trump also had scathing words for Pelosi in the Fox News interview , saying it was “ ridiculous ” she had held on to the articles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She should have sent them a long time ago , ” he said .
“ It just belittles the process .
Nancy Pelosi will go down as the least successful speaker of the House in the history of our nation .
She has done nothing .
”

John Bolton will be blocked from testifying at Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, the president has indicated, despite the former national security adviser insisting he would do so if he received a subpoena.
Trump claimed in an interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham on Friday night he would “love everybody to testify”, including Bolton, the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, and acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney.
But he went on to say “there are things that you can’t do from the standpoint of executive privilege”.
“Especially a national security adviser,” Trump added. “You can’t have him explaining all of your statements about national security concerning Russia, China and North Korea, everything. You just can’t do that.”
Asked if that meant he would invoke executive privilege to prevent Bolton from testifying, Trump said: “I think you have to for the sake of the office.”
Democrats believe Bolton, ousted by Trump last September, has key insight into the president’s failed efforts to secure a so-called quid pro quo with the government of Ukraine.
Trump is alleged to have demanded investigations into a conspiracy theory about election interference and unsubstantiated allegations of corruption involving Joe Biden, a possible rival in November’s election, in return for almost $400m in crucial military aid and a White House meeting.
Those efforts led to impeachment hearings in the Democrat-led House and ultimately two articles of impeachment, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, that the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said on Friday she would send to the Senate early next week.
Impeachment hearings contained dramatic testimony from White House aides, including that Bolton had referred to approaches to Ukraine as a “drug deal” and refused to get involved.
Bolton, who was ambassador to the United Nations under George W Bush, surprised the White House earlier this week by announcing he would testify at Trump’s Senate trial if subpoenaed to do so.
In a statement he said he had tried to “resolve serious competing issues” in weighing “my obligations both as a citizen and as a former national security adviser” and concluded that he was prepared to testify.
There remains significant doubt, however, that the issue will come to a head, irrespective of Trump’s pronouncement. The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, has joined other leading Republicans in asserting that no witnesses should be called, and claimed on Thursday to have enough votes to start the trial on that basis.
Democrats need to persuade four Senate Republicans to join them in a vote on trial rules to allow witnesses. They received a glimmer of hope Friday when Susan Collins, a moderate from Maine, said she had been working with a small group of colleagues to find a compromise.
“We should be completely open to calling witnesses,” Collins said, according to the Bangor Daily News.
Trump’s removal is a long shot. A two-thirds majority of 100 senators is required for a conviction and there are few indications any Republicans are likely to break ranks.
Trump also had scathing words for Pelosi in the Fox News interview, saying it was “ridiculous” she had held on to the articles of impeachment for several weeks.
“She should have sent them a long time ago,” he said. “It just belittles the process. Nancy Pelosi will go down as the least successful speaker of the House in the history of our nation. She has done nothing.”