shareblue--2020-01-06--Experts confirm climate change is fueling Australia's devastating wildfires

Australia ’ s unprecedented wildfires are supercharged thanks to climate change , the type of trees catching fire , and weather , experts say .
And these fires are so extreme that they are triggering their own thunderstorms .
Here are a few questions and answers about the science behind the Australian wildfires that so far have burned about 5 million hectares ( 12.35 million acres ) , killing at least 25 people and destroying more than 1,400 homes .
“ They are basically just in a horrific convergence of events , ” said Stanford University environmental studies director Chris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report on climate change and extreme events .
He said this is one of the worst , if not the worst , climate change extreme events he ’ s seen .
“ There is something just intrinsically terrifying about these big wildfires .
They go on for so long , the sense of hopelessness that they instill , ” Field said .
“ The wildfires are kind of the iconic representation of climate change impacts.
” A : Scientists , both those who study fire and those who study climate , say there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been a big part , but not the only part , of the fires .
Last year in Australia was the hottest and driest on record , with the average annual temperature 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit ( 1.5 degrees Celsius ) above the 1960 to 1990 average , according to Australia ’ s Bureau of Meteorology .
Temperatures in Australia last month hit 121.8 F ( 49.9 C ) .
“ What would have been a bad fire season was made worse by the background drying/warming trend , ’ ’ Andrew Watkins , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Bureau of Meteorology , said in an email .
Mike Flannigan , a fire scientist at the University of Alberta in Canada , said Australia ’ s fires are “ an example of climate change.
” A 2019 Australian government brief report on wildfires and climate change said , “ Human-caused climate change has resulted in more dangerous weather conditions for bushfires in recent decades for many regions of Australia.
” Q : How does climate change make these fires worse ?
A : The drier the fuel — trees and plants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to start and the hotter and nastier they get , Flannigan said .
“ It means more fuel is available to burn , which means higher intensity fires , which makes it more difficult — or impossible — to put out , ” Flannigan said .
The heat makes the fuel drier , so they combine for something called fire weather .
And that determines “ fuel moisture , ” which is crucial for fire spread .
The lower the moisture , the more likely Australian fires start and spread from lightning and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There ’ s been a 10 % long-term drying trend in Australia ’ s southeast and 15 % long-term drying trend in the country ’ s southwest , Watkins said .
When added to a degree of warming and a generally southward shift of weather systems , that means a generally drier landscape .
Australia ’ s drought since late 2017 “ has been at least the equal of our worst drought in 1902 , ” Australia ’ s Watkins said .
“ It has probably been driven by ocean temperature patterns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ term drying trend.
” A : Yes .
It ’ s about two to four months longer , starting earlier especially in the south and east , Watkins said .
“ The fires over the last three months are unprecedented in their timing and severity , started earlier in spring , and covered a wider area across many parts of Australia , ” said David Karoly , leader of climate change hub at Australia 's National Environmental science Program .
“ The normal peak fire season is later in summer and we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is weather , not just long-term climate , a factor ?
A : Yes .
In September , Antarctica ’ s sudden stratospheric warming — sort of the southern equivalent of the polar vortex — changed weather conditions so that Australia ’ s normal weather systems are farther north than usual , Watkins said .
That means since mid-October there were persistent strong westerly winds bringing hot dry air from the interior to the coast , making the fire weather even riskier for the coasts .
“ With such a dry environment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events ( storms that brought lightning but limited rainfall ) , ” Watkins said .
Q : Are people starting these fires ?
Is it arson ?
A : It ’ s too early to tell the precise cause of ignition because the fires are so recent and officials are spending time fighting them , Flannigan said .
While people are a big factor in causing fires in Australia , it ’ s usually accidental , from cars and trucks and power lines , Flannigan said .
Usually discarded cigarettes don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are so dry , they can , he said .
A : Yes .
It ’ s an explosive storm called pyrocumulonimbus and it can inject particles as high as 10 miles into the air .
During a fire , heat and moisture from the plants are released , even when the fuel is relatively dry .
Warm air is less dense than cold air so it rises , releasing the moisture and forming a cloud that lifts and ends up a thunderstorm started by fire .
It happens from time to time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world , including Canada , Flannigan said .
“ These can be deadly , dangerous , erratic , and unpredictable , ” he said .
Q : Are the Australian trees prone to burning ?
A : Eucalyptus trees are especially flammable , “ like gasoline on a tree , ” Flannigan said .
Chemicals in them make them catch fire easier , spread to the tops of trees , and get more intense .
Eucalyptus trees were a big factor in 2017 fires in Portugal that killed 66 people , he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these huge Australia fires ?
A : You don ’ t .
They ’ re just going to burn in many places until they hit the beach , Flannigan said .
“ This level of intensity , direct attack is useless , ” Flannigan said .
“ You just have to get out of the way ...
It really is spitting on a campfire .
It ’ s not doing any good.
” Q : What does the long-term fire future look like for Australian ?
A : “ The extreme fire season @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Australian National University climate scientist Nerilie Abram .
“ The question that we need to ask is how much worse are we willing to let this get ?
This is what global warming of just over 1 degree C looks like .
Do we really want to see the impacts of 3 degrees or more ?
[ B ] ecause that is the trajectory we are on .
”

Australia’s unprecedented wildfires are supercharged thanks to climate change, the type of trees catching fire, and weather, experts say.
And these fires are so extreme that they are triggering their own thunderstorms.
Here are a few questions and answers about the science behind the Australian wildfires that so far have burned about 5 million hectares (12.35 million acres), killing at least 25 people and destroying more than 1,400 homes.
“They are basically just in a horrific convergence of events,” said Stanford University environmental studies director Chris Field, who chaired an international scientific report on climate change and extreme events. He said this is one of the worst, if not the worst, climate change extreme events he’s seen.
“There is something just intrinsically terrifying about these big wildfires. They go on for so long, the sense of hopelessness that they instill,” Field said. “The wildfires are kind of the iconic representation of climate change impacts.”
Q: Is climate change really a factor?
A: Scientists, both those who study fire and those who study climate, say there’s no doubt man-made global warming has been a big part, but not the only part, of the fires.
Last year in Australia was the hottest and driest on record, with the average annual temperature 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above the 1960 to 1990 average, according to Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology. Temperatures in Australia last month hit 121.8 F (49.9 C).
“What would have been a bad fire season was made worse by the background drying/warming trend,’’ Andrew Watkins, head of long-range forecasts at Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology, said in an email.
Mike Flannigan, a fire scientist at the University of Alberta in Canada, said Australia’s fires are “an example of climate change.”
A 2019 Australian government brief report on wildfires and climate change said, “Human-caused climate change has resulted in more dangerous weather conditions for bushfires in recent decades for many regions of Australia.”
Q: How does climate change make these fires worse?
A: The drier the fuel — trees and plants — the easier it is for fires to start and the hotter and nastier they get, Flannigan said.
“It means more fuel is available to burn, which means higher intensity fires, which makes it more difficult — or impossible — to put out,” Flannigan said.
The heat makes the fuel drier, so they combine for something called fire weather. And that determines “fuel moisture,” which is crucial for fire spread. The lower the moisture, the more likely Australian fires start and spread from lightning and human-caused ignition, a 2016 study found.
There’s been a 10% long-term drying trend in Australia’s southeast and 15% long-term drying trend in the country’s southwest, Watkins said. When added to a degree of warming and a generally southward shift of weather systems, that means a generally drier landscape.
Australia’s drought since late 2017 “has been at least the equal of our worst drought in 1902,” Australia’s Watkins said. “It has probably been driven by ocean temperature patterns in the Indian Ocean and the long term drying trend.”
Q: Has Australia’s fire season changed?
A: Yes. It’s about two to four months longer, starting earlier especially in the south and east, Watkins said.
“The fires over the last three months are unprecedented in their timing and severity, started earlier in spring, and covered a wider area across many parts of Australia,” said David Karoly, leader of climate change hub at Australia’s National Environmental science Program. “The normal peak fire season is later in summer and we are yet to have that.”
Q: Is weather, not just long-term climate, a factor?
A: Yes. In September, Antarctica’s sudden stratospheric warming — sort of the southern equivalent of the polar vortex — changed weather conditions so that Australia’s normal weather systems are farther north than usual, Watkins said.
That means since mid-October there were persistent strong westerly winds bringing hot dry air from the interior to the coast, making the fire weather even riskier for the coasts.
“With such a dry environment, many fires were started by dry lightning events (storms that brought lightning but limited rainfall),” Watkins said.
Q: Are people starting these fires? Is it arson?
A: It’s too early to tell the precise cause of ignition because the fires are so recent and officials are spending time fighting them, Flannigan said.
While people are a big factor in causing fires in Australia, it’s usually accidental, from cars and trucks and power lines, Flannigan said. Usually discarded cigarettes don’t trigger big fires, but when conditions are so dry, they can, he said.
Q: Are these fires triggering thunderstorms?
A: Yes. It’s an explosive storm called pyrocumulonimbus and it can inject particles as high as 10 miles into the air.
During a fire, heat and moisture from the plants are released, even when the fuel is relatively dry. Warm air is less dense than cold air so it rises, releasing the moisture and forming a cloud that lifts and ends up a thunderstorm started by fire. It happens from time to time in Australia and other parts of the world, including Canada, Flannigan said.
“These can be deadly, dangerous, erratic, and unpredictable,” he said.
Q: Are the Australian trees prone to burning?
A: Eucalyptus trees are especially flammable, “like gasoline on a tree,” Flannigan said. Chemicals in them make them catch fire easier, spread to the tops of trees, and get more intense. Eucalyptus trees were a big factor in 2017 fires in Portugal that killed 66 people, he said.
Q: How can you fight these huge Australia fires?
A: You don’t. They’re just going to burn in many places until they hit the beach, Flannigan said.
“This level of intensity, direct attack is useless,” Flannigan said. “You just have to get out of the way… It really is spitting on a campfire. It’s not doing any good.”
Q: What does the long-term fire future look like for Australian?
A: “The extreme fire season in Australia in 2019 was predicted,” said Australian National University climate scientist Nerilie Abram. “The question that we need to ask is how much worse are we willing to let this get? This is what global warming of just over 1 degree C looks like. Do we really want to see the impacts of 3 degrees or more? [B]ecause that is the trajectory we are on.”


shareblue--2020-01-06--Israel says it has nothing to do with US 'assassination' of Iranian general

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu , traditionally a staunch ally of Donald Trump , unambiguously distanced himself and Israel from the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani .
`` The assassination of Soleimani is n't an Israeli event but an American event , '' Netanyahu reportedly said to a meeting of Israel 's security cabinet .
`` We were not involved and should not be dragged into it . ''
Israel 's closeness to the United States likely prompted the unusual statement .
`` Like other countries in the region , Israel is concerned that Iran will retaliate against it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Soleimani , '' Axios reported .
The outlet reported from sources within the Israeli government that Netanyahu said ministers should only respond to the killing by asserting that America has a right to defend itself .
In September , Netanyahu described Trump as his `` dear friend , '' adding that `` the Jewish State has never had a greater friend in the White House . ''
Democratic leaders have criticized Trump 's actions , pointing out the risk to American security and global stability .
`` We can not put the lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further at risk by engaging in provocative and disproportionate actions , '' Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement the night of the attack .
`` Tonight 's airstrike risks provoking further dangerous escalation of violence .
America – and the world – can not afford to have tensions escalate to the point of no return . ''
`` This action may well have brought our nation closer to another endless war , exactly the kind of endless war the president promised he would not drag us into , '' said Senate Minority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here , of course , is that this is actually going to get more Americans , not less Americans , killed , '' Sen. Chris Murphy ( D-CT ) told NPR .
The statement from Israel echoes many other world leaders who have expressed concern for the fallout from Trump 's action .
`` The secretary-general has consistently advocated for de-escalation in the Gulf , '' said Farhan Haq , spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
`` This is a moment in which leaders must exercise maximum restraint .
The world can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' `` We are at a dangerous point of escalation .
It is now important through prudence and restraint to contribute to de-escalation , '' said Ulrike Demmer , spokesperson for German Chancellor Angela Merkel .
`` What is happening is what we feared : Tensions between the United States and Iran are increasing , '' French Secretary of State for European Affairs Amelie de Montchalin told a radio station .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, traditionally a staunch ally of Donald Trump, unambiguously distanced himself and Israel from the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.
“The assassination of Soleimani isn’t an Israeli event but an American event,” Netanyahu reportedly said to a meeting of Israel’s security cabinet. “We were not involved and should not be dragged into it.”
Israel’s closeness to the United States likely prompted the unusual statement.
“Like other countries in the region, Israel is concerned that Iran will retaliate against it in order to avenge the killing of Soleimani,” Axios reported. The outlet reported from sources within the Israeli government that Netanyahu said ministers should only respond to the killing by asserting that America has a right to defend itself.
In September, Netanyahu described Trump as his “dear friend,” adding that “the Jewish State has never had a greater friend in the White House.”
Democratic leaders have criticized Trump’s actions, pointing out the risk to American security and global stability.
“We cannot put the lives of American servicemembers, diplomats and others further at risk by engaging in provocative and disproportionate actions,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement the night of the attack. “Tonight’s airstrike risks provoking further dangerous escalation of violence. America – and the world – cannot afford to have tensions escalate to the point of no return.”
“This action may well have brought our nation closer to another endless war, exactly the kind of endless war the president promised he would not drag us into,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
“The worry here, of course, is that this is actually going to get more Americans, not less Americans, killed,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) told NPR.
The statement from Israel echoes many other world leaders who have expressed concern for the fallout from Trump’s action.
“The secretary-general has consistently advocated for de-escalation in the Gulf,” said Farhan Haq, spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. ” This is a moment in which leaders must exercise maximum restraint. The world cannot afford another war in the Gulf.”
“We are at a dangerous point of escalation. It is now important through prudence and restraint to contribute to de-escalation,” said Ulrike Demmer, spokesperson for German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
“What is happening is what we feared: Tensions between the United States and Iran are increasing,” French Secretary of State for European Affairs Amelie de Montchalin told a radio station.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-06--Homeland Security will give citizenship data to Census after Trump lost in court

The Department of Homeland Security is agreeing to share citizenship information with the U.S. Census Bureau as part of Donald Trump 's order to collect data on who is a citizen following the Supreme Court 's rejection of a citizenship question on the 2020 Census form .
Trump 's order is being challenged in federal court , but meanwhile the Department of Homeland Security two weeks ago announced the agreement in a report .
It said the agency would share administrative records to help the Census Bureau determine the number of citizens and non-citizens in the United States , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in the United States illegally .
Information to be shared includes personally identifiable data , the Homeland Security document says .
Federal law prohibits the Census Bureau from releasing personally identifiable data , and the bureau says in its fact-sheet on privacy , “ Your answers can only be used to produce statistics — they can not be used against you in any way.
” The Census Bureau has promised the data will be kept for no more than two years , and will then be destroyed , according to the agreement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help the Census Bureau create a model estimating the likelihood that each person in the U.S. is a citizen , non-citizen or an immigrant in the country without legal permission .
Among the information Homeland Security will provide is a person 's alien identification number , country of birth and date of naturalization or naturalization application .
The department is awaiting word on whether it will be allowed to release information on asylum and refugee applicants , which typically is prohibited from being disclosed .
The Homeland Security document acknowledges risks that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ status to someone , that people wo n't be able to correct mistakes about themselves and that Homeland Security information will be linked inaccurately to data from other sources used by the Census Bureau .
`` Linking records between datasets is not likely to be 100 % accurate , '' the Homeland Security document notes .
Trump ordered the Census Bureau to collect citizenship information through administrative records from federal agencies and the 50 states after the Supreme Court ruled against his administration last summer by deciding that a citizenship question would n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Census questionnaire .
The administration had said the question was being added to aid in enforcement of the Voting Rights Act , which protects minority voters ' access to the ballot box .
But Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court 's four more liberal members in saying the administration 's current justification for the question `` seems to have been contrived . ''
Opponents of the citizenship question had argued it would scare off immigrants , Hispanics and others from participating in the once-a-decade head count .
The 2020 Census will help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gets as well as the distribution of $ 1.5 trillion in federal funds .
The order to collect citizenship data through federal and state administrative records currently is being challenged by civil rights groups in federal court in Maryland .
Their lawsuit claims that the citizenship-data gathering is motivated by “ a racially discriminatory scheme '' to reduce the political power of Latinos and increase the representation of non-Latino whites .
As part of the order , the U.S. Census Bureau has asked state drivers ' license bureaus for records , but so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gathering the citizenship data would give the states the option to design state and legislative districts using voter-age citizen numbers instead of the total population , Trump said in the order .
Opponents fear that would make legislative districts more Republican-leaning and less diverse .
`` Whether that approach is permissible will be resolved when a state actually proposes a districting plan based on the voter-eligible population , '' Trump 's order said .
`` But because eligibility to vote depends in part on citizenship , states could more effectively exercise this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ count of the citizen population . ''

The Department of Homeland Security is agreeing to share citizenship information with the U.S. Census Bureau as part of Donald Trump’s order to collect data on who is a citizen following the Supreme Court’s rejection of a citizenship question on the 2020 Census form.
Trump’s order is being challenged in federal court, but meanwhile the Department of Homeland Security two weeks ago announced the agreement in a report. It said the agency would share administrative records to help the Census Bureau determine the number of citizens and non-citizens in the United States, as well as the number of immigrants who are in the United States illegally.
Information to be shared includes personally identifiable data, the Homeland Security document says. Federal law prohibits the Census Bureau from releasing personally identifiable data, and the bureau says in its fact-sheet on privacy, “Your answers can only be used to produce statistics — they cannot be used against you in any way.”
The Census Bureau has promised the data will be kept for no more than two years, and will then be destroyed, according to the agreement. The data will be used to help the Census Bureau create a model estimating the likelihood that each person in the U.S. is a citizen, non-citizen or an immigrant in the country without legal permission.
Among the information Homeland Security will provide is a person’s alien identification number, country of birth and date of naturalization or naturalization application. The department is awaiting word on whether it will be allowed to release information on asylum and refugee applicants, which typically is prohibited from being disclosed.
The Homeland Security document acknowledges risks that the Census Bureau will assign an inaccurate immigration status to someone, that people won’t be able to correct mistakes about themselves and that Homeland Security information will be linked inaccurately to data from other sources used by the Census Bureau.
“Linking records between datasets is not likely to be 100% accurate,” the Homeland Security document notes.
Trump ordered the Census Bureau to collect citizenship information through administrative records from federal agencies and the 50 states after the Supreme Court ruled against his administration last summer by deciding that a citizenship question wouldn’t be allowed on this spring’s 2020 Census questionnaire.
The administration had said the question was being added to aid in enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, which protects minority voters’ access to the ballot box. But Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s four more liberal members in saying the administration’s current justification for the question “seems to have been contrived.”
Opponents of the citizenship question had argued it would scare off immigrants, Hispanics and others from participating in the once-a-decade head count. The 2020 Census will help determine how many congressional seats each state gets as well as the distribution of $1.5 trillion in federal funds.
The order to collect citizenship data through federal and state administrative records currently is being challenged by civil rights groups in federal court in Maryland. Their lawsuit claims that the citizenship-data gathering is motivated by “a racially discriminatory scheme” to reduce the political power of Latinos and increase the representation of non-Latino whites.
As part of the order, the U.S. Census Bureau has asked state drivers’ license bureaus for records, but so far only Nebraska has agreed to cooperate.
Gathering the citizenship data would give the states the option to design state and legislative districts using voter-age citizen numbers instead of the total population, Trump said in the order. Opponents fear that would make legislative districts more Republican-leaning and less diverse.
“Whether that approach is permissible will be resolved when a state actually proposes a districting plan based on the voter-eligible population,” Trump’s order said. “But because eligibility to vote depends in part on citizenship, states could more effectively exercise this option with a more accurate and complete count of the citizen population.”


shareblue--2020-01-06--Local paper says GOP senator 'embarrasses' his state by kissing up to Trump's son

Sen. Thom Tillis ' ( R-NC ) hometown paper is accusing the lawmaker of `` acting more like a party planner '' than a serious politician tasked with holding the president to account .
The scathing Monday editorial in the Charlotte Observer comes amid a burgeoning international conflict with Iran , following a targeted airstrike in Baghdad , which left Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani dead .
Donald Trump reportedly OK 'd the strike before informing Congress .
The editorial board bristled at Tillis ' recent effort to encourage constituents to sign a digital birthday card wishing Eric Trump , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Saturday , Tillis tweeted , `` Eric Trump 's birthday is coming up .
We 're putting together a birthday card for him — will you add your name ? ''
The editorial board of the Observer , the state 's largest newspaper , was embarrassed by the plea .
`` At a moment when the country is grappling with the unsettling U.S. assassination of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani — a time when we ’ d like our members of Congress to position themselves as a thoughtful check on any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acting more like a party planner , '' it wrote .
The board pointed out that Tillis has repeatedly refused to stand up to Trump on any issues , and `` few people have an expectation that Tillis would raise questions about the president 's killing of a foreign official and the ramifications it might have on U.S. interests and foreign policy . ''
It also noted that Tillis `` long ago laid his political future at the feet of the president , '' but that the birthday card stunt `` showed a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senator and a president . ''
Tillis is up for reelection in November .
The Observer posed a series of questions to readers , asking whether voters wanted `` a U.S. senator who understands that it is sometimes his or her uncomfortable duty to question a president '' or one who was `` so consumed with currying favor from Donald Trump that he embarrasses himself and the state he represents [ . ]
'' Tillis ' attempts to ingratiate himself with the Trump family come even after his most significant primary opponent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race in December .
Before Tucker dropped out , Tillis planned to spend $ 2 million on television ads defending his close relationship to Trump in order to shore up his conservative base .
One October 2019 poll showed just 22 % of voters approved of the job Tillis was doing , with double that number saying they disapproved .
Even among Republicans in the state , that number sat at just 40 % .
Army veteran and former North Carolina state Sen. Cal Cunningham was endorsed by the Democrats ' Senate campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign a boost in its effort to take on Tillis .
`` Cal Cunningham has shown he has the independence and strength to stand up to the powerful and fight for what 's right , '' Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto ( D-NV ) , said at the time .

Sen. Thom Tillis’ (R-NC) hometown paper is accusing the lawmaker of “acting more like a party planner” than a serious politician tasked with holding the president to account.
The scathing Monday editorial in the Charlotte Observer comes amid a burgeoning international conflict with Iran, following a targeted airstrike in Baghdad, which left Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani dead. Donald Trump reportedly OK’d the strike before informing Congress.
The editorial board bristled at Tillis’ recent effort to encourage constituents to sign a digital birthday card wishing Eric Trump, Trump’s second-eldest son, a happy birthday.
On Saturday, Tillis tweeted, “Eric Trump’s birthday is coming up. We’re putting together a birthday card for him — will you add your name?”
The editorial board of the Observer, the state’s largest newspaper, was embarrassed by the plea.
“At a moment when the country is grappling with the unsettling U.S. assassination of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani — a time when we’d like our members of Congress to position themselves as a thoughtful check on any president’s action — Tillis was acting more like a party planner,” it wrote.
The board pointed out that Tillis has repeatedly refused to stand up to Trump on any issues, and “few people have an expectation that Tillis would raise questions about the president’s killing of a foreign official and the ramifications it might have on U.S. interests and foreign policy.”
It also noted that Tillis “long ago laid his political future at the feet of the president,” but that the birthday card stunt “showed a troubling lack of distance between a U.S. senator and a president.”
Tillis is up for reelection in November. The Observer posed a series of questions to readers, asking whether voters wanted “a U.S. senator who understands that it is sometimes his or her uncomfortable duty to question a president” or one who was “so consumed with currying favor from Donald Trump that he embarrasses himself and the state he represents[.]”
Tillis’ attempts to ingratiate himself with the Trump family come even after his most significant primary opponent, Garland Tucker, dropped out of the race in December. Before Tucker dropped out, Tillis planned to spend $2 million on television ads defending his close relationship to Trump in order to shore up his conservative base.
One October 2019 poll showed just 22% of voters approved of the job Tillis was doing, with double that number saying they disapproved. Even among Republicans in the state, that number sat at just 40%.
Roll Call election experts list the North Carolina Senate race as a toss-up.
Army veteran and former North Carolina state Sen. Cal Cunningham was endorsed by the Democrats’ Senate campaign arm in late October, giving his campaign a boost in its effort to take on Tillis.
“Cal Cunningham has shown he has the independence and strength to stand up to the powerful and fight for what’s right,” Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), said at the time.


shareblue--2020-01-07--New Trump housing rule could allow 'free rein to discriminate without consequences'

The Trump administration took steps Tuesday to roll back an Obama-era rule intended to ensure that communities confront and address racial segregation in housing , saying local governments have been overburdened by the requirements .
The proposed Department of Housing and Urban Development rule would redefine fair housing standards to place more emphasis on improving housing choice rather than reducing discrimination .
It would reduce regulatory burdens and eliminate the assessment tool used to map racial segregation under the 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule .
According to HUD , simplifying the process for cities to meet fair housing requirements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obligations .
But housing advocates caution the plan would substantially weaken fair housing enforcement , leading to a resurgence of racial segregation across the country .
`` This proposal would dismantle efforts to combat ongoing racial segregation in the housing market and effectively allow jurisdictions free rein to discriminate without consequences , '' said Kristen Clarke , president and executive director of the Lawyers ’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law .
Housing Secretary Ben Carson , who previously criticized President Barack Obama 's fair housing rule as `` social engineering , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more affordable housing options in communities nationwide .
`` Mayors know their communities best , so we are empowering them to make housing decisions that meet their unique needs , not a mandate from the federal government , '' Carson said .
`` If a community fails to improve housing choice , HUD stands ready to enforce the Fair Housing Act and pursue action against any party that violates the law . ''
The 2015 fair housing rule , put in place to strengthen enforcement of the landmark Fair Housing Act of 1968 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 1,200 jurisdictions receiving HUD block grants and housing aid to analyze housing stock and come up with a plan for addressing patterns of segregation and discrimination .
If HUD determined that the plan , called a Fair Housing Assessment , was n't sufficient , the city or county would have to rework it or risk losing funding .
The Trump administration in 2018 suspended the full implementation of the rule and withdrew a data tool designed to help cities analyze their housing , arguing it was too costly and burdensome for both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A group of housing and civil rights advocates unsuccessfully sued HUD over the suspension of the rule .
The proposal released Tuesday aims to replace the 2015 rule .
The public will have 60 days to submit comments once it is published in the Federal Register .
It seeks to change the definition of fair housing from `` taking meaningful actions that , taken together , address significant disparities in housing needs '' and `` replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns '' to `` advancing fair housing choice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of influence . ''
Housing advocates say the consequences will be disastrous .
`` If the rule takes effect , ongoing housing discrimination and segregation will likely continue to be swept under the rug and HUD resources will do far less to reduce segregation and expand housing opportunities for people of color , people with disabilities , and other protected groups , '' said Peggy Bailey , vice president of housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities .
In a shift from a 92-question checklist localities had to answer on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ require each jurisdiction to submit three goals it plans to reach to overcome obstacles to fair housing choice , and leaves the contents of those goals largely up to the cities themselves .
According to HUD , 63 % of localities had their fair housing plans either rejected or only accepted after `` substantial HUD-directed revisions , '' with proposals that averaged 204 pages .
The proposed rule also seeks to rank jurisdictions based on housing costs and market rates , and reward top-performing jurisdictions with incentives that could include additional program funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relatively poor will be more closely scrutinized .
The goal is to boost the availability of affordable housing .
But some housing advocates say it could put high-cost coastal cities with great housing needs , such as California , at greater risk of losing federal funds than smaller , less-expensive rural areas , which tend to be more supportive of Trump .

The Trump administration took steps Tuesday to roll back an Obama-era rule intended to ensure that communities confront and address racial segregation in housing, saying local governments have been overburdened by the requirements.
The proposed Department of Housing and Urban Development rule would redefine fair housing standards to place more emphasis on improving housing choice rather than reducing discrimination. It would reduce regulatory burdens and eliminate the assessment tool used to map racial segregation under the 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule.
According to HUD, simplifying the process for cities to meet fair housing requirements would help them meet their civil rights obligations. But housing advocates caution the plan would substantially weaken fair housing enforcement, leading to a resurgence of racial segregation across the country.
“This proposal would dismantle efforts to combat ongoing racial segregation in the housing market and effectively allow jurisdictions free rein to discriminate without consequences,” said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
Housing Secretary Ben Carson, who previously criticized President Barack Obama’s fair housing rule as “social engineering,” said the new rule would give people more affordable housing options in communities nationwide.
“Mayors know their communities best, so we are empowering them to make housing decisions that meet their unique needs, not a mandate from the federal government,” Carson said. “If a community fails to improve housing choice, HUD stands ready to enforce the Fair Housing Act and pursue action against any party that violates the law.”
The 2015 fair housing rule, put in place to strengthen enforcement of the landmark Fair Housing Act of 1968, for the first time required more than 1,200 jurisdictions receiving HUD block grants and housing aid to analyze housing stock and come up with a plan for addressing patterns of segregation and discrimination. If HUD determined that the plan, called a Fair Housing Assessment, wasn’t sufficient, the city or county would have to rework it or risk losing funding.
The Trump administration in 2018 suspended the full implementation of the rule and withdrew a data tool designed to help cities analyze their housing, arguing it was too costly and burdensome for both local jurisdictions and the federal government. A group of housing and civil rights advocates unsuccessfully sued HUD over the suspension of the rule.
The proposal released Tuesday aims to replace the 2015 rule. The public will have 60 days to submit comments once it is published in the Federal Register.
It seeks to change the definition of fair housing from “taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs” and “replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns” to “advancing fair housing choice within the program participant’s control of influence.”
Housing advocates say the consequences will be disastrous.
“If the rule takes effect, ongoing housing discrimination and segregation will likely continue to be swept under the rug and HUD resources will do far less to reduce segregation and expand housing opportunities for people of color, people with disabilities, and other protected groups,” said Peggy Bailey, vice president of housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
HUD officials emphasized a simpler process that focuses on achieving results.
In a shift from a 92-question checklist localities had to answer on housing desegregation, the proposed rule would require each jurisdiction to submit three goals it plans to reach to overcome obstacles to fair housing choice, and leaves the contents of those goals largely up to the cities themselves. According to HUD, 63% of localities had their fair housing plans either rejected or only accepted after “substantial HUD-directed revisions,” with proposals that averaged 204 pages.
The proposed rule also seeks to rank jurisdictions based on housing costs and market rates, and reward top-performing jurisdictions with incentives that could include additional program funds. Those localities where housing choice is relatively poor will be more closely scrutinized.
The goal is to boost the availability of affordable housing. But some housing advocates say it could put high-cost coastal cities with great housing needs, such as California, at greater risk of losing federal funds than smaller, less-expensive rural areas, which tend to be more supportive of Trump.


shareblue--2020-01-07--More access to health care is improving lives in the South

Low-income people in southern states are less likely to see their health decline if they live in a state that opted to expand Medicaid under Obamacare , a new study reveals .
Still , 14 states — mostly in the South — have refused to accept the federal funds that provide 90 % of the cost of the program , leaving hundreds of thousands without coverage .
The study , conducted by researchers at Vanderbilt and Harvard Universities , was published Monday in the peer-reviewed Health Affairs journal .
It examined 15,356 low-income adults who were not elderly in four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and eight southern states that opted not to , looking at their health status before ( 2008-13 ) and after ( 2015-17 ) expansion .
Beyond finding that more people in the states that opted for Medicaid expansion had Medicaid coverage ( `` a differential change of 7.6 percentage points '' ) , the authors determined that `` a lower proportion experienced a health status decline ( -1.8 percentage points ) , and a higher proportion maintained their baseline health status ( 1.4 percentage points ) . ''
Given that most of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community health centers , the authors noted that the expansion appears to help maintain good health even for those already with access to some safety-net care .
Vanderbilt University 's John Graves , lead researcher on the study , told The Tennessean , `` The message is pretty simple .
Medicaid is keeping people from the kind of precipitous health decline that could lead to death . ''
When Barack Obama signed the landmark 2010 Affordable Care Act , commonly known as Obamacare , a major provision aimed to reduce the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the Medicaid program .
But because Medicaid is partially a federal program and partially a state one , the Supreme Court ruled in 2011 that states could choose whether to opt-in to that expansion or not .
So far , 36 states have decided to opt in .
But a few conservative states have refused to do so , rejecting millions in federal funding .
This study comes as Republican-controlled states and the Trump administration continue their legal assault on Obamacare .
After an appellate court agreed last month with Trump that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now unconstitutional , the Supreme Court is now considering whether to take the case that could determine whether the law — including its Medicaid expansion — survives .
Trump ran on a vague ( but oft-repeated ) promise to replace Obamacare with `` something terrific , '' but has continually avoided actually sharing what that would be over his first three years in office .
Citizens in Oklahoma and Missouri may have the chance later this year to override their GOP-controlled state governments and opt-in to expanded Medicaid by popular vote .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic gubernatorial candidates who ran promising to preserve or improve Medicaid expansion in their states .
Virginia voters also elected Democratic new majorities in both chambers of their legislature after most Republicans voted against expansion .
A National Bureau of Economic Research study last year found that more than 15,000 people have already died because their state governments did not expand Medicaid .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Low-income people in southern states are less likely to see their health decline if they live in a state that opted to expand Medicaid under Obamacare, a new study reveals. Still, 14 states — mostly in the South — have refused to accept the federal funds that provide 90% of the cost of the program, leaving hundreds of thousands without coverage.
The study, conducted by researchers at Vanderbilt and Harvard Universities, was published Monday in the peer-reviewed Health Affairs journal. It examined 15,356 low-income adults who were not elderly in four southern states that opted to expand Medicaid and eight southern states that opted not to, looking at their health status before (2008-13) and after (2015-17) expansion.
Beyond finding that more people in the states that opted for Medicaid expansion had Medicaid coverage (“a differential change of 7.6 percentage points”), the authors determined that “a lower proportion experienced a health status decline (-1.8 percentage points), and a higher proportion maintained their baseline health status (1.4 percentage points).”
Given that most of the people in the study were enrolled at community health centers, the authors noted that the expansion appears to help maintain good health even for those already with access to some safety-net care.
Vanderbilt University’s John Graves, lead researcher on the study, told The Tennessean, “The message is pretty simple. Medicaid is keeping people from the kind of precipitous health decline that could lead to death.”
When Barack Obama signed the landmark 2010 Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, a major provision aimed to reduce the number of uninsured Americans by putting many of them into the Medicaid program. But because Medicaid is partially a federal program and partially a state one, the Supreme Court ruled in 2011 that states could choose whether to opt-in to that expansion or not. So far, 36 states have decided to opt in. But a few conservative states have refused to do so, rejecting millions in federal funding.
This study comes as Republican-controlled states and the Trump administration continue their legal assault on Obamacare. After an appellate court agreed last month with Trump that a key provision of the law is now unconstitutional, the Supreme Court is now considering whether to take the case that could determine whether the law — including its Medicaid expansion — survives. Trump ran on a vague (but oft-repeated) promise to replace Obamacare with “something terrific,” but has continually avoided actually sharing what that would be over his first three years in office.
Citizens in Oklahoma and Missouri may have the chance later this year to override their GOP-controlled state governments and opt-in to expanded Medicaid by popular vote. Last year voters in Kentucky and Louisiana backed Democratic gubernatorial candidates who ran promising to preserve or improve Medicaid expansion in their states. Virginia voters also elected Democratic new majorities in both chambers of their legislature after most Republicans voted against expansion.
A National Bureau of Economic Research study last year found that more than 15,000 people have already died because their state governments did not expand Medicaid.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--Duncan Hunter invokes 9/11 but not his felony in resignation letter

Rep. Duncan Hunter ( R-CA ) sent his letter of resignation to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and California Gov .
Gavin Newsom Tuesday , more than a month after pleading guilty to a felony count of misusing campaign funds .
In his letter , Hunter announced that his resignation will be effective Jan. 13 .
In December , after pleading guilty , Hunter announced that he would resign `` shortly after the holidays . ''
`` Since the day I joined the Marines in the aftermath of 9/11 , I have had the honor of serving my country , both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote in his letter .
He described his tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan , and his subsequent election to the very House seat previously held by his father .
He also mentioned fighting for `` warriors '' like Eddie Gallagher , the Navy SEAL charged with several war crimes and recently pardoned by Donald Trump .
Gallagher was described by his fellow who testified at his trial as an `` evil '' and `` toxic '' man who `` just wants to kill anybody he can . ''
Hunter made no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his letter .
The Republican congressman was accused of illegally spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign cash on a lavish lifestyle for himself and his family : a family vacation to Italy , private school tuition for his children , and even a plane ticket to fly the family 's pet rabbit across the country .
Hunter also allegedly used campaign cash on extramarital affairs with multiple women , including congressional staff members — a violation of House ethics rules .
`` It has been an honor to serve the people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I greatly appreciate the trust they have put in me over these last 11 years , '' said in his letter .
Hunter faces up to five years in prison for his crimes .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) sent his letter of resignation to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and California Gov. Gavin Newsom Tuesday, more than a month after pleading guilty to a felony count of misusing campaign funds. In his letter, Hunter announced that his resignation will be effective Jan. 13.
In December, after pleading guilty, Hunter announced that he would resign “shortly after the holidays.”
“Since the day I joined the Marines in the aftermath of 9/11, I have had the honor of serving my country, both at home and abroad,” he wrote in his letter. He described his tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his subsequent election to the very House seat previously held by his father.
He also mentioned fighting for “warriors” like Eddie Gallagher, the Navy SEAL charged with several war crimes and recently pardoned by Donald Trump. Gallagher was described by his fellow who testified at his trial as an “evil” and “toxic” man who “just wants to kill anybody he can.”
Hunter made no mention of his own criminal activities in his letter.
The Republican congressman was accused of illegally spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign cash on a lavish lifestyle for himself and his family: a family vacation to Italy, private school tuition for his children, and even a plane ticket to fly the family’s pet rabbit across the country.
Hunter also allegedly used campaign cash on extramarital affairs with multiple women, including congressional staff members — a violation of House ethics rules.
“It has been an honor to serve the people of California’s 50th District, and I greatly appreciate the trust they have put in me over these last 11 years,” said in his letter.
Hunter faces up to five years in prison for his crimes.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--Local news mocks GOP senator for hiding from press in his own state

A Denver newscaster called out Republican Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado on Monday for his habit of avoiding the press in his own state .
`` Republican Sen. Cory Gardner emerged from hiding for some impeachment questions , '' Kyle Clark , an anchor with 9 News Denver , said .
Clark characterized Gardner 's brief interaction with the press as a `` rare instance . ''
That instance occurred on Monday , when Gardner took questions before a Senate vote , according to CPR News , who also characterized the event as a `` rare moment . ''
Gardner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton 's willingness to testify in a Senate impeachment trial , but the Colorado senator avoided the question by pivoting to attack House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , saying there will be no trial until the House sends the articles of impeachment to the Senate .
After reporting Gardner 's answer to his audience , Clark took one more swipe at his state 's junior senator , who is up for reelection in November .
`` Obviously , we would prefer to ask elected officials our questions directly , '' Clark said .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our questions .
So we figured that you should probably just hear anytime he makes a rare comment about impeachment . ''
The news program was the second time that day Gardner was called out by the media in his own state for his silence .
Denver residents woke up Monday morning to a front-page Denver Post story criticizing Gardner for avoiding Colorado media .
`` Gardner 's silence dates back months , '' the Post reported .
`` His public appearances , never numerous in 2019 , were rarer still this fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , once a political safe space , along with most news media .
His office agreed to arrange an interview with The Denver Post in Washington , D.C. , during the House impeachment process , but later said he was unavailable and instead emailed a statement criticizing that process . ''
The Post noted that the last time Gardner met with the state-based press in any meaningful way , he `` made national headlines for refusing to say whether it 's inappropriate for an American president to ask a foreign government to investigate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that it is against the law to seek foreign assistance in an election , Gardner refused to answer the question 12 times in one day .
Gardner faces reelection in a state that recently voted for complete Democratic control of the state government , from the governor to both chambers of the state legislature .
Gardner has fully embraced Trump , endorsing Trump 's reelection campaign even though only 37 % of Coloradans have a favorable view of Trump .
Then again , even fewer Colorado residents — just 33 % — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

A Denver newscaster called out Republican Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado on Monday for his habit of avoiding the press in his own state.
“Republican Sen. Cory Gardner emerged from hiding for some impeachment questions,” Kyle Clark, an anchor with 9 News Denver, said. Clark characterized Gardner’s brief interaction with the press as a “rare instance.”
That instance occurred on Monday, when Gardner took questions before a Senate vote, according to CPR News, who also characterized the event as a “rare moment.” Gardner was asked about former Trump official John Bolton’s willingness to testify in a Senate impeachment trial, but the Colorado senator avoided the question by pivoting to attack House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, saying there will be no trial until the House sends the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
After reporting Gardner’s answer to his audience, Clark took one more swipe at his state’s junior senator, who is up for reelection in November.
“Obviously, we would prefer to ask elected officials our questions directly,” Clark said. “But Sen. Gardner does not respond to our questions. So we figured that you should probably just hear anytime he makes a rare comment about impeachment.”
The news program was the second time that day Gardner was called out by the media in his own state for his silence. Denver residents woke up Monday morning to a front-page Denver Post story criticizing Gardner for avoiding Colorado media.
“Gardner’s silence dates back months,” the Post reported. “His public appearances, never numerous in 2019, were rarer still this fall. He has avoided conservative talk radio, once a political safe space, along with most news media. His office agreed to arrange an interview with The Denver Post in Washington, D.C., during the House impeachment process, but later said he was unavailable and instead emailed a statement criticizing that process.”
The Post noted that the last time Gardner met with the state-based press in any meaningful way, he “made national headlines for refusing to say whether it’s inappropriate for an American president to ask a foreign government to investigate a political rival.” Despite the fact that it is against the law to seek foreign assistance in an election, Gardner refused to answer the question 12 times in one day.
Gardner faces reelection in a state that recently voted for complete Democratic control of the state government, from the governor to both chambers of the state legislature. Gardner has fully embraced Trump, endorsing Trump’s reelection campaign even though only 37% of Coloradans have a favorable view of Trump.
Then again, even fewer Colorado residents — just 33% — have a favorable opinion of Gardner.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--Wisconsin GOP becomes 10th state party to rig its primary for Trump

Donald Trump will be the only Republican listed on the GOP primary ballot , the Associated Press reported .
A committee of Democrats and Republicans met on Tuesday to decide who will be on each party 's respective primary ballot .
The Democrats on the committee put forward 14 names , including frontrunners such as former Vice President Joe Biden , Sens .
Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) , and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigeig .
Republicans on the committee only put one name forward : Donald Trump .
Both lists were unanimously approved by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AP .
The decision by the state 's Republican Party means Wisconsin will be the tenth state to fix the primary process to ensure Trump will be the party 's 2020 nominee , joining Alaska , Arizona , Georgia , Hawaii , Kansas , Michigan , Minnesota , Nevada , and South Carolina .
`` So yet another state in America wants to disenfranchise its voters , '' former Rep. Joe Walsh , a Republican from Illinois who is challenging Trump for the nomination , wrote on social media following the announcement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't happen here , '' he added , accusing Republicans in those 10 states of treating Trump like a king .
After the decision , Wisconsin Republican Party Chair Andrew Hitt told reporters that the Walsh campaign , and the campaign of Bill Weld , a former Massachusetts governor also challenging Trump for the nomination , `` did n't do the work '' to get on the ballot , according to the AP .
The Wisconsin Republican Party did not respond to a request for comment .
Republicans in Arizona , Hawaii , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply canceled their nominating contests .
Like Wisconsin , Republicans in Georgia and Minnesota refused to list any other candidates on their primary ballot .
In Michigan , Republicans changed the threshold of votes a candidate would need to receive in order to win delegates .
The contest for the Democratic nominee is wide open , with Iowa holding the first nominating contest on Feb. 3 .
Voters in New Hampshire , Nevada , and South Carolina will also weigh in during February before 16 states and territories hold primaries on March 3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Biden leads in the average of national polls , while Sanders holds a small lead in the average polls in Iowa and New Hampshire .
Biden holds the lead in Nevada and South Carolina .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Donald Trump will be the only Republican listed on the GOP primary ballot, the Associated Press reported.
A committee of Democrats and Republicans met on Tuesday to decide who will be on each party’s respective primary ballot. The Democrats on the committee put forward 14 names, including frontrunners such as former Vice President Joe Biden, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigeig.
Republicans on the committee only put one name forward: Donald Trump. Both lists were unanimously approved by a voice vote, according to the AP.
The decision by the state’s Republican Party means Wisconsin will be the tenth state to fix the primary process to ensure Trump will be the party’s 2020 nominee, joining Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, and South Carolina.
“So yet another state in America wants to disenfranchise its voters,” former Rep. Joe Walsh, a Republican from Illinois who is challenging Trump for the nomination, wrote on social media following the announcement. “This kind of un-American bullshit shouldn’t happen here,” he added, accusing Republicans in those 10 states of treating Trump like a king.
After the decision, Wisconsin Republican Party Chair Andrew Hitt told reporters that the Walsh campaign, and the campaign of Bill Weld, a former Massachusetts governor also challenging Trump for the nomination, “didn’t do the work” to get on the ballot, according to the AP.
The Wisconsin Republican Party did not respond to a request for comment.
Republicans in Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Nevada, and South Carolina simply canceled their nominating contests.
Like Wisconsin, Republicans in Georgia and Minnesota refused to list any other candidates on their primary ballot.
In Michigan, Republicans changed the threshold of votes a candidate would need to receive in order to win delegates.
The contest for the Democratic nominee is wide open, with Iowa holding the first nominating contest on Feb. 3. Voters in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina will also weigh in during February before 16 states and territories hold primaries on March 3, known as “Super Tuesday.”
Biden leads in the average of national polls, while Sanders holds a small lead in the average polls in Iowa and New Hampshire. Biden holds the lead in Nevada and South Carolina.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--Trump begrudgingly says he won't commit war crimes 'if that's the law'

Donald Trump on Tuesday begrudgingly admitted that retaliatory attacks on Iranian cultural sites would be against the law , and that if that 's the case , he wo n't order the military to carry out war crimes .
`` Well as I said yesterday , it was very interesting , they 're allowed to kill our people , they 're allowed to maim our people , they 're allowed to blow up everything that we have and there 's nothing to stop them , '' Trump said in the Oval Office , repeating his rhetoric from the weekend in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by attacking Iranian cultural sites .
`` And we are , according to various laws , supposed to be very careful with their cultural heritage then you know what , if that 's what the law is — I like to obey the law , '' Trump continued .
`` But think of it , they kill our people , they blow up our people , and then we have to be very careful with their cultural institutions ?
But I 'm OK with it . ''
Trump 's comments suggest he is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targeting of cultural sites to preserve history and avoid civilian casualties .
Trump threatened to attack those sites if Iran retaliates against the killing of Gen. Qassem Soleimani .
`` Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans , or American assets , we have targeted 52 Iranian sites ( representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago ) , some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture , and those targets , and Iran itself , WILL BE HIT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump tweeted on Saturday .
However , his hands appear to be tied , after Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on Monday that the military would not carry out an order to attack Iranian cultural sites if Trump ordered them .
`` We will follow the laws of armed conflict , '' Esper said at a news conference on Monday , admitting that attacking cultural sites is indeed a war crime .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Donald Trump on Tuesday begrudgingly admitted that retaliatory attacks on Iranian cultural sites would be against the law, and that if that’s the case, he won’t order the military to carry out war crimes.
“Well as I said yesterday, it was very interesting, they’re allowed to kill our people, they’re allowed to maim our people, they’re allowed to blow up everything that we have and there’s nothing to stop them,” Trump said in the Oval Office, repeating his rhetoric from the weekend in which he threatened to commit war crimes by attacking Iranian cultural sites.
“And we are, according to various laws, supposed to be very careful with their cultural heritage then you know what, if that’s what the law is — I like to obey the law,” Trump continued. “But think of it, they kill our people, they blow up our people, and then we have to be very careful with their cultural institutions? But I’m OK with it.”
Trump’s comments suggest he is frustrated with long-standing international treaties that prohibit targeting of cultural sites to preserve history and avoid civilian casualties. Trump threatened to attack those sites if Iran retaliates against the killing of Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
“Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD,” Trump tweeted on Saturday.
However, his hands appear to be tied, after Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on Monday that the military would not carry out an order to attack Iranian cultural sites if Trump ordered them.
“We will follow the laws of armed conflict,” Esper said at a news conference on Monday, admitting that attacking cultural sites is indeed a war crime.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--Mitch McConnell demands 'bipartisan applause' for Trump on Iran attack

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell complained that Democrats have not offered enough `` applause '' for Donald Trump after he ordered the killing of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani .
Trump has been criticized by Speaker Nancy Pelosi , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , and other Democrats in Congress for going through with the attack without briefing Congress .
Four days after the strike , the Trump administration had still not spoken to congressional leaders .
Despite the delay , McConnell told reporters on Tuesday that Trump was owed `` applause . ''
`` As Joe Lieberman pointed out in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where 's the applause ?
Where is the applause on the other side , for the demise of one of the most heinous killers who ever stalked the earth ? ''
McConnell asked .
`` This guy was the worst of the worst .
Where is the bipartisan applause for eliminating this threat ?
It 's mind-boggling . ''
The opinion column cited by McConnell complained that Democrats had insufficiently praised the attack .
It was written by former Senator Joe Lieberman , who was one of the most prominent supporters of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is estimated that as many as 600,000 people died as a result of the Iraq War , including nearly 5,000 U.S. service members .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell complained that Democrats have not offered enough “applause” for Donald Trump after he ordered the killing of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
Trump has been criticized by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and other Democrats in Congress for going through with the attack without briefing Congress.
Four days after the strike, the Trump administration had still not spoken to congressional leaders. Despite the delay, McConnell told reporters on Tuesday that Trump was owed “applause.”
“As Joe Lieberman pointed out in the Wall Street Journal the other day, where’s the applause? Where is the applause on the other side, for the demise of one of the most heinous killers who ever stalked the earth?” McConnell asked.
“This guy was the worst of the worst. Where is the bipartisan applause for eliminating this threat? It’s mind-boggling.”
The opinion column cited by McConnell complained that Democrats had insufficiently praised the attack. It was written by former Senator Joe Lieberman, who was one of the most prominent supporters of the Iraq War in 2003.
It is estimated that as many as 600,000 people died as a result of the Iraq War, including nearly 5,000 U.S. service members.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--White House comes clean after hiding Trump's meeting with Saudi regime

The White House Correspondents ' Association slammed the Trump administration on Tuesday for seemingly hiding a meeting with a top Saudi Arabian official , and only announcing that the meeting took place after the Saudis tweeted about it on Tuesday morning .
`` Trump met with Saudi Arabia 's vice minister of defense at the White House yesterday , but the public did not learn about the meeting until the Saudi government released a statement about it today , '' WHCA President Jon Karl said in a statement .
`` A meeting with a foreign leader in the Oval Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be on the public schedule with a read-out of the meeting released after it is over , '' he continued , adding , `` It is disturbing to see the government of Saudi Arabia have more transparency than the White House about a meeting with the President in the Oval Office . ''
Khalid bin Salman , the younger brother of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman , tweeted Tuesday morning about the meeting with Trump , including photos of him sitting in the Oval Office next to Trump 's son-in-law , Jared Kushner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crown Prince , I had the pleasure of meeting with @ RealDonaldTrump yesterday to deliver a message from the Crown Prince , and review aspects of our bilateral cooperation , including efforts to confront regional and international challenges , '' he tweeted .
After the Saudis tweeted about the meeting , and the WHCA slammed Trump for not mentioning its existence , Trump finally acknowledged it Tuesday afternoon .
`` Had a very good meeting with @ kbsalsaud of Saudi Arabia , '' Trump tweeted .
`` We discussed Trade , Military , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Middle East ! ''
Trump 's relationship with the Saudis has come under scrutiny , after Trump has been deferential to the oppressive regime , and refused to punish the Saudi government for the intelligence community 's assessment that the crown prince ordered the brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Kashoggi .
Trump has even blocked Congress for trying to stop a massive arms sale to the Saudis , vetoing Congress ' bill .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

The White House Correspondents’ Association slammed the Trump administration on Tuesday for seemingly hiding a meeting with a top Saudi Arabian official, and only announcing that the meeting took place after the Saudis tweeted about it on Tuesday morning.
“Trump met with Saudi Arabia’s vice minister of defense at the White House yesterday, but the public did not learn about the meeting until the Saudi government released a statement about it today,” WHCA President Jon Karl said in a statement.
“A meeting with a foreign leader in the Oval Office should, at the very least, be on the public schedule with a read-out of the meeting released after it is over,” he continued, adding, “It is disturbing to see the government of Saudi Arabia have more transparency than the White House about a meeting with the President in the Oval Office.”
Khalid bin Salman, the younger brother of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, tweeted Tuesday morning about the meeting with Trump, including photos of him sitting in the Oval Office next to Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
“Upon directives from HRH the Crown Prince, I had the pleasure of meeting with @RealDonaldTrump yesterday to deliver a message from the Crown Prince, and review aspects of our bilateral cooperation, including efforts to confront regional and international challenges,” he tweeted.
Upon directives from HRH the Crown Prince, I had the pleasure of meeting with @RealDonaldTrump yesterday to deliver a message from the Crown Prince, and review aspects of our bilateral cooperation, including efforts to confront regional and international challenges. pic.twitter.com/q7uXlgSjx8 — Khalid bin Salman خالد بن سلمان (@kbsalsaud) January 7, 2020
After the Saudis tweeted about the meeting, and the WHCA slammed Trump for not mentioning its existence, Trump finally acknowledged it Tuesday afternoon.
“Had a very good meeting with @kbsalsaud of Saudi Arabia,” Trump tweeted. “We discussed Trade, Military, Oil Prices, Security, and Stability in the Middle East!”
Trump’s relationship with the Saudis has come under scrutiny, after Trump has been deferential to the oppressive regime, and refused to punish the Saudi government for the intelligence community’s assessment that the crown prince ordered the brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Kashoggi.
Trump has even blocked Congress for trying to stop a massive arms sale to the Saudis, vetoing Congress’ bill.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--Nunes is still investigating Ukraine whistleblower despite Trump's impeachment

California Rep. Devin Nunes , the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee , is reportedly involved in an `` active investigation '' of the whistleblower whose complaint triggered the impeachment of Donald Trump .
Fox News reported on Tuesday that Nunes first told conspiracy theorist Sara Carter , a contributor to the network , about the investigation .
According to the conservative outlet , Republicans are `` looking at '' how Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson handled the whistleblower 's complaint and how the allegations — repeatedly corroborated by several Trump administration officials — contributed to the impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House of Representatives in December for abuse of power stemming from his attempts to get Ukraine to investigate his political rivals by withholding military aid from that nation , as well as his obstruction of the investigation into those attempts .
The whistleblower alerted the inspector general to the phone call between Trump and Ukraine 's president that was central to the impeachment .
Numerous witnesses testified under oath on the details of the phone call , and Trump himself released a summary of the phone call that matched up with the whistleblower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his position on the committee to act as Trump 's defender , and during the impeachment hearings he consistently attacked the proceedings rather than address Trump 's actions .
During the course of the impeachment inquiry , records of phone calls between Nunes and Lev Parnas , the indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani who reportedly worked on efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government , were released .
Trump is only the third U.S. president in history to be impeached .
That impeachment can not be reversed , regardless of what Nunes might uncover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of The American Independent Foundation .

California Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, is reportedly involved in an “active investigation” of the whistleblower whose complaint triggered the impeachment of Donald Trump.
Fox News reported on Tuesday that Nunes first told conspiracy theorist Sara Carter, a contributor to the network, about the investigation.
According to the conservative outlet, Republicans are “looking at” how Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson handled the whistleblower’s complaint and how the allegations — repeatedly corroborated by several Trump administration officials — contributed to the impeachment inquiry.
Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives in December for abuse of power stemming from his attempts to get Ukraine to investigate his political rivals by withholding military aid from that nation, as well as his obstruction of the investigation into those attempts. The whistleblower alerted the inspector general to the phone call between Trump and Ukraine’s president that was central to the impeachment.
Numerous witnesses testified under oath on the details of the phone call, and Trump himself released a summary of the phone call that matched up with the whistleblower’s complaint.
Nunes has frequently used his position on the committee to act as Trump’s defender, and during the impeachment hearings he consistently attacked the proceedings rather than address Trump’s actions.
During the course of the impeachment inquiry, records of phone calls between Nunes and Lev Parnas, the indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani who reportedly worked on efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government, were released.
Trump is only the third U.S. president in history to be impeached. That impeachment cannot be reversed, regardless of what Nunes might uncover with his investigation.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-07--US won't let Iran foreign minister into country for UN visit

The U.S. wo n't issue Iran 's foreign minister a visa to travel to the United Nations later this week , contending there was not enough time to process the request .
Mohammed Javad Zarif told `` CBS This Morning '' on Tuesday that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo informed the U.N. secretary general , who in turn relayed the information to Zarif .
Zarif 's trip would have been an opportunity for him to discuss the U.S. killing of a top Iranian general in Baghdad last week .
That targeted killing has escalated tensions with Iran , which has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Tuesday the application could n't be processed in time for Zarif 's travel although it was n't clear if his request had been formally denied .
A formal rejection would trigger legal technicalities that could affect future visa applications and could also violate the host country agreement the U.S. has with the U.N .
The official was n't authorized to speak on the record and discussed the matter on condition of anonymity .
The State Department declined to comment on the matter , citing visa confidentiality laws that bar the release of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Pompeo himself would not discuss specifics of the situation while briefing reporters .
`` We do n't comment on visa matters of those traveling here to the United States on visas , so I ca n't add much more on this issue of Foreign Minister Zarif 's travel to the United States , '' he said .
`` I 'll say only this : We will always comply with our obligations under the U.N. requirements , the headquarters agreement , and we will do so in this particular instance and more broadly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggest that the U.S. believes it remains in compliance with the headquarters agreement as long as the visa was not formally rejected .
At the White House earlier Tuesday , national security adviser Robert O'Brien told `` Fox & Friends , '' `` I do n't think Secretary Pompeo thought that this was the right time for Mr. Zarif to come to the United States . ''
`` This is because they fear someone will go there and tell the truth to the American people , '' Zarif said earlier Tuesday .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not limited to New York .
You can speak with American people from Tehran , too , and we will do that . ''
Zarif had applied for the visa in order to speak to a U.N. Security Council session Thursday about the importance of upholding the U.N. charter .
`` Whenever he comes to New York , he spreads propaganda , '' O'Brien said .
`` I actually find it somewhat ironic that Mr. Zarif wants to take advantage of the diplomatic niceties of being able to come to New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revolution was born in the taking of 52 American diplomats hostage in Iran and holding them for 444 days .
...
He can certainly call in to the meeting or he can participate by video teleconference and his voice will be heard if he wants to be heard . ''
Under its obligations as the host country of the U.N. headquarters , the U.S. is required in most circumstances to issue visas to foreign officials for meetings at the world body .
However , there are exceptions and the U.S. has severely restricted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York in the past .
It has also moved to bar non-U.N.-related travel by other foreign officials , notably the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court .

The U.S. won’t issue Iran’s foreign minister a visa to travel to the United Nations later this week, contending there was not enough time to process the request.
Mohammed Javad Zarif told “CBS This Morning” on Tuesday that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo informed the U.N. secretary general, who in turn relayed the information to Zarif.
Zarif’s trip would have been an opportunity for him to discuss the U.S. killing of a top Iranian general in Baghdad last week. That targeted killing has escalated tensions with Iran, which has vowed to retaliate.
A U.S. official said Tuesday the application couldn’t be processed in time for Zarif’s travel although it wasn’t clear if his request had been formally denied. A formal rejection would trigger legal technicalities that could affect future visa applications and could also violate the host country agreement the U.S. has with the U.N. The official wasn’t authorized to speak on the record and discussed the matter on condition of anonymity.
The State Department declined to comment on the matter, citing visa confidentiality laws that bar the release of such information with certain limited exceptions, and Pompeo himself would not discuss specifics of the situation while briefing reporters.
“We don’t comment on visa matters of those traveling here to the United States on visas, so I can’t add much more on this issue of Foreign Minister Zarif’s travel to the United States,” he said. “I’ll say only this: We will always comply with our obligations under the U.N. requirements, the headquarters agreement, and we will do so in this particular instance and more broadly.”
Pompeo’s remarks appeared to suggest that the U.S. believes it remains in compliance with the headquarters agreement as long as the visa was not formally rejected.
At the White House earlier Tuesday, national security adviser Robert O’Brien told “Fox & Friends,” “I don’t think Secretary Pompeo thought that this was the right time for Mr. Zarif to come to the United States.”
“This is because they fear someone will go there and tell the truth to the American people,” Zarif said earlier Tuesday. “But they are mistaken. The world is not limited to New York. You can speak with American people from Tehran, too, and we will do that.”
Zarif had applied for the visa in order to speak to a U.N. Security Council session Thursday about the importance of upholding the U.N. charter.
“Whenever he comes to New York, he spreads propaganda,” O’Brien said. “I actually find it somewhat ironic that Mr. Zarif wants to take advantage of the diplomatic niceties of being able to come to New York and come to the U.N. when his revolution was born in the taking of 52 American diplomats hostage in Iran and holding them for 444 days. … He can certainly call in to the meeting or he can participate by video teleconference and his voice will be heard if he wants to be heard.”
Under its obligations as the host country of the U.N. headquarters, the U.S. is required in most circumstances to issue visas to foreign officials for meetings at the world body. However, there are exceptions and the U.S. has severely restricted the movements of Iranian diplomats in New York in the past. It has also moved to bar non-U.N.-related travel by other foreign officials, notably the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.


shareblue--2020-01-08--World skeptical Trump will do the right thing on foreign affairs

The world is still skeptical that after nearly three years in office Donald Trump will do the right thing on foreign affairs , according to Pew Research Center polling released Wednesday .
The poll was conducted well before Trump signed off on a U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani last week .
The strike has pushed tensions between America and its longtime Middle Eastern nemesis to high alert and led to Tehran launching ballistic missiles at two Iraqi military bases that house American troops .
Majorities of people in many of the 33 nations surveyed by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the policies that Trump talks about most often , including slapping tariffs on imported goods as a way to gain leverage in trade disputes , withdrawing from international climate change agreements , building a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border , and putting tougher restrictions on immigration to the United States .
Similarly , across the 33 countries , more people disapprove than approve of Trump 's decision to have the United States be the only world power to back out of a nuclear agreement with Iran .
A brighter spot for Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he has had with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un .
That effort garnered the most support , though not a majority in most countries surveyed .
Trump and Kim have held three rounds of talks about denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula , most recently last year at the Demilitarized Zone separating North Korea and South Korea .
Sentiment against Trump is common across Western Europe , where roughly 75 % or more of people in Germany , Sweden , France , Spain , and the Netherlands lack confidence in the U.S. leader .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where 89 % have no confidence in Trump , who has made Mexicans the target of his barbs and anti-immigration policies like the border wall .
But the world is n't entirely against Trump .
Majorities in Israel , the Philippines , Kenya , Nigeria , and India have confidence that Trump will do the right thing on the world stage .
Five leaders were rated in the poll , with Trump receiving the most negative views .
Low shares expressed confidence in Russia 's Vladimir Putin and China 's Xi Jinping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Angela Merkel was the highest among the leaders .
Views of France ’ s Emmanuel Macron were slightly more positive than negative .
Trump , a Republican , treats his relatively low approval on the world stage like a badge of honor .
He told supporters during a December campaign rally in Battle Creek , Michigan , that Germany and France like his predecessor , Barack Obama , a Democrat , more than they like him .
Trump noted that he had taxed imports of French alcoholic beverages to retaliate over a tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies , including some based in the United States .
“ If I ever become more popular that means I 'm not doing my job , ” he said .
The survey of nearly 37,000 people in the 33 countries was conducted from May 18 to Oct. 2 , 2019 , based on telephone and face-to-face interviews .
In an earlier version of the survey , which was released several months after Trump took office in January 2017 , less than 30 % of respondents expressed confidence in Trump 's ability to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @

The world is still skeptical that after nearly three years in office Donald Trump will do the right thing on foreign affairs, according to Pew Research Center polling released Wednesday.
The poll was conducted well before Trump signed off on a U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani last week. The strike has pushed tensions between America and its longtime Middle Eastern nemesis to high alert and led to Tehran launching ballistic missiles at two Iraqi military bases that house American troops.
Majorities of people in many of the 33 nations surveyed by the nonpartisan research center disapprove of a number of the policies that Trump talks about most often, including slapping tariffs on imported goods as a way to gain leverage in trade disputes, withdrawing from international climate change agreements, building a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, and putting tougher restrictions on immigration to the United States.
Similarly, across the 33 countries, more people disapprove than approve of Trump’s decision to have the United States be the only world power to back out of a nuclear agreement with Iran.
A brighter spot for Trump, however, is the direct negotiations he has had with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. That effort garnered the most support, though not a majority in most countries surveyed.
Trump and Kim have held three rounds of talks about denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula, most recently last year at the Demilitarized Zone separating North Korea and South Korea.
Sentiment against Trump is common across Western Europe, where roughly 75% or more of people in Germany, Sweden, France, Spain, and the Netherlands lack confidence in the U.S. leader.
That feeling runs even deeper in Mexico, where 89% have no confidence in Trump, who has made Mexicans the target of his barbs and anti-immigration policies like the border wall.
But the world isn’t entirely against Trump.
Majorities in Israel, the Philippines, Kenya, Nigeria, and India have confidence that Trump will do the right thing on the world stage.
Five leaders were rated in the poll, with Trump receiving the most negative views. Low shares expressed confidence in Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping as well.
Confidence in Germany’s Angela Merkel was the highest among the leaders. Views of France’s Emmanuel Macron were slightly more positive than negative.
Trump, a Republican, treats his relatively low approval on the world stage like a badge of honor. He told supporters during a December campaign rally in Battle Creek, Michigan, that Germany and France like his predecessor, Barack Obama, a Democrat, more than they like him.
Trump noted that he had taxed imports of French alcoholic beverages to retaliate over a tax that France has imposed on major tech companies, including some based in the United States.
“If I ever become more popular that means I’m not doing my job,” he said.
The survey of nearly 37,000 people in the 33 countries was conducted from May 18 to Oct. 2, 2019, based on telephone and face-to-face interviews.
In an earlier version of the survey, which was released several months after Trump took office in January 2017, less than 30% of respondents expressed confidence in Trump’s ability to do the right thing on international affairs.