rawstory--2020-10-16--White House official Jared Kushner brings on campaign aide to ‘offer strategic advice’: report

Presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner is a White House official , but guided a campaign hiring decision , according to a @ @ @ @ @ “ In recent days , Jared Kushner has brought back 2016 Republican National Committee chief @ @ @ @ @ to offer strategic advice to the Trump campaign , ” Axios reported , citing “ @ @ @ @ @ a senior campaign official briefed on the move.
” “ A senior administration official said @ @ @ @ @ conjunction with RNC chair Ronna Romney McDaniel , ” Axios reported .
“ Several campaign @ @ @ @ @ they believe this coordination between the campaign and the RNC has not worked well in @ @ @ @ @ Brad Parscale ’ s demotion as campaign manager .
”

Trained in political science and the law, he has no formal education in disaster preparedness or response. And prior to his current role, he never held a full-time job dedicated to emergency management.
Instead, his main qualification was being chief of staff to then-mayor Alan Arakawa. But in that role, he told Civil Beat Tuesday, he assisted during emergency operations. And he said he participated in online FEMA trainings and workshops throughout the years.
In 2017, Andaya beat out 40 other applicants for the job, Maui Now reported at the time.
As the mayor’s administration was coming to a close, a panel of government officials – which said it was independent of the mayor – chose Andaya for the civil service role.
Civil Beat reviewed Andaya’s experience after historic Lahaina was swallowed by an inferno last week, killing scores of residents and visitors who never saw it coming.
The Maui Emergency Management Agency had the authority to issue siren warnings that might have alerted people. After Andaya’s agency decided not to sound them, many survivors reported they only became aware of the fire when they saw and smelled smoke.
Andaya said sounding the sirens wasn’t an option officials considered because they’re “mainly used for tsunamis.” That’s why they’re mostly located on the coast, he said.
But the state’s own website says the sirens are useful for many kinds of emergencies.
“The all-hazard siren system can be used for a variety of both natural and human-caused events; including tsunamis, hurricanes, dam breaches, flooding, wildfires, volcanic eruptions, terrorist threats, hazardous material incidents, and more,” the site states.
Andaya wasn’t on the island when the fires started, and he hasn’t made any appearances at press conferences since the disaster occurred.
Asked about Andaya’s resume, David Hafner, a retired telecommunications planner for the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, questioned whether his relative inexperience affected his agency’s performance in a crisis.
“It’s a good ol’ boy network,” Hafner said. “This time it cost lives.”
Hafner said it’s “absolutely essential” for emergency management leaders to have experience in the field so they make the right decisions both before and after disasters strike.
Not having it, he said, “can lead to grave mistakes in judgment.”
Andaya’s hiring came at a time when Hawaii’s counties had just taken on increased responsibility for disaster response, according to Hafner. State emergency management officials used to be the designated authority to respond to emergencies, he said, but an update to the law in 2014 put the counties in the driver’s seat.
Asked about Andaya’s LinkedIn resume, Colin Moore, a political scientist at the University of Hawaii, said he was shocked by the emergency administrator’s lack of relevant experience. He said the public is owed an explanation.
“It’s a legitimate question to ask why the person leading the county emergency services agency has no clear background in fire, police, public health, the usual emergency services backgrounds,” he said.
“Having that on-the-ground experience, you develop the instincts and the connections to be able to perform a job like this. And if you just have general government experience, there is just no opportunity to have that kind of on-the-ground knowledge that often is really useful in a crisis.”
Andaya said as a former member of the mayor’s cabinet, he was qualified for the job.
“Whenever there was an activation in the emergency operations center, we were involved,” he said. “To say that I have no experience or no background in emergency management is not correct.”
‘Political Influence’ A Concern
Andaya, 52, is from Maui and graduated from HP Baldwin High School.
He has bachelor’s and master’s degrees in political science from the University of Hawaii Manoa. He also has a law degree from the UH Richardson School of Law, although he never became a licensed attorney, according to the Hawaii State Bar Association’s online database.
He began his career clerking for Maui Judge Artemio Baxa. He then worked for the law office of Lynn Araki-Regan, an attorney who is the wife of Arakawa’s managing director, Keith Regan.
When Andaya vacated his position as chief of staff, it was filled by Araki-Regan, who was by then the county budget director. Regan said he had no involvement in Andaya’s hiring.
From the early 2000s onward, Andaya has held leadership positions in Maui’s Department of Housing and Human Concerns and worked as the assistant to the chancellor of UH’s Maui College, according to his LinkedIn resume. He is married to Rowena Dagdag-Andaya, a former elementary school teacher who served as Maui’s public works director and now works in Maui’s Office on Aging.
Andaya was Arakawa’s chief of staff from 2011 through 2017. That year, the mayor appointed him acting administrator of MEMA, and he became permanent by the end of that year.
In contrast, Honolulu’s emergency management director, Hiro Toiya, has technical training in emergency response, worked for years as a preparedness planner for the Hawaii health department and rose up the ranks of Honolulu’s Department of Emergency Management. He worked there for more than seven years before becoming the director.
Asked how he stood out among a pool of 40 job candidates, Andaya said Maui doesn’t have a lot of emergency management professionals to begin with. He noted that he had to take an exam and based on his score was determined to be a finalist.
“You would have to question the civil service process if you can believe that politics was involved,” he said. “This is something that my predecessors have to go through as well.”
Before Andaya was hired, there were concerns in Maui’s political scene that the county was considering someone who wasn’t qualified.
“In the past, this position has sometimes been filled by individuals without the proper emergency response background.”
Former Maui County Council Chairman Mike White
In July 2017, the chair of the Maui County Council at the time, Mike White, took the unusual step of writing a Maui News column warning that the job of emergency management was too important to be “subject to political influence.”
“In the past, this position has sometimes been filled by individuals without the proper emergency response background,” White wrote.
“The administration must search for well-qualified candidates who can make a seamless transition in leading our Emergency Management Agency. The stakes are too high and our community has grown to a point where emergency coordination has become quite sophisticated in its implementation.”
In his column, White praised the outgoing emergency management chief, Anna Foust, who had previously worked for years leading the Maui branch of the Red Cross. White emphasized her expertise.
“During her tenure, she used her emergency response experience and training to help guide the county to keep citizens safe during hurricane warnings and watches, flooding events and tsunami warnings,” White wrote.
Civil Beat wasn’t able to reach White for comment.
Panel Of Specialists Chose Andaya
On Tuesday, Arakawa’s former managing director, Keith Regan, said that politics was not a factor in Andaya’s hiring. Asked why Andaya was the best candidate, Regan said he didn’t know because he wasn’t on the hiring committee. But he was adamant there was “zero” political influence in the process.
“This was a straightforward civil service process,” said Regan, who is now the state comptroller.
When Regan ran for Maui County Council in 2015, Andaya was his campaign manager. This year, Andaya wrote a letter of support of Regan’s nomination to state comptroller.
Regan noted that the hiring panel included numerous experts in the field. Maui Now identified them at the time as then-Maui Police Chief Tivoli Faaumu; then-Maui Fire Chief Jeff Murray; Elton Ushio, administrator of the Kauai Emergency Management Agency; and Vern Miyagi, then-administrator of the Hawaii State Emergency Management Agency.
At the time, Ushio was quoted by Maui Now as saying Andaya’s “proven leadership abilities, executive level experience, and impressive knowledge of emergency management” made him a great fit for the job. Murray cited Andaya’s familiarity with government processes, his “institutional knowledge of the various emergency incidents” in recent years, and his then-recent work as acting leader of the department.
“These are not people that, you know, are just political people,” Regan said. “They’re people who understand emergency management and are going to make the right choice for the community.”
In a statement, former HI-EMA director Miyagi said the public’s focus should be on working together on response and recovery.
“Herman Andaya and his staff at MEMA are really good people,” he said. “They carried Maui successfully through numerous hurricanes, floods, and other disasters.”
He said the public should wait for the attorney general’s investigation before drawing conclusions.
Civil Beat left messages with the other hiring committee members on Tuesday, but they were not returned. Former mayor Arakawa also did not respond to a request for comment.
“Herman is a very skilled, experienced, knowledgeable, professional individual,” Regan said. “I trust that is making the right decisions … There is no question in my mind that he cares about that community, and he’s going to do everything he can to keep that community safe.”


rawstory--2020-10-17--Senators failed to ask Amy Coney Barrett some important questions

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers .
Not a subscriber ?
Try us and go ad-free for $ 1 .
Prefer to give a one-time tip ?
Click here .
After three days of Kabuki theater , a television mini-series produced by the Senate Judiciary Committee , did you learn anything Judge Amy Coney Barrett that she didn ’ t want you to know ?
Really , it ’ s not hard to frame questions that produce informative answers , including when the response is a dodge .
Let me show you , starting here : Judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to follow the law as written .
Can you please cite examples of where the law required you to render a decision contrary to your personal beliefs ?
Notice how that is framed .
Barrett can ’ t swat it away , as she did so many questions as hypotheticals .
It asked her to speak about the decisions she already rendered .
As a relatively new judge , appointed by Donald Trump to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals three years ago , Barrett has not written all that many opinions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she has yet to encounter that issue here ’ s the follow up : Judge Barrett , have you given thought to how you would deal with that conflict , especially an irresolvable conflict , between your most deeply held beliefs and the law ?
Again , notice the framing .
The question is not what you thought but have you thought about a conflict between personal beliefs and the law .
Were the nominee to say that she had not pondered this—which would be preposterous — then the line of inquiry shifts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the law .
If she says she has indeed thought about it the question to ask is , “ What did you conclude , if anything ?
” Judge Barrett , have you talked in your Notre Dame law classes and other forums about resolving conflicts between personal beliefs and Supreme Court rulings your students must work under with when they become lawyers and jurists ?
That ’ s a question Barrett might try to slough off with the “ I don ’ t recall ” diversion .
To deal with that ask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , let ’ s assume I ’ m not a senator , but the most serious student in your class and that I hope to become a trial court judge or , like you , an appellate court judge .
So , what do I do , professor , when confronted with a wide chasm , or worse a complete contradiction , between the law as decided by our Supreme Court and my beliefs ?
Following Your Own Advice ?
The goal here is to get her to talk about how she analyzes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And if she gives her advice the obvious follow up is short and sweet : Would you , Judge Barrett , always take your own advice ?
How that question is answered — candidly , philosophically , or evasively — would give senators and the public insight into what is going on behind the smiling mask that Barrett , like all judicial nominees , wears during such hearings .
I could go on with more questions like this but the point I want to make here is that nothing like this emerged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is supposed to be the most exclusive deliberative body in the world , the American Senate .
Their questions indicate our senators don ’ t respect that .
That so many bad questions were asked was unsurprising , but also shocking given that most Judiciary committee members are lawyers .
Chuck Grassley of Iowa , a subsidy grabbing Republican , is the Senate ’ s only pig farmer .
The rest of them ought to know how to ask useful questions .
Judiciary Committee members in both parties should ask questions that probe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direct questions stripped of rhetorical filagree .
Their questions should force nominees to instantly choose between dissembling , looking idiotic to other lawyers or telling the truth .
We would be wise to castigate every member of that committee , in person if you attend a political or social event , for making novice lawyers on their first day in a courtroom look good .
There ’ s one other question I would have asked .
It ’ s based on my own life experience as the father of eight now grown children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deliveries sometimes must make an awful choice between saving the life of the mother or the child .
How would you weigh that choice ?
Again , the framing is how to make a choice , not what choice .
Concise follow-ups would note that each year about 700 American women die in childbirth .
So do about 21,000 of roughly 3.8 million infants .
Judge Barrett , are laws that restrict the freedom of choices that doctors , the mother , or if incapacitated her spouse , make during troubled labor a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state ?
If the doctors conclude that someone will die why should the crude axe of state police power be applied at all ?
If there is any role at all for exercising the state ’ s police power in these tragic situations please articulate it .
Whatever her answer , smart follow up questions should focus on freedom , including the freedom to decide who will die .
Framing questions in terms of liberty versus policing powers would be illuminating about the nominee ’ s thoughts .
Judge Barrett , have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awry you would sacrifice your own life to save that of your youngest child , leaving your other children sitting behind you motherless , or whether to live so that your children would grow up under your care with one less sibling ?
If that sounds cruel let me note Barrett chose to use her children as props .
She could have had them stay home playing with dolls and footballs .
Again , notice that the frame is not what would you decide , but have you thought about this .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physician and parents must decide , preferably in advance , but all too often in the unexpected moment .
Here ’ s a recommendation to make all Congressional hearings less Kabuki theater and more a service to us , the people who own our government .
Every member of Congress , in both parties plus independents , should not ask another question until they have sat through a class , including role-play exercises , on how to frame questions .
Congress already has the perfect expert to teach this — Rep. Katie Porter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmaker , a former University of California Irvine law professor , frames only smart questions during House Financial Services hearings .
No matter how witnesses reply , Porter is ready to follow so that we the people learn about the integrity of each witness or lack thereof .
Porter questions are free of flourish .
Porter never preens .
Instead , her five-minute examinations are packed tightly .
Whether in interrogations designed to embarrass a mandarin like Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank or subtle sideways approaches that sneak up on the witness like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hunter in the original Jurassic Park film , she gets revealing responses .
Smart woman .
Would that our senators were half as smart in asking questions .
This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers .
Not a subscriber ?
Try us and go ad-free for $ 1 .
Prefer to give a one-time tip ?
Click here .

David Cay Johnston, DC Report @ Raw Story

After three days of Kabuki theater, a television mini-series produced by the Senate Judiciary Committee, did you learn anything Judge Amy Coney Barrett that she didn’t want you to know?
Really, it’s not hard to frame questions that produce informative answers, including when the response is a dodge. Let me show you, starting here:
Judge Barrett, you testified your judicial philosophy is to follow the law as written. Can you please cite examples of where the law required you to render a decision contrary to your personal beliefs?
Notice how that is framed. Barrett can’t swat it away, as she did so many questions as hypotheticals. It asked her to speak about the decisions she already rendered.
Judge Barrett, have you contemplated whether in a childbirth gone awry you would sacrifice your own life to save that of your youngest child, leaving your other children sitting behind you motherless, or whether to live so that your children would grow up under your care with one less sibling?
As a relatively new judge, appointed by Donald Trump to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals three years ago, Barrett has not written all that many opinions. Were the judge to respond that she has yet to encounter that issue here’s the follow up:
Judge Barrett, have you given thought to how you would deal with that conflict, especially an irresolvable conflict, between your most deeply held beliefs and the law?
Framing Matters
Again, notice the framing. The question is not what you thought but have you thought about a conflict between personal beliefs and the law.
Were the nominee to say that she had not pondered this—which would be preposterous -- then the line of inquiry shifts to how deeply she has thought about the law. If she says she has indeed thought about it the question to ask is, “What did you conclude, if anything?”
Next question:
Judge Barrett, have you talked in your Notre Dame law classes and other forums about resolving conflicts between personal beliefs and Supreme Court rulings your students must work under with when they become lawyers and jurists?
That’s a question Barrett might try to slough off with the “I don’t recall” diversion. To deal with that ask this:
Well then, Judge Barrett, let’s assume I’m not a senator, but the most serious student in your class and that I hope to become a trial court judge or, like you, an appellate court judge. So, what do I do, professor, when confronted with a wide chasm, or worse a complete contradiction, between the law as decided by our Supreme Court and my beliefs?
Following Your Own Advice?
The goal here is to get her to talk about how she analyzes such conflicts as well as her advice. And if she gives her advice the obvious follow up is short and sweet:
Would you, Judge Barrett, always take your own advice?
How that question is answered -- candidly, philosophically, or evasively -- would give senators and the public insight into what is going on behind the smiling mask that Barrett, like all judicial nominees, wears during such hearings.
I could go on with more questions like this but the point I want to make here is that nothing like this emerged from three days of hearings in what is supposed to be the most exclusive deliberative body in the world, the American Senate. Their questions indicate our senators don’t respect that.
That so many bad questions were asked was unsurprising, but also shocking given that most Judiciary committee members are lawyers. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, a subsidy grabbing Republican, is the Senate’s only pig farmer. The rest of them ought to know how to ask useful questions.
Judiciary Committee members in both parties should ask questions that probe the souls of nominees -- simple, direct questions stripped of rhetorical filagree. Their questions should force nominees to instantly choose between dissembling, looking idiotic to other lawyers or telling the truth.
We would be wise to castigate every member of that committee, in person if you attend a political or social event, for making novice lawyers on their first day in a courtroom look good.
There’s one other question I would have asked. It’s based on my own life experience as the father of eight now grown children:
Awful Choices
Judge Barrett, obstetricians in troubled deliveries sometimes must make an awful choice between saving the life of the mother or the child. How would you weigh that choice?
Again, the framing is how to make a choice, not what choice.
Concise follow-ups would note that each year about 700 American women die in childbirth. So do about 21,000 of roughly 3.8 million infants.
More questions:
Judge Barrett, are laws that restrict the freedom of choices that doctors, the mother, or if incapacitated her spouse, make during troubled labor a proper exercise of the police powers of the state?
If the doctors conclude that someone will die why should the crude axe of state police power be applied at all?
If there is any role at all for exercising the state’s police power in these tragic situations please articulate it.
Whatever her answer, smart follow up questions should focus on freedom, including the freedom to decide who will die. Framing questions in terms of liberty versus policing powers would be illuminating about the nominee’s thoughts.
Another follow up:
Judge Barrett, have you contemplated whether in a childbirth gone awry you would sacrifice your own life to save that of your youngest child, leaving your other children sitting behind you motherless, or whether to live so that your children would grow up under your care with one less sibling?
If that sounds cruel let me note Barrett chose to use her children as props. She could have had them stay home playing with dolls and footballs.
Again, notice that the frame is not what would you decide, but have you thought about this. And trust me these are real-world questions that physician and parents must decide, preferably in advance, but all too often in the unexpected moment.
Asking Better Questions Lessons
Here’s a recommendation to make all Congressional hearings less Kabuki theater and more a service to us, the people who own our government.
Every member of Congress, in both parties plus independents, should not ask another question until they have sat through a class, including role-play exercises, on how to frame questions.
Congress already has the perfect expert to teach this -- Rep. Katie Porter, Democrat of California.
The freshman lawmaker, a former University of California Irvine law professor, frames only smart questions during House Financial Services hearings. No matter how witnesses reply, Porter is ready to follow so that we the people learn about the integrity of each witness or lack thereof.
Porter questions are free of flourish. Porter never preens. Instead, her five-minute examinations are packed tightly. Whether in interrogations designed to embarrass a mandarin like Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank or subtle sideways approaches that sneak up on the witness like the velociraptor who surprises the big game hunter in the original Jurassic Park film, she gets revealing responses.
Smart woman. Would that our senators were half as smart in asking questions.


rawstory--2020-10-17--‘Drunk all the time’: Michael Cohen explains how ‘Russians used’ Rudy Giuliani

President Donald Trump ’ s former fixer and personal attorney Michael Cohen is sounding off about the latest scandal surrounding the president ’ s current lawyer Rudy Giuliani .
During an appearance on MSNBC ’ s “ The Beat ” with host Ari Melber , Cohen weighed in on recent reports about the White House being warned last year that the Russian government could be attempting to manipulate Giuliani with disinformation about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden .
That intelligence came amid questionable reports about alleged emails found on Hunter Biden ’ s laptop .
The laptop , obtained by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contained emails between Hunter Biden and foreign officials .
Melber quickly dived in to discuss the subject , at hand .
He asked if Cohen though Giuliani was being used by Russian officials .
“ I want to start as promised with Giuliani and we can then widen out , ” Melber said at the beginning of his discussion with Cohen .
“ Do you think Rudy Giuliani is being used as a tool and hack of the Russians , whether or not it passes a legal line and do you think that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Cohen admitted that he does believe Giuliani is being used and that he was likely an easy target for the Russians .
“ Of course it ’ s wrong and the answer is yes , ” Cohen replied .
“ Rudy is being played by the Russians .
He ’ s 100 percent susceptible to being used by Russians because… the disinformation , he runs right back to President Trump like a child running to a parent : ‘ Look what I have .
Look what I have.
’ Let ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s office when Roger Stone contacted Mr. Trump at the time to tell him about the emails that were going to be dropped ultimately learning several days later they were the [ John ] Podesta emails.
” Cohen went on to explain why Giuliani is likely one of the worst foot soldiers Trump could use for the discovery opposition research on Biden and his family .
“ Trump speaks and behaves like the mob boss and this is what he ’ s doing , ” Cohen added .
“ He ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here is that Rudy isn ’ t a soldier .
Rudy is — Rudy is drunk all the time , which is a big problem and that ’ s what makes him susceptible because his faculties are gone .
He behaves crazy.
” The remarks quickly garnered a reaction from Melber who , in turn , asked for clarity on whether or not he had personally seen Giuliani drink .
“ As a journalist , I ’ m asking : Are you sharing an opinion or observation like you ’ ve seen him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Cohen wasted no time clarifying that he has witnessed Giuliani drink excessive amounts of alcohol .
“ No , no , I ’ ve seen him drink to the point like he ’ s a high school drunk , ” Cohen claimed .
“ And it makes him susceptible .
He takes the information that he gets and provides it to the president and simply because Rudy — who used to be considered , you know , I mean , a real litigator and he was considered to be America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just a joke .
And he takes it right back to Trump and Trump listens to it .
”

President Donald Trump's former fixer and personal attorney Michael Cohen is sounding off about the latest scandal surrounding the president's current lawyer Rudy Giuliani.
During an appearance on MSNBC's "The Beat" with host Ari Melber, Cohen weighed in on recent reports about the White House being warned last year that the Russian government could be attempting to manipulate Giuliani with disinformation about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
That intelligence came amid questionable reports about alleged emails found on Hunter Biden's laptop. The laptop, obtained by Giuliani from a dubious source, reportedly contained emails between Hunter Biden and foreign officials. Melber quickly dived in to discuss the subject, at hand. He asked if Cohen thought Giuliani was being used by Russian officials.
"I want to start as promised with Giuliani and we can then widen out," Melber said at the beginning of his discussion with Cohen. "Do you think Rudy Giuliani is being used as a tool and hack of the Russians, whether or not it passes a legal line and do you think that's wrong?"
Without hesitation, Cohen admitted that he does believe Giuliani is being used and that he was likely an easy target for the Russians.
"Of course it's wrong and the answer is yes," Cohen replied. "Rudy is being played by the Russians. He's 100 percent susceptible to being used by Russians because… the disinformation, he runs right back to President Trump like a child running to a parent: 'Look what I have. Look what I have.' Let's not forget, I was in Trump's office when Roger Stone contacted Mr. Trump at the time to tell him about the emails that were going to be dropped ultimately learning several days later they were the [John] Podesta emails."
Cohen went on to explain why Giuliani is likely one of the worst foot soldiers Trump could use for the discovery opposition research on Biden and his family.
"Trump speaks and behaves like the mob boss and this is what he's doing," Cohen added. "He's using his soldier, but the problem here is that Rudy isn't a soldier. Rudy is — Rudy is drunk all the time, which is a big problem and that's what makes him susceptible because his faculties are gone. He behaves crazy."
The remarks quickly garnered a reaction from Melber who, in turn, asked for clarity on whether or not he had personally seen Giuliani drink.
"As a journalist, I'm asking: Are you sharing an opinion or observation like you've seen him drink X amount?" Melber asked.
Cohen wasted no time clarifying that he has witnessed Giuliani drink excessive amounts of alcohol.
"No, no, I've seen him drink to the point like he's a high school drunk," Cohen claimed. "And it makes him susceptible. He takes the information that he gets and provides it to the president and simply because Rudy — who used to be considered, you know, I mean, a real litigator and he was considered to be America's Mayor — he's now really just a joke. And he takes it right back to Trump and Trump listens to it."


rawstory--2020-10-17--Trump’s reign of corruption has left the federal government in ruins

Who remembers Tom Price ?
Gee , you might say , that name sounds familiar … he had something to do with the Trump administration , didn ’ t he ?
This article first appeared in Salon .
You ’ re right !
He was one of those guys who resigned from a cabinet position because he was abusing something … let me see … think I ’ ve got it … he was the one who took all those flights on private jets , something like a million dollars worth of flights , including on military aircraft during trips @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He refunded $ 51,887 to the federal government , which he said accounted for the cost of his seat on private charter flights he took before he resigned from Trump ’ s cabinet .
But that was just the cost of his seat .
The total amount spent to fly old Tom Price around the world on private jets was more than $ 400,000 in taxpayer dollars .
What cabinet position did he hold that made it necessary for so many trips on chartered private jets and other business aircraft ?
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he was flying back and forth to Europe and Africa and making trips to Aspen and Salt Lake City and Nashville , and basically jetting all over the place on the taxpayers ’ dime and staying in first-class hotels and eating out at expensive restaurants and taking his wife along with him a lot of the time ?
Oh , I remember !
He was the secretary of Health and Human Services .
He was the dude who resigned after only 231 days in office , the shortest term ever served by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a right-wing congressman from Georgia who during his term in the House voted multiple times to repeal the Affordable Care Act , supported a Republican plan to privatize Medicare , voted to defund Planned Parenthood and sponsored the “ Right to Life Act , ” which would have defined life as beginning at conception and banned all abortions and many forms of contraception .
Busy , busy man , old Tom , with all those flights around the world and fighting to repeal Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood and banning abortion .
Took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In fact , it took up the time he could have spent studying the plan to contain pandemics which was left for him at the Department of Health and Human Services by the Obama administration .
But old Tom Price didn ’ t study that plan , did he ?
No , he shelved the Obama pandemic plan , where it stayed as his successor , Alex Azar , was appointed .
So it was Azar who was running HHS when COVID hit in February of this year , and it was Azar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shelf and was first put in charge of the pandemic task force at the White House , until Vice President Pence took over that job .
It was Azar who appointed Brian Harrison , a 37-year-old former labradoodle breeder with zero education and zero background in public health as the department ’ s top man in charge of organizing the HHS response to the COVID crisis .
Now he has overseen the appointment of two more nonentities with no background in public health or epidemiology to keep Centers for Disease Control and Prevention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and to control messaging on the coronavirus pandemic coming out of the department .
Oh , I almost forgot : Azar also supports ending the Affordable Care Act and defunding Planned Parenthood and banning abortion and every other whacked-out right wing idea that ever came down the pike .
Are you beginning to get the picture here ?
Health and Human Services is just one Trump cabinet department that has been led by not one , but two half-wit hacks and undercut by the White House from Day One .
Both HHS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weakened under the control of the Trump White House while some 220,000 Americans have lost their lives and 8 million more have been infected by the COVID virus .
Trump ’ s ravaging of the rest of the government has followed the same script .
Remember Scott Pruitt , Trump ’ s first administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency ?
He lasted just about a year before he resigned under the cloud of investigations by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel , the Government Accountability Office , the EPA inspector general and 11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pruitt was another Trumpazoid incompetent who flew around on chartered jets and used EPA employees to reserve tables for dinner at exclusive Washington restaurants .
He set the EPA on a course to undo nearly every Obama administration environmental accomplishment .
He fired all the scientists on the Board of Scientific Counselors and replaced them with representatives of industries regulated by the EPA .
When he left the agency in disgrace , Pruitt was replaced by his deputy , Andrew Wheeler , a former coal industry lobbyist , who proceeded apace to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his predecessor .
Wheeler has weakened regulations on coal fired electrical plants and declined to raise standards for “ fine soot pollution ” under a mandated review .
In the midst of the COVID pandemic , Wheeler ’ s EPA announced that it would not enforce regulations for “ routine compliance monitoring [ of pollution ] , integrity testing , sampling , laboratory analysis , training and reporting or certification obligations.
” In other words , polluting industries , here ’ s your get-out-of-jail-free COVID card , courtesy of your friendly EPA .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ rest of the federal government is equally astonishing .
He ’ s gone through cabinet secretaries like they were an order of Big Macs .
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson ?
Gone early on , replaced by Mike Pompeo .
Attorney General Jeff Sessions ?
Out the door in disgrace .
In his place , the odious Bill Barr ( after a brief appearance by the totally incompetent Matt Whitaker ) .
Secretary of Energy Rick Perry ?
Bye-bye in a blink .
Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta ?
Resigned in disgrace for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with famed pedophile and presidential friend Jeffrey Epstein .
Secretary of Defense James Mattis ?
Resigned in protest against Trump ’ s haphazard misuse of U.S. military forces .
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke ?
Resigned rather than face federal investigation for using his office for personal gain .
Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats ?
Ousted in a Trumpian power play to politicize the intelligence community .
Trump has proceeded to appoint acting secretaries to replace expired acting secretaries .
Recently , one of his attempts to get around the rules hit a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ordered the removal of the acting director of the Bureau of Land Management , William Perry Pendley , who he found had been serving illegally for 400 days without Senate confirmation .
Pendley has been an advocate of selling federal lands to the states or private citizens .
There is more , much , much more , but you get the picture .
The damage Trump will be leaving to Joe Biden is incalculable .
The death toll caused by his mismanagement of the COVID crisis and the numbers of infections increase by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only good thing about a hollowed-out federal government will be the thousands of appointments Biden will be able to make upon taking office , and the dozens of executive orders he ’ ll be able to sign reversing Trump ’ s giveaways to polluters , drug companies and corrupt corporations .
All we ’ ve got to do is get out and vote to make that happen .

Who remembers Tom Price? Gee, you might say, that name sounds familiar … he had something to do with the Trump administration, didn't he?
This article first appeared in Salon.
You're right! He was one of those guys who resigned from a cabinet position because he was abusing something … let me see … think I've got it … he was the one who took all those flights on private jets, something like a million dollars worth of flights, including on military aircraft during trips to Europe and Africa with his wife. He refunded $51,887 to the federal government, which he said accounted for the cost of his seat on private charter flights he took before he resigned from Trump's cabinet. But that was just the cost of his seat. The total amount spent to fly old Tom Price around the world on private jets was more than $400,000 in taxpayer dollars.
What cabinet position did he hold that made it necessary for so many trips on chartered private jets and other business aircraft? What was he doing that was so important that he was flying back and forth to Europe and Africa and making trips to Aspen and Salt Lake City and Nashville, and basically jetting all over the place on the taxpayers' dime and staying in first-class hotels and eating out at expensive restaurants and taking his wife along with him a lot of the time? Oh, I remember! He was the secretary of Health and Human Services. He was the dude who resigned after only 231 days in office, the shortest term ever served by an HHS secretary. Price had been a right-wing congressman from Georgia who during his term in the House voted multiple times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, supported a Republican plan to privatize Medicare, voted to defund Planned Parenthood and sponsored the "Right to Life Act," which would have defined life as beginning at conception and banned all abortions and many forms of contraception.
Busy, busy man, old Tom, with all those flights around the world and fighting to repeal Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood and banning abortion. Took up a lot of his time. In fact, it took up the time he could have spent studying the plan to contain pandemics which was left for him at the Department of Health and Human Services by the Obama administration. But old Tom Price didn't study that plan, did he? No, he shelved the Obama pandemic plan, where it stayed as his successor, Alex Azar, was appointed. So it was Azar who was running HHS when COVID hit in February of this year, and it was Azar who left the pandemic plan on the shelf and was first put in charge of the pandemic task force at the White House, until Vice President Pence took over that job. It was Azar who appointed Brian Harrison, a 37-year-old former labradoodle breeder with zero education and zero background in public health as the department's top man in charge of organizing the HHS response to the COVID crisis. Now he has overseen the appointment of two more nonentities with no background in public health or epidemiology to keep Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Robert Redfield "in line," and to control messaging on the coronavirus pandemic coming out of the department. Oh, I almost forgot: Azar also supports ending the Affordable Care Act and defunding Planned Parenthood and banning abortion and every other whacked-out right wing idea that ever came down the pike.
Are you beginning to get the picture here? Health and Human Services is just one Trump cabinet department that has been led by not one, but two half-wit hacks and undercut by the White House from Day One. Both HHS and CDC have been hollowed out and weakened under the control of the Trump White House while some 220,000 Americans have lost their lives and 8 million more have been infected by the COVID virus.
Trump's ravaging of the rest of the government has followed the same script. Remember Scott Pruitt, Trump's first administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency? He lasted just about a year before he resigned under the cloud of investigations by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, the Government Accountability Office, the EPA inspector general and 11 other federal agencies and congressional committees. Pruitt was another Trumpazoid incompetent who flew around on chartered jets and used EPA employees to reserve tables for dinner at exclusive Washington restaurants. He set the EPA on a course to undo nearly every Obama administration environmental accomplishment. He fired all the scientists on the Board of Scientific Counselors and replaced them with representatives of industries regulated by the EPA.
When he left the agency in disgrace, Pruitt was replaced by his deputy, Andrew Wheeler, a former coal industry lobbyist, who proceeded apace to continue the fine legacy left to him by his predecessor. Wheeler has weakened regulations on coal fired electrical plants and declined to raise standards for "fine soot pollution" under a mandated review. In the midst of the COVID pandemic, Wheeler's EPA announced that it would not enforce regulations for "routine compliance monitoring [of pollution], integrity testing, sampling, laboratory analysis, training and reporting or certification obligations." In other words, polluting industries, here's your get-out-of-jail-free COVID card, courtesy of your friendly EPA.
Donald Trump's pillaging of the rest of the federal government is equally astonishing. He's gone through cabinet secretaries like they were an order of Big Macs. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson? Gone early on, replaced by Mike Pompeo. Attorney General Jeff Sessions? Out the door in disgrace. In his place, the odious Bill Barr (after a brief appearance by the totally incompetent Matt Whitaker). Secretary of Energy Rick Perry? Bye-bye in a blink. Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta? Resigned in disgrace for his connection to a kid-gloves plea arrangement with famed pedophile and presidential friend Jeffrey Epstein. Secretary of Defense James Mattis? Resigned in protest against Trump's haphazard misuse of U.S. military forces. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke? Resigned rather than face federal investigation for using his office for personal gain. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats? Ousted in a Trumpian power play to politicize the intelligence community.
Trump has proceeded to appoint acting secretaries to replace expired acting secretaries. Recently, one of his attempts to get around the rules hit a wall when a federal judge in Montana ordered the removal of the acting director of the Bureau of Land Management, William Perry Pendley, who he found had been serving illegally for 400 days without Senate confirmation. Pendley has been an advocate of selling federal lands to the states or private citizens.
There is more, much, much more, but you get the picture. The damage Trump will be leaving to Joe Biden is incalculable. The death toll caused by his mismanagement of the COVID crisis and the numbers of infections increase by the thousands seemingly every day. The only good thing about a hollowed-out federal government will be the thousands of appointments Biden will be able to make upon taking office, and the dozens of executive orders he'll be able to sign reversing Trump's giveaways to polluters, drug companies and corrupt corporations.
All we've got to do is get out and vote to make that happen.


rawstory--2020-10-17--Amy Coney Barrett accused of ‘unconscionable cruelty’ in teen rape case

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has been accused of “ unconscionable cruelty ” by a watchdog group over her role in an appellate court decision overturning a district court which found a Wisconsin county liable for millions in damages to a woman who alleged she had been repeatedly raped by a jail guard .
This article first appeared in Salon .
“ After a 19-year old pregnant prison inmate was repeatedly raped by a prison guard , Amy Coney Barrett ruled that the county responsible for the prison could not be held liable because the sexual assaults fell outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Her judgment demonstrates a level of unconscionable cruelty that has no place on the high court , ” Kyle Herrig , president of the progressive watchdog group Accountable.US , told Salon .
“ The only thing more concerning than the rush to confirm by Senate Republicans is what we are learning about Amy Coney Barrett ’ s extremist record .
It is hardly surprising that she has dodged question after question during her testimony.
” Barrett was one of the three judges on a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals panel which reversed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County in 2018 after a corrections officer was charged with repeatedly raping a pregnant 19-year-old inmate .
Former corrections officer Xavier Thicken was charged with multiple counts of sexual assault in 2013 after the woman alleged that he had raped her during and after her pregnancy at a jail run by the controversial former Sheriff David Clarke .
Those charges were dropped when he agreed to plead guilty to felony misconduct in public office in 2014 .
The woman later filed a lawsuit against Milwaukee County .
In her testimony , she alleged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parts of the jail when she was eight months pregnant and demanded that she perform oral sex on him after giving birth .
A jury awarded the woman $ 6.7 million in 2017 , which was upheld by District Judge J.P. Stadmueller before the Seventh Circuit Court overturned the ruling in September 2018 .
Barrett joined Judges Daniel Manion and Robert Gettleman in reversing the district court ruling against the county , though it upheld the judgement against Thicklen .
Mannion wrote in the unanimous opinion that the county was not responsible for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Conduct is not in the scope if it is different in kind from that authorized , far beyond the authorized time or space , or too little actuated by a purpose to serve the employer , ” he said .
“ Even when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to ( the woman ) and the verdict , we hold no reasonable jury could find the sexual assaults were in the scope of his ( Thicklen ’ s ) employment , ” the opinion stated .
“ The evidence negates the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ materials stated guards were prohibited from having sex with inmates .
“ The undisputed facts and reasonable inferences point ineluctably to the conclusions that Thicklen ’ s abhorrent acts were in no way actuated by a purpose to serve county , ” he wrote .
“ He raped ( the inmate ) for purely personal reasons , the rapes did not benefit county but harmed it , he knew the rapes did not serve county , and the rapes were outside the scope.
” With the ruling , the judge acknowledged that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to collect the judgment .
But ( the law ) does not make public employers absolute insurers against all wrongs.
” In a similar case this year , however , Barrett joined a majority of the full Seventh Circuit Court to find that Wisconsin ’ s Polk County was liable in a case where a jail guard sexually assaulted five women hundreds of times .
The case was filed after former prison guard Daryl Christensen was convicted of sexually assaulting the women hundreds of times over three years in 2016 .
Two of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and M.J.J.
, sued Christensen and Polk County in federal court , according to Courthouse News .
A complaint filed by one of the women alleged that the Polk County Sheriff ’ s Department was liable , because it failed to protect her from Christensen and chose not to accept state-provided training materials on prison rape .
The lawsuit largely echoed the allegations in the criminal complaint , accusing Christensen of leading women inmates to areas of the jail where there were no security cameras before digitally penetrating them and forcing them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was sentenced to 30 years in prison , and a jury awarded the women $ 11.5 million in compensatory and punitive damages , according to Courthouse News .
Polk County was ordered to pay $ 4 million of the award , which the outlet noted was “ the only part of the award the women will ever possibly receive.
” A split three-judge Seventh Circuit Court panel overturned the ruling against the county last year , with the majority arguing that it should not be held liable for actions taken by a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jail ’ s policy .
The full court voted to rehear the case in December , and it voted 7-4 to hold the county responsible in May .
Barrett joined the majority .
“ The jury was furnished with sufficient evidence to hold Polk County liable not on the basis of Christensen ’ s horrific acts but rather the county ’ s own deliberate choice to stand idly by while the female inmates under its care were exposed to an unmistakable risk that they would be sexually assaulted — a choice that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on J.K.J .
and M.J.J.
, ” Judge Michael Scudder wrote in the majority opinion .
Scudder added that “ the jury was entitled to conclude that if Polk County had taken action in response to the glaring risk that its female inmates ’ health and safety were in danger , J.K.J .
and M.J.J.
’ s assaults would have stopped sooner , or never happened at all.
” Barrett penned an influential decision last year which made it easier for college students accused of sexual assault to sue their universities over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision for a Seventh Circuit panel which ruled that Purdue University might have discriminated against a male student accused of sexual assault when it suspended him for one year , costing him a spot in the Navy ROTC program .
“ It is plausible that [ university officials ] chose to believe Jane because she is a woman and to disbelieve John because he is a man , ” Barrett wrote in the decision .
Barrett said the discrimination claim was plausible , in part because the Obama administration had pressured schools to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two investigations into Purdue .
“ The Department of Education made clear that it took the letter and its enforcement very seriously , ” Barrett wrote .
“ The pressure on the university to demonstrate compliance was far from abstract.
” Emily Martin , the vice president for education and workplace justice at the National Women ’ s Law Center , expressed concerns that Barrett ’ s description of the Education Department ’ s efforts to go after campus sexual assault was evidence of discrimination against men .
Martin told The Washington Post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a champion of women ’ s rights and lamented the prospect of “ replacing someone like that with a judge who is eager to use the language of sex discrimination in order to defend the status quo and to use the statutes that were created to forward gender equality as swords against that very purpose.
” Beth Barnhill , the executive director of the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault , penned an op-ed this week warning that Barrett “ holds extreme positions on areas of the law on which victims of sexual assault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Supreme Court that works for all of us , yet a previous ruling from Barrett made it easier for students who are held accountable for sexual assault to sue their schools for sex discrimination , ” Barnhill wrote .
“ She suggested that a school ’ s commitment to taking sexual misconduct seriously is evidence of sex discrimination against the people who caused harm .
This is deeply problematic and troubling for survivors .
”

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has been accused of "unconscionable cruelty" by a watchdog group over her role in an appellate court decision overturning a district court which found a Wisconsin county liable for millions in damages to a woman who alleged she had been repeatedly raped by a jail guard.
This article first appeared in Salon.
"After a 19-year old pregnant prison inmate was repeatedly raped by a prison guard, Amy Coney Barrett ruled that the county responsible for the prison could not be held liable because the sexual assaults fell outside of the guard's official duties. Her judgment demonstrates a level of unconscionable cruelty that has no place on the high court," Kyle Herrig, president of the progressive watchdog group Accountable.US, told Salon. "The only thing more concerning than the rush to confirm by Senate Republicans is what we are learning about Amy Coney Barrett's extremist record. It is hardly surprising that she has dodged question after question during her testimony."
Barrett was one of the three judges on a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals panel which reversed a $6.7 million verdict against Milwaukee County in 2018 after a corrections officer was charged with repeatedly raping a pregnant 19-year-old inmate.
Former corrections officer Xavier Thicken was charged with multiple counts of sexual assault in 2013 after the woman alleged that he had raped her during and after her pregnancy at a jail run by the controversial former Sheriff David Clarke. Those charges were dropped when he agreed to plead guilty to felony misconduct in public office in 2014.
The woman later filed a lawsuit against Milwaukee County. In her testimony, she alleged that Thicklen had raped her in different parts of the jail when she was eight months pregnant and demanded that she perform oral sex on him after giving birth.
A jury awarded the woman $6.7 million in 2017, which was upheld by District Judge J.P. Stadmueller before the Seventh Circuit Court overturned the ruling in September 2018.
Barrett joined Judges Daniel Manion and Robert Gettleman in reversing the district court ruling against the county, though it upheld the judgement against Thicklen. Mannion wrote in the unanimous opinion that the county was not responsible for the guard's conduct.
"Conduct is not in the scope if it is different in kind from that authorized, far beyond the authorized time or space, or too little actuated by a purpose to serve the employer," he said.
"Even when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to (the woman) and the verdict, we hold no reasonable jury could find the sexual assaults were in the scope of his (Thicklen's) employment," the opinion stated. "The evidence negates the verdict."
Manion noted that the training materials stated guards were prohibited from having sex with inmates.
"The undisputed facts and reasonable inferences point ineluctably to the conclusions that Thicklen's abhorrent acts were in no way actuated by a purpose to serve county," he wrote. "He raped (the inmate) for purely personal reasons, the rapes did not benefit county but harmed it, he knew the rapes did not serve county, and the rapes were outside the scope."
With the ruling, the judge acknowledged that the woman "loses perhaps her best chance to collect the judgment. But (the law) does not make public employers absolute insurers against all wrongs."
In a similar case this year, however, Barrett joined a majority of the full Seventh Circuit Court to find that Wisconsin's Polk County was liable in a case where a jail guard sexually assaulted five women hundreds of times.
The case was filed after former prison guard Daryl Christensen was convicted of sexually assaulting the women hundreds of times over three years in 2016. Two of the victims, identified as J.K.J. and M.J.J., sued Christensen and Polk County in federal court, according to Courthouse News.
A complaint filed by one of the women alleged that the Polk County Sheriff's Department was liable, because it failed to protect her from Christensen and chose not to accept state-provided training materials on prison rape.
The lawsuit largely echoed the allegations in the criminal complaint, accusing Christensen of leading women inmates to areas of the jail where there were no security cameras before digitally penetrating them and forcing them to perform oral sex on him.
Christensen was sentenced to 30 years in prison, and a jury awarded the women $11.5 million in compensatory and punitive damages, according to Courthouse News. Polk County was ordered to pay $4 million of the award, which the outlet noted was "the only part of the award the women will ever possibly receive."
A split three-judge Seventh Circuit Court panel overturned the ruling against the county last year, with the majority arguing that it should not be held liable for actions taken by a "rogue guard" in violation of the jail's policy.
The full court voted to rehear the case in December, and it voted 7-4 to hold the county responsible in May. Barrett joined the majority.
"The jury was furnished with sufficient evidence to hold Polk County liable not on the basis of Christensen's horrific acts but rather the county's own deliberate choice to stand idly by while the female inmates under its care were exposed to an unmistakable risk that they would be sexually assaulted — a choice that was the moving force behind the harm inflicted on J.K.J. and M.J.J.," Judge Michael Scudder wrote in the majority opinion.
Scudder added that "the jury was entitled to conclude that if Polk County had taken action in response to the glaring risk that its female inmates' health and safety were in danger, J.K.J. and M.J.J.'s assaults would have stopped sooner, or never happened at all."
Barrett penned an influential decision last year which made it easier for college students accused of sexual assault to sue their universities over the handling of investigations.
She wrote the decision for a Seventh Circuit panel which ruled that Purdue University might have discriminated against a male student accused of sexual assault when it suspended him for one year, costing him a spot in the Navy ROTC program.
"It is plausible that [university officials] chose to believe Jane because she is a woman and to disbelieve John because he is a man," Barrett wrote in the decision.
Barrett said the discrimination claim was plausible, in part because the Obama administration had pressured schools to prioritize sexual assault investigations and later opened two investigations into Purdue.
"The Department of Education made clear that it took the letter and its enforcement very seriously," Barrett wrote. "The pressure on the university to demonstrate compliance was far from abstract."
Emily Martin, the vice president for education and workplace justice at the National Women's Law Center, expressed concerns that Barrett's description of the Education Department's efforts to go after campus sexual assault was evidence of discrimination against men.
Martin told The Washington Post that late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a champion of women's rights and lamented the prospect of "replacing someone like that with a judge who is eager to use the language of sex discrimination in order to defend the status quo and to use the statutes that were created to forward gender equality as swords against that very purpose."
Beth Barnhill, the executive director of the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault, penned an op-ed this week warning that Barrett "holds extreme positions on areas of the law on which victims of sexual assault depend."
"Survivors want and deserve a Supreme Court that works for all of us, yet a previous ruling from Barrett made it easier for students who are held accountable for sexual assault to sue their schools for sex discrimination," Barnhill wrote. "She suggested that a school's commitment to taking sexual misconduct seriously is evidence of sex discrimination against the people who caused harm. This is deeply problematic and troubling for survivors."


rawstory--2020-10-18--Trump is already creating excuses about the next debate — and it hasn’t even happened yet

President Donald Trump wimped out of participating in the national Town Hall this week after the Presidential Debate Commission decided to take the event online due to the president ’ s COVID diagnosis .
During a rally on Saturday night in Wisconsin , however , Trump was already at work generating conspiracies about the debate slated for next Thursday .
“ She ’ s extraordinarily unfair , ” Trump said of moderator Kirsten Welker .
“ She deleted her entire account .
I can ’ t imagine.
” It ’ s unclear what he meant by “ deleted her entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still on Twitter .
“ She ’ s extraordinarily unfair .
I ’ ve known her for a long time .
But that ’ s okay , ” Trump said .
“ We did well with a person the other night that was even more unfair .
Savannah Guthrie .
In fact , nobody ’ s seen Savannah in two days .
What happened to Savannah ?
” Guthrie is a co-host of NBC ’ s Today Show , which appears on weekdays .
Trump ’ s town hall was of his own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s event , so it ’ s unclear why he ’ s lashing out at her .
See the video below :

President Donald Trump wimped out of participating in the national Town Hall this week after the Presidential Debate Commission decided to take the event online due to the president's COVID diagnosis. During a rally on Saturday night in Wisconsin, however, Trump was already at work generating conspiracies about the debate slated for next Thursday.
"She's extraordinarily unfair," Trump said of moderator Kirsten Welker. "She deleted her entire account. I can't imagine."
It's unclear what he meant by "deleted her entire account," as she's still on Twitter.
"She's extraordinarily unfair. I've known her for a long time. But that's okay," Trump said. "We did well with a person the other night that was even more unfair. Savannah Guthrie. In fact, nobody's seen Savannah in two days. What happened to Savannah?"
Guthrie is a co-host of NBC's Today Show, which appears on weekdays.
Trump's town hall was of his own creation and not part of the PDC's event, so it's unclear why he's lashing out at her.
See the video below:


rawstory--2020-10-17--Confused Trump tells Michigan voters ‘Minnesota, you better vote for me!’

In a moment of confusion , President Donald Trump appeared to forget where he was speaking Saturday night .
Flying @ @ @ @ @ Trump cautiously walked down the steps of his airplane to take the stage before a @ @ @ @ @ again , ” sign .
After a series of rants about Democrats , Speaker Nancy @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden and others , he turned to attack Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-MN ) @ @ @ @ @ ’ t represent Michigan .
“ Dammit , Minnesota , you better vote for me @ @ @ @ @ supporters in Muskegon .
It isn ’ t the first time Trump has struggled with @ @ @ @ @ he told a Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania crowd that he was building a wall on the @ @ @ @ @ The state is about 400 miles north of Mexico , with the state of New @ @ @ @ @ the moment in the video below :

In a moment of confusion, President Donald Trump appeared to forget where he was speaking Saturday night.
Flying into Muskegon, Michigan, Trump cautiously walked down the steps of his airplane to take the stage before a large "make America great again," sign. After a series of rants about Democrats, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former Vice President Joe Biden and others, he turned to attack Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), a Congresswoman who doesn't represent Michigan.
“Dammit, Minnesota, you better vote for me," Trump told his supporters in Muskegon.
It isn't the first time Trump has struggled with confusion. In 2019, he told a Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania crowd that he was building a wall on the southern border of Colorado. The state is about 400 miles north of Mexico, with the state of New Mexico in between.
See the moment in the video below:


rawstory--2020-10-17--Oklahoma Republican says people don’t need health insurance — they can just use savings accounts

The most endangered Democratic in the U.S. is in the Oklahoma Fifth District , where Democratic Rep. Kendra Horn is facing off against Republican Stephanie Bice .
During a local interview , Bice explained why she doesn ’ t support the Affordable Care Act , even after the state voted to authorize Medicaid expansion in the state .
“ Everyone wants to make sure we ’ re taking care of low-income families that need healthcare , ” said Bice before she pivoted to say she doesn ’ t want such families to have care .
“ Well , you don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that can ’ t be true , ” the reporter fact-checked her .
“ No , that ’ s actually very true , and I ’ ll explain that in a second , ” Bice said .
“ The difference between my opponent and I ( sic ) is how do you get there .
That ’ s the difference .
I think that there are a lot of ways that you can utilize things like a health savings account .
Instead of providing insurance , let ’ s give an individual a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of dollars in it and let them spend those dollars on health-related – ” The reporter interrupted to ask how an individual could have a health savings account through an insurance company without having an insurance company , to begin with .
So it would ultimately just be a savings account that the government would put money into for someone to spend on whatever they want .
If the government just hands people a savings account to pay for their healthcare , it may as well just be a socialized plan , unless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ savings account to have any money to cover for care .
Horn tweeted a question about how someone handles it when they ’ re in a car accident or a COVID-19 scare .
The average cost for someone in the hospital with COVID-19 is $ 73,000 , she said .
See the video below :

The indictment describes Individual 1 as talking about a draft speech on or about Oct. 21, 2020, that falsely declared victory and alleged voter fraud. It matches what was found by the House Select Committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack and the attempt to overthrow the 2020 election. Fitton wrote a draft speech he emailed to Trump through two aides on Oct. 31.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
That matches material the Jan. 6 congressional committee released last year, revealing that Fitton had written a draft speech and emailed it to Trump via two aides on Oct. 31, noting he had recently discussed the draft with the then-president.
“Dear Mr. President,” the email begins. “Please see below a draft statement as you requested.”
They can't say with absolute certainty that Fitton is the one, but it's their best guess. Just Security agreed with the assessment, naming Fitton, too.
Individual 2, they believe, is a fake elector that was among one of the most engaged, based on the descriptions in the indictment, according to both sites. No name is included.
Individual 3 is likely Boris Epshteyn, one of Trump's longtime aides that has provided legal advice. The indictment says that he was on stage with Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, and Sidney Powell, which narrows things down.
He sent an email that investigators have from John Eastman where he admits to constitutional questions about the Electoral Count Act before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which “could invite counter views that we do not believe should constrain Pence.”
Just Security agreed that Epshteyn is Individual 3, specifically citing Act 109 of the indictment.
Individual 4, the Daily Beast confirmed is Robert Sinners, who ran operations for Election Day for the Trump campaign. Indicted co-conspirator David Shafer, former Republican Party chair of Georgia, and Sinners exchanged emails on Nov. 20, 2020, which claimed that indicted Georgia bail bondsman Scott Hall “has been looking into the election on behalf of the President at the request of [Trump adviser] David Bossie." He then asked Individual 4 to contact Hall and lend a hand.
Just Security also named Sinners, saying that "the same email is accounted for in Curling v. Raffensperger ."
Sinners now works "with an institutional bulwark that brooked some of the most severe abuse and violent threats while holding the Trump team’s anti-democratic efforts at bay—the office of Georgia’s GOP Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger," said the Beast.
Individuals 5 and 6 are likely Bernie Kerik (5), and Phil Waldron (6). Kerik is the longtime Rudy Giuliani pal that was in the war room at the Willard Hotel on Jan. 6. But he was also chatting with Waldron about a conspiracy theorist in Texas who had a PowerPoint roadmap to overturning the election using China and Venezuela.
Just Security agreed, too, noting that the two men are in some of the same places or meetings as previously known. Waldron, for example, told The Washington Post that he was at the Nov. 25 meeting.
"The indictment then puts Individuals 5 and 6 together during similar back-to-back presentations that Giuliani’s team made days later to a group of Arizona GOP lawmakers. Kerik describes those meetings in detail to the Jan. 6 committee, matching details in the indictment," the Beast concluded.
Individual 7 was unknown to the Daily Beast, but Just Security can narrow it down to five people: "G. Michael Brown or others on email chain: James Fitzpatrick, Shawn Flynn, Thomas Lane, Valerie McConahay."
"Act 77 of the indictment alleges that Mike Roman sent an email on 12/14/2020 to Robert Sinners, Individual 7, and others stating: 'Please send me an update as soon as the State Electoral College has adjourned and all paperwork is secured.'"
The House Select Committee had the email, showing the possible people that were also on the email.
Individual 8 appears to be Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, both sites said. He was a state senator at the time, and was one of the 16 fake electors.
"The indictment makes it easy to identify Individual 8, who is portrayed as a central figure in the alleged fake elector scheme, appearing in 11 overt acts," said the report. "But the glaring tip that Willis included might not sit well with the purportedly anonymous Individual 8. Last year, Jones successfully barred the DA from publicly naming him in connection with the grand jury probe."
Still, he was quoted from an identifiable Dec. 7 tweet, that Rudy Giuliani shared.
“Georgia Patriot Call to Action: today is the day we need you to call your state Senate & House Reps & ask them to sign the petition for a special session,” the tweet says. “We must have free & fair elections in GA & this is our only path to ensuring every legal vote is counted. @realDonaldTrump.”
Jones is the author, making it easy to identify him. He refused to comment, but did attack D.A. Fani Willis on Twitter for "pursuing 'political vendettas of the past' and spending 'millions of taxpayer dollars' on the sprawling criminal investigation for 'the sole purpose of the furthering of her own political career.'"
Individual 9 the Daily Beast thinks is former Georgia Republican Party treasurer Joseph Brannan, but Just Security isn't as certain. They only identify 9 as a fake elector.
"Individual 9 is alleged in the indictment to have been on the receiving end of a Dec. 10 email from indicted pro-Trump lawyer Ken Chesebro, who is said to also be unindicted co-conspirator 5 in Smith’s federal indictment," said the Beast.
The House Select committee has an email from that as well, showing Chesebro trying “to help coordinate with the other 5 contested States, to help with logistics of the electors in other States hopefully joining in casting their votes on Monday.”
The recipients match Brannan's description, the report explained, which also featured indicted former Georgia GOP chair David Shafer along with “unindicted co-conspirator Individual 9.” The two other people on the email are women, and 9 is referred to as male.
Individuals 10-19 are all fake electors both sides aid.
Individual 20, which was cited by some of the legal analysts after the indictment dropped, was someone that was in the Oval Office during one of the key meetings on 12/18/2020. While the Daily Beast won't say, Just Security narrows it down to Michael Flynn, Patrick Byrne, or Emily Newman.
Individual 21, the Beast said was unknown, but Just Security identifies Todd Sanders or Conan Hayes. They use Act 91, which refers to an email sent by Sidney Powell that mentions both men along with Waldron, who was identified as Individual 6. The email was also included in the records from Curling v. Raffensperger.
Individual 22 would reportedly be the other of Todd Sanders or Conan Hayes.
Individual 23, which the Beast also said was unknown. Citing Act 115, Just Security said that Individual 23 was on one of the phone calls with Harrison Floyd and others on Jan. 3, 2021, at 8:11 p.m. Act 27 also references a four-way call that included Floyd, Trevian Kutti, Stephen Lee, and individual 23 on Jan. 5, 2021.
Individual 24 is Alex Cruce, Just Security said, using Act 143 which references the individual flying into Coffee County with Scott Hall, something Cruce admitted in Curling v. Raffensperger.
Individual 25, both sites believe to be Doug Logan, the CEO of the Cyber Ninjas.
Act 154 refers to Misty Hampton, one of the people who allowed Individual 25 into non-public areas of the Coffee County Election Board offices on Jan. 18, 2021. The videos were reported by ABC News and showed Logan and Jeff Lenbert being allowed in on that time. Act 150 refers to Individual 25 downloading the information from the county and putting it on legal technology company Sullivan Strickler's ShareFile, which showed Logan downloading the data on several dates in Jan. 2021.
Individuals 26 and 27, Just Security writes are probably Michael Pospieszalski or Jovan Pulitzer. They cite Acts 151 and 152 accusing Individuals 26 and 27 of downloading Coffee County data. There were six people who did this according to Curling v. Raffensperger. Others have already been identified, leaving these two men.
Individual 28, both believe is Jim Penrose, a former National Security official who ultimately went to work for Sidney Powell. Act 155 alleging an email on April 22, 2021 to SullivanStrickler COO Paul Maggio, asking that the voting data taken from Coffee County be sent to an attorney working with Powell.
“On or about the 22nd day of April 2021, unindicted co-conspirator Individual 28, whose identity is known to the grand jury, sent an email to the chief operations officer of SullivanStrickler LLC directing him to transmit all data copied from Dominion Voting Systems equipment at the Coffee County Board of Elections & Registration Office in Coffee County, Georgia, to unindicted co-conspirator Individual 30, whose identity is known to the grand jury, an attorney associated with Sidney Katherine Powell and the Trump campaign,” the indictment says.
Individual 29 is likely Jeffrey Lenberg, the Beast and Just Security believes, citing Act 154 of the indictment. Lenberg was with Logan on Jan. 18, 2021, when going into the board of elections.
Individual 30 is probably Stefanie Lambert, the sites agree, citing Act 155.
Jim Pemrose, though to be Individual 28, sent an email that was available in Curling v. Raffensperger, indicating Stefanie Lambert was to get the data from Coffee County. Penrose wrote to send the materials to "the same address as before," and "[i]nvoice Stefanie Lambert for the work like last time."
The Daily Beast spoke to Lambert's lawyer, Michael Smith, who said, “My client is a brilliant and zealous advocate for her clients. Stefanie Lambert has done nothing illegal. Like all law firms, Lambert hires experts to opine on potential cases or cases in active litigation. She intends to file suit against any person or entity falsely implying her legal work was improper.”
Read both reports at Just Security and the Daily Beast for significantly more details.


rawstory--2020-10-17--Indiana police department fires officer after he was outed on ‘Iron March’ Neo-Nazi forum

The Lafayette , Indiana police department announced Saturday that they fired a “ recruit officer ” after he participated in the Neo-Nazi web forum Iron March .
According to a release , officer Joseph Zacharek was outed on Twitter after he was discovered participating in the fascist forum .
The police department did an investigation into the officer and discovered enough that prompted the department to fire him .
“ The Lafayette Police Department conducts very thorough and complete background investigations on all potential employees , which includes a complete review of personal social media accounts , ” the release @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not have been accessible through our investigative processes , we are appreciative that it was brought to our attention .
We take great pride in our investigations and are extremely disappointed that we were not able to uncover this information in that process .
We endeavor to learn from this investigation to ensure it never happens again.
” The department also tried to reassure the community that the officer had nothing to do with the everyday policing of the department .
“ Officer Zacharek was hired in June of 2020 and to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ training environment and has no exposure to the public , ” the release said .
“ As a result of this investigation Officer Zacharek ’ s employment with the Lafayette Police Department has been terminated .
”

"You mentioned the concept of accountability and how it is not something that Donald Trump is particularly familiar with," said anchor Alex Wagner. "I wonder what you think of the peril that he keeps putting himself in, legally speaking, by lashing out at prosecutors. Targeting judges. Speaking badly about the very people who will determine his fate. And being, effectively, not threatened, but potentially forced to pay a price for that in the form of a trial date that has moved, or a fine, or even the possibility of being incarcerated while he awaits trial. Do you think that there is anything at this point that could force Donald Trump to stop the vitriol and to stop the tweets and the rants? Or is he going to push it as far as he possibly can?"
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
"The short answer is no, he is not going to be able to stop himself," said Mary Trump. "There has been a really interesting shift over the last few months or couple of years. the way in which he is presenting himself in social media, the kind of attacking nature, and the aggressiveness, that used to be a strategy for him."
"You know, he used to throw temper tantrums strategically to get his way," she continued. "It is not strategy anymore."
"He is literally doing what he has done in other contexts, which is pushing the envelope to see how much he could get away with, which obviously, until this time, has been everything," she added. "But, the unconscious fear, terror, and especially if you have a fear of humiliation is so strong, that he cannot course correct and realize that what he's always done is, this time, not going to get him what he wants. In fact, quite the opposite."
Watch the video below or at the link.


rawstory--2020-10-17--John Bolton urged his staff to avoid Russian-manipulated Rudy Giuliani while the White House ignored

John Bolton urged his staff to avoid Russian-manipulated Rudy Giuliani while the White House ignored it

When Former National Security Adviser John Bolton received a warning about President Donald Trump ’ s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani due to his suspected ties to Russian operatives , he wasted no time heeding the warning and urged his staff to steer clear of having any involvement or interactions with The Daily Beast compiled a report based on what the publication described as “ interviews with 11 knowledgeable sources ” detailing Bolton ’ s repeated attempts to maintain distance between his department and Giuliani .
It has been reported that in January of 2019 , the intelligence committee warned Capitol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ a target of Russian intelligence operation to feed disinformation to Trump.
” As months passed , the warnings about Giuliani are said to have “ intensified.
” “ Officials said the warnings about Giuliani intensified in the spring and summer of 2019 as the president ’ s personal attorney appeared on television propagating disinformation about the Bidens and former U.S .
Ambassador to Ukraine Masha Yovanovitch .
One ex-NSC official said that Giuliani , as a U.S. citizen , was neither named nor referenced in contemporaneous intelligence reports about Russian disinformation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role was the subject of informal discussions between White House and intelligence officials.
” – The Daily Beast A former official also raised concerns about Russia ’ s server hack of the Ukranian energy company Burisma—where Hunter Biden once served on the executive board .
It reportedly led to “ informed speculation among professionals that this would be the entrée to fabricate material connecting Hunter Biden to corruption inside Burisma , and it wouldn ’ t take more than 10 percent truth.
” Bolton even warned his subordinates to refrain from being in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bolton ’ s directives were so specific he even advised against his staff attending Trump ’ s Oval Office meeting May 23 , 2019 following the Ukrainian inauguration of President Volodymyr Zelensky .
An unnamed Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee also weighed in as he admitted that Giuliani had been a big topic of discussion .
“ Rudy ’ s been the topic of conversation a lot , ” said the other source , a Democratic member of the House intelligence committee .
“ Wittingly or unwittingly , Rudy seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gain politically from his relationship and discussions with Russian assets than he does about how he might be being used.
” When contacted about the latest debacle , Giuliani claimed he was unaware of Bolton ’ s opposition toward him .
“ I didn ’ t find out that John was unhappy with me or opposed to me until he left [ the administration ] …I ’ ve known him for ten years , ” and claimed that “ when I was being considered for Secretary of State , I told him I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

In new allegations revealed Wednesday, Texas House investigators accused suspended Attorney General Ken Paxton of engaging in a complex cover-up to hide his relationship with real estate investor Nate Paul as senior aides grew increasingly concerned about Paxton’s willingness to use his office to benefit Paul.
The subterfuge allegedly included Paxton and Paul creating an Uber account under an alias so they could meet each other and so the attorney general could visit the woman with whom he was having an extramarital affair.
And once Paxton learned several high-ranking officials in his office reported his behavior to the FBI, the House impeachment managers alleged, he took immediate steps to cover up his relationship with Paul, including wiring a $122,000 payment to a Paul-affiliated company in an effort to hide home renovations that Paul had provided for free.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
The allegations, outlined in a series of filings with the Texas Senate’s court of impeachment, shed new light on the relationship between Paul and Paxton that is at the core of his impeachment proceedings.
Among the new claims: Top deputies in the attorney general’s office persistently warned Paxton that Paul was a “crook” and that there was no merit to his claims that he had been unfairly treated by law enforcement, and that the two met at least 20 times in spring and summer 2020, sometimes discussing the FBI investigation into Paul’s faltering real estate empire.
Paxton “blindly accepted Paul’s conspiracy,” impeachment managers alleged. “Senior Staff urged Paxton to stay away. But when it came to Paul, Paxton was immune to reason.”
Paul was arrested in June on federal felony charges of lying to financial institutions to secure business loans.
Responding to Paxton’s pretrial motions that seek to dismiss all 20 articles of impeachment, including four that will not be included in the Sept. 5 impeachment trial, House managers also detailed multiple actions in which Paxton allegedly sought to use his office to benefit Paul.
They alleged that Paxton conducted a “sham criminal investigation” into Paul’s “adversaries,” routinely overriding concerns from agency staff who told him that Paul was a “criminal” and that Paxton needed to “get away.”
Instead, House managers alleged, Paxton became increasingly “entangled in Paul’s web of deceit” and “went to great lengths” to hide his relationship with Paul — using a burner phone and secret email accounts, ditching his security detail and using the fake Uber name to be “ferried to his lover’s or Paul’s properties more than a dozen times.”
In response to Paul’s favors — including allegedly employing the woman and paying to remodel Paxton’s home — Paxton “continually abused the power of his office to advance Paul’s aims,” House managers alleged.
In one instance, Paxton allegedly told agency staff that he did not want the office to assist law enforcement “in any way” with an investigation into Paul, who Paxton claimed was being “railroaded” and needed “unprecedented” access to sensitive information about his case.
After meeting with “alarmed” senior staff, Paxton allegedly demanded files about Paul’s criminal case that included an unredacted FBI letter that identified individuals involved in a 2019 raid on Paul’s home and businesses.
“Paxton held onto the file for more than a week,” House managers wrote. “Ultimately, OAG did not disclose the information to Paul. But Paxton did.”
In another instance, Paxton was accused of issuing a legal opinion that staved off a pending foreclosure sale of Paul’s businesses at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. House investigators cited two agency employees who said they were forced to work through the night to produce the opinion while Paxton frequently called them.
Paxton “sounded like someone was holding him hostage,” one of the staffers told investigators.
The opinion, which Paxton allegedly edited himself, was published at 1 a.m. Aug. 2, 2020, and said foreclosure proceedings posed a public health threat — despite the state’s “open for business” mantra throughout the pandemic, managers said.
The next day, managers alleged, Paul cited the opinion to successfully delay the foreclosures.
“It is hard to imagine a more blatant abuse of Paxton’s office,” House managers wrote.
Paxton’s legal team had filed more than a dozen motions to dismiss all articles of impeachment, often arguing that the underlying allegations were baseless or fell under the legitimate duties of the attorney general’s office.
His attorneys also accused the Texas House of trying to “overturn the will of voters” who reelected Paxton to a third term last year despite various public scandals dating to 2015. One argument stressed that Paxton cannot be impeached for alleged misconduct that predated his most recent election under the so-called “prior-term doctrine.” And they downplayed some of the allegations he faces, saying that, even if true, they are not severe enough to warrant his removal from office.
Paxton’s lawyers also attacked two bribery-related impeachment articles, saying there was no evidence of a “quid pro quo” and that Paxton’s ties to Paul were nothing more than “a personal relationship with a constituent and that the constituent found something the Attorney General did to be agreeable in some way.”
Under rules adopted by the Senate, any pretrial motion to dismiss or quash an article of impeachment must be voted on by senators. A majority — 16 senators — can approve dismissal of an article, placing an early test on the determination of the chamber’s 19 Republicans to allow a trial on the allegations. Those votes are set to be taken shortly after the trial begins in September.
In a written response, filed with the Senate on Tuesday and made public Wednesday, the impeachment team challenged other pretrial assertions from Paxton’s lawyers, who claimed the articles of impeachment were deficient because they failed to list specific laws that Paxton allegedly broke.
“Impeachable offenses need not be indictable crimes,” the House team argued. “Impeachment in Texas seeks to protect against conduct that undermines the integrity of the office, disregards constitutional duties and oaths of office, abuses government process and power, and adversely impacts the system of government.”
What’s more, the team argued, many of the articles listed particular crimes, and several detailed “how Paxton abused his office for his own personal benefit or that of Nate Paul and business entities controlled by Paul.”
More broadly, the managers emphasized that the impeachment trial is not a criminal or civil proceeding, as Paxton’s side has implied. In one new filing, the managers wrote that an impeachment trial is “a unique, if not mostly Political, with a capital ‘P’, proceeding — i.e., an action by the representatives of the people challenging official actions that are contrary to the public interest.”
That view aligns with the view that Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who leads the Senate and is acting as judge in the impeachment trial, offered in a TV interview Tuesday.
“It’s not a criminal trial. It’s not a civil trial. It’s a political trial,” Patrick told the Fox affiliate in Houston.
The House managers also asked the Senate to dismiss Paxton’s motion to quash the articles or return them to the House to add more detail to the allegations. The managers said the demand shows a “fundamental misunderstanding” of how impeachment works, arguing that the Texas Constitution does not require the level of detail common in a civil or criminal proceeding.
“A person can be impeached without an indictment, therefore Paxton does not have any right to demand more details,” the managers said.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.


rawstory--2020-10-17--Trump World’s desperate Hunter Biden pseudo-scandal backfired on them in record time

Welcome to another edition of What Fresh Hell ?
, Raw Story ’ s roundup of news items that might have become controversies under another regime , but got buried – or were at least under-appreciated – due to the daily firehose of political pratfalls , unhinged tweet storms and other sundry embarrassments coming out of the current White House .
In the course of one week , we ’ ve moved from The New York Post ’ s supposed “ blockbuster ” proving that Hunter Biden had arranged a meeting between an official with Burisma Holdings , the Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sat on , and then-Vice President Joe Biden to a contrived controversy over Twitter banning the story from its platform because it contained personal email addresses and phone numbers and we ended up with reports about Rudy Giuliani ’ s apparent involvement in a clumsy scheme to launder hacked emails through a Seth Rich-truther at a computer shop , the likelihood that the emails were forged and the FBI investigating the whole thing as a disinformation campaign undertaken by foreign adversaries .
When they rolled out the “ story ” on Monday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like “ Rudy : Only ‘ 50/50 ’ Chance I Worked With a ‘ Russian Spy ’ to Dig Dirt on Bidens ” to be prevalent by Saturday .
One should keep in mind that while the conservative media have run dozens of stories this week with “ smoking gun ” in their headlines , there ’ s absolutely nothing here .
That Hunter Biden leveraged his family name and connections he ’ d made at Yale to land a cushy directorship is sleazy but not illegal , unethical or uncommon among wealthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shady operation , and both Hunter and Joe Biden have acknowledged it was a bad decision for that reason , but the nontroversy rests on the entirely false claim that Hunter ’ s association with Burisma played some role in the Obama administration ’ s efforts , along with those of their European allies , to persuade the Ukrainian government to remove Viktor Shokin , the country ’ s corrupt top prosecutor .
And nothing “ revealed ” this week , by the New York Post ( or other outlets like Breitbart ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debunked claim .
And while the legacy media have taken a lot of justifiable criticism for their coverage of the Trump presidency , this episode shows that they have learned a thing or two .
Peter Schweizer , the former Breitbart editor , got a ton of mainstream coverage of his Uranium One non-scandal in 2016 , even after it had been widely debunked .
This time , the press has not only treated a similarly fact-free smear with appropriate skepticism , it ’ s pursued the story of how it came to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change .
The Washington Post buried a lede this week when it reported that “ maverick scientists who call for allowing the coronavirus to spread freely at “ natural ” rates among healthy young people while keeping most aspects of the economy up and running have found an audience inside the White House.
” The real story is that the White House acknowledged that this has long been the regime ’ s policy .
According to the report , “ a senior administration official told reporters in a background briefing call Monday that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ denounced by other infectious-disease experts and called ‘ fringe ’ and ‘ dangerous ’ by National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins — supports what has been Trump ’ s policy for months.
” Meanwhile , while the economy melts down , additional funding for testing and contact-tracing has become an obstacle to a deal on a relief bill .
And The New York Times reports that the White House ’ s opposition is being driven by the same crackpots referenced in The Post story .
Dr. Scott Atlas , a radiologist who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of his relentless efforts to downplay the seriousness of the virus , along with “ other administration officials playing influential roles in the government ’ s virus response , ” say “ that more widespread testing would infringe on Americans ’ privacy and hurt the economy , by keeping potentially infected workers who show no symptoms from reporting to their jobs.
” Meanwhile , “ the FDA is resisting Trump administration pressure to rebrand the emergency authorization of a Covid-19 vaccine as a “ pre-licensure , ” over worries that it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ determinations , ” according to Politico .
The $ 200 cards the Trump administration promised to send to older voters to defray the cost of prescription drugs won ’ t likely reach households before the election , the Wall Street Journal reports .
One of the reasons for the delay , Politico reports , is that “ the health department ’ s top lawyer is warning in an internal memo that President Donald Trump ’ s plan to give seniors $ 200 discount cards to buy prescription drugs could violate election law.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempts to buy votes with piles of taxpayer dollars are going so poorly .
The New York Times reports : For the American farmers President Trump counts on for support , the government money is flowing faster than ever .
Federal payments to farmers are projected to hit a record $ 46 billion this year as the White House funnels money to Mr. Trump ’ s rural base in the South and Midwest ahead of Election Day .
The gush of funds has accelerated in recent weeks as the president looks to help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard by the double whammy of his combative trade practices and the coronavirus pandemic .
According to the American Farm Bureau , debt in the farm sector is projected to increase by 4 percent to a record $ 434 billion this year and farm bankruptcies have continued to rise across the country .
Reuters reports that a federal prosecutor in California who recently resigned “ became the third career Justice Department official to claim in a recent newspaper letter or op-ed that Attorney General William Barr has politicized the department.
” In related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ more than 1,000 current and former officers of an elite disease-fighting program at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have signed an open letter expressing dismay at the nation ’ s public-health response to the Covid-19 pandemic and calling for the federal agency to play a more central role .