ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

Clintons Focus on Economic Inequality at Arkansas Conference

Former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday that efforts to increase access to credit and financial assistance in underserved areas can help bridge America’s partisan divide, as he and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, hosted a daylong summit focused on economic inequality.The Clintons opened the daylong conference at the former president’s library in Little Rock to mark the 25th anniversary of the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, a federal initiative that provides assistance to low-income communities. The conference featured former Clinton administration officials, nonprofit leaders, mayors and others.“This is an enormous opportunity for us to bridge this partisan divide and do something together,” the former president said. “Because a lot of these urban neighborhoods have the same sort of credit challenges that these small towns do.”Several of the candidates vying for the Democratic presidential nomination have campaigned on economic inequality as a major issue, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, but neither Clinton touched on presidential politics when they addressed the conference.Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate in 2016, urged attendees to try and find ways to provide smaller loans at market rates so that people in underserved areas don’t have to turn to payday lenders.“People are desperate. They don’t think a bank would lend them that money they need for that next car payment because they just got laid off but think they’ll get another job next month, or that medical emergency no one could have predicted,” she said.When asked what issues she doesn’t think are getting enough attention, she said she doesn’t think there has been enough of a focus on the future in areas such as renewable energy.“Right now, we’re ceding the future at great cost to ourselves and our people but also to the great delight of our competitors and our adversaries,” she said.The former president said increasing access to affordable high-speed internet would also help address economic inequality.“I think if we had affordable, rapid, high-quality broadband to every American in every hamlet in this country, it would be much easier to have a more even rate of economic growth,” he said.
 
…

Democratic Presidential Contenders Prepare for Wednesday Debate

U.S. Democrats hold their fifth presidential debate Wednesday in Atlanta, Georgia.  Ten Democratic contenders will debate each other in a presidential race that of late has been largely overshadowed by the impeachment drama in Washington involving President Donald Trump.  VOA National correspondent Jim Malone has more on the Democratic race from Washington.
…

EU Ambassador Sondland To Face Tough Questions In Impeachment Hearings

The U.S. House Intelligence Committee is set to hear impeachment inquiry testimony Wednesday from a key actor in President Donald Trump’s alleged effort to pressure Ukraine for incriminating information on his political rivals as Democrats continue to build their case for impeaching the U.S. leader.U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland will become the first witness with a direct line of communication to the  president to testify in public to the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry.According to the testimony of other witnesses, Sondland spoke to Trump multiple times from mid-July to mid-September and could shed light on whether Trump abused his power by making U.S. security aid to Ukraine contingent on Kyiv’s agreement to investigate Burisma, an energy company on which the son of former Vice President and political rival Joe Biden had served as a board member.Sondland will likely face tough questioning from Democratic and Republican lawmakers after he revised his previous closed-door testimony to say there was a link between the withholding of $391 million in aid to Ukraine and the investigations Trump wanted. He testified in October that he knew of no preconditions to the assistance.A text message between Ambassador Kurt Volker, former special envoy to Ukraine, and Gordon Sondland, ambassador to the European Union, is displayed as the House Intelligence Committee holds a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 19, 2019.But on Nov. 4, the EU ambassador sent the congressional committee an addendum, saying statements from other witnesses had refreshed his memory about some conversations from early September.  In his revised testimony, Sondland said he now remembered that he had told an aide to the Ukrainian president that the United States “likely” would not send the much needed military aid until Ukraine agreed to investigate Burisma.Sondland is set to testify in the morning, followed by career Pentagon official Laura Cooper and Undersecretary of State David Hale Wednesday afternoon. Former White House adviser Fiona Hill and career foreign service officer David Holmes are to testify Thursday.It was a long and exhausting day in Washington Tuesday, where testimony in the impeachment inquiry lasted more than 11 hours.Lawmakers on the Intelligence Committee heard from four witnesses – three of whom directly listened to Trump’s July 25 telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, when he asked Zelenskiy to investigate the Bidens.Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the White House’s National Security Council, said Trump’s call was “inappropriate” and “improper.””Frankly, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. It was probably an element of shock that maybe, in certain regards, my worst fear of how our Ukrainian policy could play out was playing out,” he said.Vindman said Trump’s request to investigate Biden “had nothing to do with U.S. national security” interests and was not part of the talking points Vindman and others prepared for Trump ahead of the call.Jennifer Williams, a foreign affairs adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, also testified Tuesday. She heard the call and said the Trump request for a Biden probe was “unusual” because it involved a “domestic political matter” and not foreign policyWilliams said in her 14 years as a foreign service officer, she has heard a lot of presidential phone calls, but nothing like what Trump was asking for.After a break, the committee heard from two more witnesses.Ambassador Kurt Volker, former special envoy to Ukraine, leaves the hearing room as they conclude a public impeachment hearing of President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2019.Ambassador Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, had said in closed-door testimony that he did not see a link between Trump pressuring Ukraine for a Biden probe and Trump withholding nearly $400 million in military aid.Volker said in Tuesday’s testimony that after hearing other witnesses and seeing the transcript of the July 25 phone call, he now believes there was a connection. He said if he had seen things differently earlier, he would have raised objections.Tim Morrison, who was the top director for European affairs on the National Security Council, testified Tuesday that he did not hear anything in Trump’s July phone call that he would call illegal.But Morrison said he does not think investigating Biden should be a “policy objective.”Trump and the Republicans allege that when Biden was vice president, he threatened to withhold loan guarantees to Ukraine unless prosecutors stopped a corruption probe into Burisma.No evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens has surfaced, and the allegations of Ukrainian election interference are based on a debunked conspiracy theory.Democrats are focused on whether Trump froze military aid to Ukraine in exchange for Zelenskiy publicly committing to an investigation of the Bidens and some Democrats accuse Trump of bribery — an impeachable crime.Trump calls the hearings a huge scam and a witch hunt, insisting he did nothing wrong.
…

US Ambassador Sondland to Testify in Trump Impeachment Inquiry

U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland on Wednesday will be the most high-profile witness to appear before the U.S. House of Representatives as it holds public hearings on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.Sondland is set to testify in the morning, followed by career Pentagon official Laura Cooper and Undersecretary of State David Hale Wednesday afternoon. Former White House adviser Fiona Hill and career foreign service officer David Holmes are to testify Thursday.On Tuesday Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence, and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, former U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and former NSC official Tim Morrison testified.All nine have testified previously in closed-door hearings about Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, who had served as a board member of a Ukraine natural gas company, and probe a discredited conspiracy theory regarding the 2016 president election. Three of the nine listened in on the July 25 phone conversation between Trump and Ukraine’s president.Democrats hope the hearings will sway public opinion in favor of impeachment.  Republicans have used them to discredit the impeachment proceedings and poke holes in the witnesses’ testimony.Here is what you need to know about the witnesses Wednesday and Thursday and their role in the Ukraine affair.Gordon SondlandAs President Donald Trump’s ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland was in frequent contact with Trump and other administration officials about Ukraine policy. On July 26, the day after Trump and the Ukrainian president Zelenskiy spoke by phone, Sondland and Trump had their own  phone conversation during which the president was overheard asking whether Ukraine would “do the investigation” he had asked for.  A wealthy hotel magnate, Sondland gave $1 million to Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee.  In March 2018, Trump picked him as his ambassador to the European Union.  He was confirmed by the Senate in July.Laura CooperLaura Cooper is a career Pentagon official responsible for policy on Russia, Ukraine and other nations in that region. Cooper first joined the Department of Defense in 2001. She held a series of posts at the Pentagon before being named the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia. In that capacity, she met with Volker in late August to discuss the frozen Ukrainian aid and was told by Volker that the hold might be lifted if Ukraine was willing to issue a statement disavowing election interference and vowing to prosecute anyone engaged in interference.  Cooper later told impeachment investigators that she and others had expressed concerns about the legality of withholding congressionally authorized funds for UkraineDavid HaleAs under secretary of state for Political Affairs, David Hale is the State Department’s No. 3 official, a position to which Trump named him in 2018.   A graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, Hale joined the foreign service in 1984 and holds the rank of career ambassador.  In early March, he traveled to Ukraine where he asked then Ambassador Marie Yovanovich to extend her diplomatic term by one year and stay in the country through 2020.  Later, when Rudy Giuliani, the president’s point man on Ukraine, launched a smear campaign to oust Yovanovitch, Hale instructed a subordinate, George Kent, to “keep [your] head down.”  Hale testified behind closed doors this month about the State Department’s handling of the former ambassador’s recall.Fiona HillA British-born American foreign affairs expert, Fiona Hill served as the National Security Council’s top Russia expert until June. The first former White House official to testify in the House impeachment inquiry, Hill told investigators in October that Yovanovitch’s removal was the “result of the campaign that Mr. Giuliani had set in motion” and that she had personally been the target of similar smear campaigns.  Hill also testified about a July 10 White House meeting between U.S. and Ukrainian officials at which Sondland announced that “we have an agreement with the chief of staff for a meeting (between Trump and Zelenskiy) if these investigations in the energy sector start.”David HolmesA career foreign service officer, Holmes has been the political counselor at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv since August 2017. In that capacity, he serves as the senior political and political adviser to the ambassador and has attended many meetings with Zelenskiy and other Ukrainian officials. Holmes is the diplomat who overheard a phone conversation between Sondland and Trump the day after Trump pressed Zelenskiy to carry out corruption investigations. During the call, Holmes testified last week, Trump asked Sondland, “So, he’s gonna do the investigation?” According to Holmes’ testimony, he heard Sondland reply that “he’s gonna do it” and that Zelenskiy would do “anything you ask him to.” The account establishes a direct link between Trump and the Ukraine pressure campaign.
…

MTV Launches 2020 ‘+1thevote’ Campaign to Mobilize Millennial, Gen Z

In 1990, a bikini-clad Madonna wrapped in a U.S. flag urged MTV viewers to vote in Senate elections as the youth television network partnered with a “Rock the Vote” campaign that mixed pop culture and politics.Thirty years on, with Millennials and Gen Z poised to outnumber the Baby Boomer generation for the first time in a U.S. presidential election, MTV on Tuesday launched its most ambitious turnout campaign ever, reaching beyond celebrities to tap into burgeoning youth activism.The year-long “+1thevote”  initiative across MTV’s multiple TV platforms, social media and live events includes plans to open new polling stations at college campuses, sponsor school proms that host registration drives, and integrate voting messages into shows.”You need to look no further than the climate change strikes and what is happening in the streets to see that this is a fired-up generation,” said Brianna Cayo Cotter, SVP of social impact for MTV and its affiliate platforms VH1, CMT and Logo.”But they have to vote in this election to take that passion and turn it into political power. That’s the aim of this campaign – how do we help young people, who are so passionate but for whom voting today was not really designed,” she told Reuters.The campaign is aimed at first time voters, especially the 4 million Americans who will turn 18 in time for the Nov. 8 presidential elections. It aims to make voting an experience to be shared with friends, or a “plus one.”Millennials and Gen Z – those born between 1981-96 and after 1996, respectively – will make up 37 percent of the U.S. electorate, according to a January report from the Pew Research Center, outnumbering for the first time Boomers born between 1946-64.FILE – Various logos of the different cable channels from the MTV Networks are pictured at the Cable Television Critics Association press tour in Pasadena, California, July 13, 2006.MTV, a unit of Viacom, is well-placed to catch their attention as the most-watched non-sports U.S. cable network in primetime with 18-34 year olds, according to Nielsen data.The past three years have seen a boom in youth activism on issues ranging from climate change, partly inspired by 16 year-old Swedish activist Greta Thunberg, to gun control, civil rights and immigration.Yet for the two generations raised on the internet and smart phones, the process of registering and voting can seem bewildering, MTV found during months of research.”People have questions that are like, ‘What do I wear to vote?’, and ‘Where do I go?’ To young people who can order anything on their phones automatically, the fact that in a lot of places they would have to go to a post office and get a stamp feels crazy,” said Cayo Cotter.Part of the +1thevote campaign involves a partnership with Campus Vote Project and two other grassroots groups to create dozens of new polling stations on college campuses and in local communities nationwide to make youth voting more accessible.Voters cast their ballots in state and local elections at Pillow Boro Hall in Pillow, Pennsylvania, Nov. 5, 2019.Some 1,200 polling stations have been shut down across the Southern United States since 2014, according to a September report by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.The MTV initiative also includes a drive to integrate voting messages in TV shows across the industry and plans to register voters waiting in line at MTV events like the Video Music Awards.”If we can use our platforms’ superpowers to reach an untapped and largely ignored audience, we’re going to be able to unlock an incredible amount of first time voters that otherwise would probably sit this election out,” said Cayo Cotter. 
…

Patrick Defends Corporations And Capitalism in Primary Bid

Democratic presidential candidate Deval Patrick is centering his fledgling campaign on a defense of corporations and capitalism that puts him directly at odds with some of the party’s most progressive figures.
                   
“There is a role in the economy for private equity. You bet your life,” Patrick said Monday night in an interview with The Associated Press during his first visit to Iowa since officially launching his campaign. “There’s a lot of good that gets done by private interests investing in the country.”
                   
Patrick is a former Massachusetts governor who, after serving as an assistant attorney general in the Clinton administration, built a successful and varied career working for businesses that today would be seen as anathema to the Democratic Party’s progressive grassroots.
                   
He served as counsel to an oil and gas company, on the board of a subprime lending company and most recently worked for Bain Capital, the private equity company that became an albatross around Republican Mitt Romney’s neck during his presidential campaign in 2012 after President Barack Obama painted the company as ruthless toward middle-class workers.
                   
But Patrick is banking that his moderation and business experience will be an asset in a field largely devoid of any credible business-oriented candidates, arguing for a vision in which capitalism can be a force for social good. That, he says, is the work he did during his time at Bain Capital, where he helped launch an investment fund focused on building out companies focused on positive social and environmental impacts.
                   
“It’s not the cartoon, God bless ’em, that was painted in the 2012 campaign,” he said. “And this is what we do, right? We pick a villain, we decide we’re gonna make a caricature of him or her, and we run with that. That’s not what I’m about.”
                   
In a campaign in which rivals Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders launched to the front of the primary pack and stayed there by railing against big corporations and promising massive structural change, it remains to be seen whether Patrick’s approach will catch fire with Democrats. On Monday night, he stood by his pro-business stance when asked if he believes corporations bear any responsibility for income inequality in the nation.
                   
“I think we all have responsibility for inequality. We vote for the people and have voted for the people who have supported some of these strategies,” he said, pointing to tax policy that has favored the rich over the middle class.
                   
Patrick also said there were “structural incentives” in the tax code for businesses to consolidate wealth, and that “we have a business culture that has been very short-term in focus.” Asked whether Bain Capital was part of that culture, Patrick said that “everyone in business is a part of that.”
                   
“My point is, I’m not gonna say, `and therefore we shouldn’t have business.’ We can have capitalism that is humane. And I don’t think that attacking any one company or any one sector is productive” he said.
                   
In a departure from his previous political runs, Patrick pledged to release his own tax returns as he runs for president, potentially before the end of the year. And he said he planned to put out policies that would address the issues with the tax code and other structural drivers of inequality.
                   
While Patrick said combating climate change is a priority for him, he does not plan to put his weight behind the Green New Deal, the progressive climate change policy backed by a handful of Democrats. “I am really, really cautious about governing by slogan,” he said, because the same policy can be interpreted in many different ways.
                   
“There’s a lot to like about it. It has some things that are actionable right now, and some things that are more aspirational,” he said, but offered no further details.
                   
Patrick also parted with some in the field in his refusal to disavow contributions from executives, lobbyists and political action committees tied to oil and gas companies. Sixteen current candidates have signed a pledge refusing to take such contributions, but Patrick said he doesn’t believe in “guilt by association.”
                   
“There are good people in every kind of environment, or many kinds of environments, and if they want to support what it is we are trying to do _ which includes, by the way, a prompt move to a carbon-free economy … then I welcome their support,” he said.
                   
Patrick launched his campaign last week to much fanfare but with little campaign organization and just over two months until the first nominating contest takes place in Iowa. He says he’ll be watching Wednesday night’s debate and “taking notes,” which he says he’s done on previous debates
                   
He’ll face a challenge in getting to the debate stage. A late entry in the primary race makes it that much tougher to raise the awareness that his campaign will need to meet the polling and fundraising thresholds for future debates.
                   
Patrick declined to commit to making it to next month’s debate, but he insisted that “when the people are paying attention, I’ll be part of the debate.”
                   
That remains a major rationale for Patrick’s late entry into the race: his belief that voters are just starting to tune in.
                   
Speaking Monday night to a room full of Democratic activists who had already sat through an hour’s worth of party business at the Polk County Democratic Party’s monthly meeting, he acknowledged the weariness some of the committed activists have expressed at adding another candidate to the field, but he said he didn’t agree.
                   
“I know in Iowa, where you see everybody all the time, you are so done with candidates. I understand that from some of the mechanics of running for president, it feels late. But I gotta tell you, from the perspective of a whole lotta voters, it’s not,” he said.
                   
But Patrick himself acknowledged, almost self-consciously, that he’s got some growing pains to get through as a candidate. After the Polk County meeting, he told reporters, “It was hot, it was crowded, and I stink at soundbites.”
…

Netanyahu Celebrates US Settlement Decision in West Bank

Israel’s prime minister traveled to the West Bank on Tuesday to celebrate the U.S.’s announcement that it does not consider Israeli settlements to violate international law.Benjamin Netanyahu called the Trump administration’s declaration, which stepped back from four decades of U.S. policy and reversed the policies of President Barack Obama, a “huge achievement” that “fixed a historic wrong.”
“I think it is a great day for the state of Israel and an achievement that will remain for decades,” he said.Israeli Parliament Legalizes 4,000 Jewish Settlements on Private Palestinian Land

        Israel's parliament has passed a new law on settlements which is sure to be challenged in court and bring global wrath against Israel.The Knesset voted 60-52 Monday night to retroactively legalize 4,000 Jewish settlements on private Palestinian land in the West Bank — land Palestinians want for a future state.Israeli lawmakers on the right and left emotionally debated the controversial measure. 

Netanyahu spoke Tuesday at a gathering of ecstatic supporters and settler leaders in Alon Shvut, a settlement outside of Jerusalem.Israeli right-wing leaders welcomed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s announcement. Although it is largely symbolic, it fueled calls from settler supporters for increased construction or even the annexation of parts of the West Bank.The Palestinians, who claim the West Bank as part of a future state, condemned the decision. They and other countries said the move undercuts any chances of a broader peace deal.Israeli Monitor: Jewish Settlements Grew Under Trump Presidency

        West Bank settlement construction surged during the first year of the Trump presidency, an Israeli monitoring group said Sunday, releasing data that added to Palestinian mistrust of the American administration.

Peace Now said that Israel began construction of 2,783 settlement homes in 2017. That was about 17 percent higher than the annual average since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took office in 2009.

It said that 78 percent of the new homes were in outlying settlements that would likely have…
Over 400,000 settlers now live in the West Bank, in addition to more than 200,000 settlers in east Jerusalem, the Palestinian’s hoped-for capital.The Palestinians and the international community say that settlements are illegal and prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. Israel says the fate of the settlements should be determined in negotiations.The head of the Arab League joined the large number of critics, condemning the Trump administration’s latest decision “in the strongest terms.”West Bank Jewish Settlements Pose Obstacle to Peace, Political Dilemma for Israel

        Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank - home to about 300,000

Israelis – are a crucial issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and
one that threatens to derail prospects for peace.  U.S. President
Barack Obama, in his speech to the Muslim world this month, called for
a freeze on all settlement activity. Washington has said in no
uncertain terms that Israel’s expansion of existing settlements must
stop.  Israeli compliance with the U.S. demand will not come easily.Yitzhar, a hilltop community…
The league’s secretary-general, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, said the decision would result in “more violence and cruelty” against the Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli settlers and “undermines any possibility” of achieving peace.The White House says it has developed a Mideast peace plan, but it has not yet unveiled it. The Palestinians already have rejected the plan, accusing the U.S. of unfair bias in favor of Israel.The Trump administration has made a number of moves in favor of Israel, recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, recognizing Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights and shuttering the Palestinian diplomatic offices in Washington.
…

House Launches Busy Week in Trump Impeachment Probe

A busy week in the public impeachment hearings into U.S. President Donald Trump begins early Tuesday with the first of three witnesses and what they know about Trump’s alleged efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rivals.In total, House committees will hear from nine witnesses during five separate hearings taking place on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of this week.The most anticipated testimony will come from U.S. ambassador to the European Union and million-dollar Trump inaugural donor Gordon Sondland.Sondland appeared to be in the center of dealing with Ukraine over Trump’s alleged demand that Ukraine investigate 2020 presidential rival and former Vice President Joe Biden for corruption.Another witness expected to draw a lot of attention is David Holmes — a U.S. diplomat in Kyiv who apparently overheard Trump asking about the investigations during a phone call between Sondland and the president.David Holmes, a career diplomat and the political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Ukaine leaves the Capitol Hill, Friday, Nov. 15, 2019, in Washington.Some witnesses have already testified behind closed doors. They include Sondland, who had to amend some of his testimony when other witnesses seemed to contradict what he told lawmakers.President Trump said Monday he would “strongly consider” testifying in writing to the House Intelligence Committee.”Even though I did nothing wrong, and don’t like giving credibility to this No Due Process Hoax, I like the idea & will, in order to get Congress focused again, strongly consider it!” Trump tweeted…..that I testify about the phony Impeachment Witch Hunt. She also said I could do it in writing. Even though I did nothing wrong, and don’t like giving credibility to this No Due Process Hoax, I like the idea & will, in order to get Congress focused again, strongly consider it!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) Jennifer Williams, special adviser for Europe and Russia in the Office of U.S. Vice President Mike Pence arrives on Capitol Hill for a closed-door hearing in Washington, U.S., November 7, 2019.The impeachment inquiry centers on whether Trump withheld $400 million in badly needed military aid to Ukraine, unless Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy publicly committed to investigating Biden, whose son Hunter sat on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, and alleged Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election on behalf of the Democrats.Trump made the initial request during a July 25 telephone call with Zelenskiy.A whistleblower disturbed by a U.S. president appearing to ask a foreign government to dig up dirt on a political rival alerted the the intelligence community’s inspector general, leading to the current impeachment inquiry.No evidence of corruption by Joe and Hunter Biden has ever surfaced and the allegations of Ukrainian election interference are based on a debunked conspiracy theory.Trump has described the July telephone call as “perfect ” and strongly denies there was any quid pro quo with Ukraine. He has called the impeachment probe a “hoax” and a “witch hunt,” He has also described some of the witnessed as “never Trumpers,” including several career diplomats who have spent decades serving presidents of both parties in non-partisan roles.The impeachment hearing “is a great fraud being played out against the American people by the Fake News Media & their partner, the Do Nothing Democrats,” Trump tweeted Monday, claiming the hearing rules “are rigged” by Pelosi and Congressman Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence panel.”But we are winning, and we will win!” Trump contended. 
…

Warren’s ‘Medicare for All’ Plan Reignites Health Care Clash

Elizabeth Warren’s proposal to gradually move the country to a government-funded health care system has further inflamed the debate over “Medicare for All,” likely ensuring the issue will play a significant role in this week’s Democratic presidential debate.The Massachusetts senator announced Friday that her administration would immediately build on existing laws, including the Affordable Care Act, to expand access to health care while taking up to three years to fully implement Medicare for All. That attempt to thread the political needle has roiled her more moderate rivals, who say she’s waffling, while worrying some on the left, who see Warren’s commitment to a single-payer system wavering.The divide could complicate plans by Democrats to turn health care into a winning issue in 2020. The party successfully took back control of the House last year by championing programs that ensure that people with preexisting medical conditions keep their insurance coverage while arguing that Republicans want to weaken such provisions. But the Medicare for All debate is more delicate as advocates including Warren grapple with concerns that a new government-run system won’t provide the same quality of coverage as private insurance – and would be prohibitively expensive.”The Medicare for All proposal has turned out to be a real deal-breaker in who gets the Democratic nomination,” said Robert Blendon, a Harvard University School of Public Health professor whose teaching responsibilities include courses on political strategy in health policy and public opinion polling. “This is not just another issue.’’FILE – Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) attend a Medicare For All event on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 10, 2019.Warren’s transition plan indicates she’d use her first 100 days as president to expand existing public health insurance options. That is closer to what has been supported by former Vice President Joe Biden and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. Both Democratic presidential candidates have criticized Medicare for All for wiping out private insurance – something they say many Americans aren’t ready for.Warren insists she’s simply working to expand health insurance in the short term to people who don’t have it while remaining committed to the full plan in the long run.”My commitment to Medicare for All is all the way,” Warren said while campaigning in Iowa over the weekend.Still, the transition signified a step toward pragmatism and an acknowledgement that the government has ways to expand health insurance coverage before embracing a universal system – something that would be difficult for any president to get through Congress. Consider that current entitlements, such as Social Security and Medicare, were phased in over years, not all at once.”If she’s looked at it and decides the sensible thing to do in order to not cause too much disruption in employment situations and within the medical system is to gear up over three years, she’s probably right,” said Cindy Wolf, a customer service and shipping manager who attended the California state Democratic Convention on Saturday in Long Beach.Still, the move may prove politically problematic for a candidate who has long decried others settling for consultant-driven campaigns seeking incremental changes at the expense of big ideas.Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is the original architect of Medicare for All and has made fighting for it the centerpiece of his 2020 White House bid. He tweeted following the release of Warren’s transition plan: “In my first week as president, we will introduce Medicare for All legislation.’’Una Lee Jost, a lawyer from Pasadena, Californi, holds signs supporting Bernie Sanders at the California Democratic Convention in Long Beach, California, Nov. 16, 2019.Campaigning in Nevada on Monday, California Sen. Kamala Harris said, “I believe that government should not be in a position of taking away people’s choice.””Especially on one of the most intimate and personal decisions people can make,” Harris said, “which is about how to address their health care needs.’’The criticism from others was far sharper. Top Biden adviser Kate Bedingfield dismissed Warren’s plan as “trying to muddy the waters” by offering “a full program of flips and twists.” Buttigieg spokeswoman Lis Smith said it was a “transparently political attempt to paper over a very serious policy problem.’’It’s easy to see the issue spilling into Wednesday’s debate because Warren rode a steady summer climb in the polls to become one of the primary field’s front-runners – but no longer seems to be rising. Polls recently show her support stabilizing, though not dipping, as focus on her Medicare for All ideas intensifies.The last two debates featured Warren failing to answer direct questions on whether she would be forced to raise middle class taxes to pay for the universal health care system she envisions. That set up a plan released two-plus weeks ago in which Warren vowed to generate $20-plus trillion in new government revenue without increasing taxes on the middle class – but that’s been decried by critics who accuse Warren of underestimating how much Medicare for All would really cost.And, though Warren never promised to begin working toward Medicare for All on Day 1 of her administration, the release of the transition plan, which spelled out that the process will take years, has unsettled some.Una Lee Jost, a lawyer who was holding “Bernie” signs in Chinese and English at the California Democratic Convention, called any lengthy transition to Medicare for All “a serious concern.’'”We should have implemented this decades ago,” she said.
…

Trump Backing Off Banning Vaping Flavors Popular with Teens

When President Donald Trump boarded Air Force One to fly to a Kentucky campaign rally two weeks ago, a plan was in place for him to give final approval to a plan to ban most flavored e-cigarettes.By the time Trump landed back at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington a few hours later, the plan was off. And its future is unclear.For nearly two months, momentum had been building inside the White House to try to halt a youth vaping epidemic that experts feared was hurting as many as 5 million teenagers.Both first lady Melania Trump and Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and senior adviser, pushed for the ban, which was also being championed internally by White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, who has taken the lead on some public health issues.But as Trump sat surrounded by political advisers on the flights to and from Lexington, he grew reluctant to sign the ban, convinced it could alienate voters who would be financially or otherwise affected by a vaping ban, according to two White House and campaign officials not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations.A news conference scheduled by Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar to announce the ban was canceled, while more meetings with industry leaders and lobbyists were proposed, according to the officials.Trump tweeted last week that he’ll be meeting with vaping industry representatives, medical professionals and others “to come up with an acceptable solution to the Vaping and E-cigarette dilemma.” The White House has yet to announce a date for a meeting.FILE- Flavored vaping solutions are shown in a window display at a vape and smoke shop in New York, Sept. 16, 2019.This month, Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale and others showed the president polling data indicating that e-cigarette users could abandon him if he followed through with the ban, the officials said.Campaign aides also highlighted an aggressive social media campaign — (hash)IVapeIVote —  in which advocates claimed a ban would force the closure of vaping shops, eliminating jobs and sending users of electronic cigarettes back to traditional smokes. Parscale also pointed out the risk that a ban could have on e-cigarette users in key battleground states that Trump narrowly won in 2016.Others in the West Wing, including Conway, have argued that a ban could be a winning issue with suburban voters, including mothers, who have fled the president in large numbers. Few would predict where Trump, who is known to abruptly change his mind, would end up since he recently has been consumed with other matters, notably televised impeachments hearings.The vaping industry’s largest trade group said Monday the administration was heading “in the right direction for adult smokers and their families.”“Bans don’t work, they never have,” Tony Abboud, executive director of the Vapor Technology Association, said in a statement.Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Association, an advocacy organization, added that the government should put in place “sensible and targeted regulations” before it resorts to prohibition, which opponents of a ban said could lead to the creation of an underground market for e-cigarettes.But Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said Trump would be guilty of “terrible public policy” and “bad politics” if he backs down.“This is one of the very few issues on which public views are unified,” Myers said in a telephone interview. “There are a small number of vape shop owners who are loud and don’t care. But there are millions more moms and dads who are deeply concerned.”Robin Koval, president and CEO of the Truth Initiative, a nonprofit, anti-tobacco organization, called on Trump to implement the original plan.“The health of America’s youth must come first and is not for sale or political gain,” Koval said in a statement. The first lady opened the White House to a group of young people from the Truth Initiative in October to tell her about their experiences with vaping.FILE – A high school student uses a vaping device near a school campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts.Trump’s initial pledge Sept. 11 to ban virtually all flavored e-cigarettes stunned vaping proponents and was immediately embraced by anti-tobacco advocates. In an Oval Office appearance with the first lady and Azar, Trump said the government would act within weeks to protect children from fruit, candy, dessert and other sweet vaping flavors, including mint and menthol.The announcement followed a tweet two days earlier by Mrs. Trump expressing concern “about the growing epidemic of e-cigarette use in our children.”“We need to do all we can to protect the public from tobacco-related disease and death, and prevent e-cigarettes from becoming an on-ramp to nicotine addiction for a generation of youth,” she said.But within days, Trump tweeted that e-cigarettes might be a less-harmful alternative for smokers, a point long made by the industry. Meanwhile, vaping lobbyists, conservative groups and Republican lawmakers from key states warned Trump that a crackdown could cost him with voters.The Vapor Technology Association launched ads and an online campaign promising to punish Trump and other politicians who support vaping restrictions. Conservative groups that have long promoted vaping as an alternative to smoking, including Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, joined the criticism.That group and others helped organize protests against banning flavors, including one outside the White House. Trump supporters also showed up at some of his campaign rallies holding signs expressing their opposition to a ban.The industry warned some 15,000 to 19,000 vaping shops across the country — and jobs — could be wiped out if flavors were eliminated.The administration was widely expected earlier this month to announce a scaled-back flavor ban that would exempt menthol, citing research that the flavor was not widely used by children. But no decision came.Trump instead told reporters on Nov. 8 — four days after his political advisers buttonholed him on the Kentucky trip — he was considering new approaches to curbing teen use, including raising the minimum age for purchasing tobacco from 18 to 21.Last week, Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson sent Trump a letter warning against “unchecked government action that stifles innovation and restricts adults’ freedom to choose safer alternatives to smoking.”Asked how disappointed the first lady would be if the president did not follow through with a ban, her spokeswoman, Stephanie Grisham, who also speaks for the president, said Mrs. Trump’s priority is the health and safety of children.“She does not believe e-cigarettes or any nicotine products should be marketed or available to children,” Grisham said.Underage vaping has reached what health officials call epidemic levels. In the latest government survey, 1 in 4 high school students reported using e-cigarettes in the previous month.Anticipating a ban on flavors, Juul Labs, the nation’s largest e-cigarette maker, said this month it would stop selling its best-selling, mint-flavored nicotine pods.
…

US House Panel Agrees to 10-day Hold in Fight for Trump Financial Data

A House of Representatives committee on Monday told the U.S. Supreme Court it would agree to a 10-day hold – but not a longer delay – on a lower court ruling directing President Donald Trump’s accounting firm to hand over his financial records to the Democratic-led panel.The case represents an important showdown pitting the powers of the presidency against the authority of Congress, with Trump fighting doggedly to keep details of this finances private.The delay agreed to by the House Oversight Committee would give the nine justices a chance to decide whether to grant Trump’s emergency request, filed on Friday, seeking to block the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruling.Trump turned to the justices after the lower court last week refused his request to reconsider its October decision backing the House committee’s authority to subpoena the records from Mazars LLP, Trump’s longtime accounting firm.The Republican president had asked the justices for at least a temporary hold on the enforcement of the subpoena. Trump’s lawyers would also want the matter to be put on hold for a longer period while the litigation is resolved.In a letter to the court, the committee’s lawyers said they would agree to a 10-day delay “out of courtesy for this court,” but would oppose Trump’s request for a longer pause. The Supreme Court has yet to act on Trump’s request or the committee’s offer to allow the 10-day delay.If the Supreme Court declines to hear Trump’s appeal, the documents would have to be handed over to lawmakers. Five votes among the justices are needed to grant a stay request. The court has a 5-4 conservative majority.In a separate case, Trump last Thursday asked the Supreme Court to review a New York-based federal appeals court’s ruling that local prosecutors can enforce a subpoena also issued to Mazars demanding Trump’s personal and corporate tax returns from 2011 to 2018.The House committee subpoenaed Mazars this year, saying it needed the records to determine if Trump complied with laws requiring disclosure of his assets, and to assess whether those laws needed to be changed.
…

US Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks Trump Tax Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that would have required President Donald Trump to turn over some of his financial records to a Democratic-led committee in the House of Representatives.Trump, in two conflicts with opposition lawmakers and prosecutors investigating his finances, has sought to shield disclosure of his personal and business affairs. He is only the second U.S. leader in the last four decades to refuse to make his tax returns public.Last week, a federal appellate court in Washington refused to rehear a ruling from a divided three-judge panel that Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars, must turn over eight years of Trump’s financial records.But Trump appealed and the Supreme Court, at least for the moment, blocked the need for Mazars to comply with the lower court ruling to turn over the documents.The order issued by Chief Justice John Roberts did not indicate whether the court ultimately plans to hear Trump’s appeal. The Roberts order puts the lower court ruling on hold while the nine Supreme Court justices decide how to proceed.In separate litigation, Trump has asked the Supreme Court to bar turning over the Mazars financial records to prosecutors in New York who are investigating the president’s business deals.The case could eventually result in a major decision on the extent of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution.Trump’s lawyers have argued that as long as Trump remains in office he is immune from criminal proceedings and investigations.”That the Constitution would empower thousands of state and local prosecutors to embroil the president in criminal proceedings is unimaginable,” Trump’s lawyers argued.The accounting firm has said that it will turn over the documents the prosecutors want if Trump loses the case. 
…

Buttigieg Touts Military Service, Wary of Overstating Role

Pete Buttigieg strides past an oversized photograph of himself dressed in fatigues, the Afghan horizon behind him, as he enters a Des Moines arena for an Iowa Democratic Party gala.In his first Iowa television ad, he holds a rifle and points it toward the rubble at his feet, introducing himself, “As a veteran … .”Like candidates from the time of George Washington, the South Bend, Indiana, mayor is leaning hard on his seven-month deployment as an intelligence officer in Afghanistan as a powerful credential. As he does, he walks a narrow path between giving his wartime service its due and overstating it.He is careful not to call himself a combat veteran even as he notes the danger he faced. One of his former competitors for the Democratic nomination, Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, has drawn a sharp contrast between his four combat tours in Iraq and Buttigieg’s service. And a former commanding officer, who said he thinks Buttigieg would be within his rights to say he is a combat veteran, nonetheless questions the use of a rifle in his ads.As support for his campaign grows, Buttigieg can expect more intense scrutiny of his military record in a political climate where military service is far from sacred, as past attacks on the records of Republican John McCain and Democrat John Kerry show.Buttigieg addressed the subject with reporters during a recent bus tour in northern Iowa. “It kind of felt like combat when the rocket alarm went off,” he said. “But I don’t feel prepared to use that term for myself.”Buttigieg and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard are the only Democratic candidates with military experience. He would not only be the first Democratic president to have served in the armed forces since Jimmy Carter, he would be the first veteran of a post-9/11 war.He volunteered for service and was quickly recognized for his intellect. Retired Col. Guy Hollingsworth chose Buttigieg as the lead analyst tracking the flow of money to terrorist cells in Afghanistan, information that would inform combat operations.Though more of Buttigieg’s time in Afghanistan was spent working in a secured intelligence office as an officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve, his dozens of trips outside U.S./NATO headquarters in the fortified Green Zone make him a combat veteran in the eyes of Hollingsworth, Buttigieg’s commanding officer.During these movements, Buttigieg, in body armor and an M4 rifle nearby, would typically drive a team of officials, navigating an armored SUV through Kabul’s chaotic streets.“That is the definition, going down range into a combat zone,” Hollingsworth said. “He is a combat veteran.”Kabul’s streets possessed threats such as crowds that could turn aggressive toward a vehicle found to contain U.S. military or parked vehicles that could hide improvised explosive devices.“Anytime somebody would go in a vehicle and drive, no matter how close it would be — even six city blocks away — over there, that’s a life-or-death situation,” said retired Col. Paul Karweik, who succeeded Hollingsworth as Buttigieg’s commanding officer.But Buttigieg never fired his weapon nor was he fired on, criteria for the Combat Action Badge, which is Karweik’s definition of a combat veteran and the one Buttigieg observes.That doesn’t mean Buttigieg holds back while campaigning in emphasizing the more dangerous aspects of his time in the war zone to distinguish himself subtly from his top-tier Democratic rivals and directly with President Donald Trump.“I don’t have to throw myself a military parade to see what a convoy looks like, because I was driving in one around Afghanistan right about the time this president was taping season seven of ‘Celebrity Apprentice,’” Buttigieg told Iowa Democrats at the state party’s marquee fundraiser in Des Moines this month.Buttigieg also often notes he has “seen worse incoming than a misspelled tweet.” There were sporadic, often inaccurate, but sometimes deadly rocket attacks when he was stationed at Bagram Air Force Base before being transferred to Kabul.He weaves his experience into campaign events with voters, especially when it reinforces his proposal to ban assault weapons.“This is definitely not the sense of peace and security I thought I was protecting when I was carrying one of these damn things around a war zone,” Buttigieg told voters in Charles City, Iowa, this month.And while Buttigieg says he relishes the chance to compare records with the Republican president, who received five draft deferments during the Vietnam War, there are warning signs for Buttigieg of overplaying his service.Moulton, who left the race in September, pointedly noted his four deployments to Iraq as a Marine combat officer was a better test of leadership than Buttigieg’s.“It’s good that Mayor Pete served, but there’s a world of difference between driving a Chevy Suburban in Kabul, where plenty of foreigners walk around without a problem, and closing on the enemy in combat,” Moulton told the Washington Examiner in September. Moulton declined to be interviewed for this report.Though Buttigieg’s commanding officers say he accurately describes his service, he could face questions. “It boils down to a bit of semantics,” Hollingsworth said.A combat convoy is defined as two or more vehicles moving together in unprotected space, not necessarily a long string of vehicles towing heavy weapons.“Pete’s statement would be accurate in the strict sense,” Hollingsworth said. “I might question the quote of ‘driving in one around Afghanistan.’ That implies something most likely bigger than what his assignment required under my command time, but I recognize his intent.”Hollingsworth also said Buttigieg might face questions about whether the image of him holding the rifle suggests to the viewer he was engaged in exchange of hostile fire.“If I were writing his bio ad, I wouldn’t start with that,” Hollingsworth said. “The bulk of his time was not strapping on all kinds of weapons of war and taking your chances.”Buttigieg dismissed whether the picture embellished his real mission. It was taken when he and a handful of others were on a hike within the Green Zone, he said.“If you’re watching closely, you’ll notice I’m not wearing body armor,” he told The Associated Press. “It was manageable risk, but you still wanted to have your weapon.”Distinctions such as these have begun stirring Republican critics on social media to cast doubt on Buttigieg’s credibility.They are reminiscent of Trump’s 2015 criticism of McCain’s capture as a Navy pilot during the Vietnam War, which showed the president’s willingness to challenge even valorous service.In the fall of 2004, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a political group that was by law allowed to raise unlimited sums from undisclosed donors, challenged Kerry’s version of events from 1969 that had earned the Navy veteran a Silver Star. Kerry’s campaign opted not to respond to the ads, as to not legitimize them, a decision the Massachusetts senator later suggested was a key to his loss to Republican President George W. Bush.Candidates must abandon the idea that their service can inoculate them from attacks and should prepare early a strategy to confront them aggressively, said David Wade, Kerry’s campaign spokesman and longtime adviser.“Bottom line, if it’s a character issue, you have to match dollar-for-dollar on advertising,” Wade said.
…

Trump’s Border Wall Could Again Become Obstacle in Last Minute Budget Talks

During his run for the presidency in 2016, Donald Trump found a surefire method for changing the mood at his political rallies. Whenever he sensed that he was losing the crowd, he told the editorial board of the New York Times, “I just say, We will build the wall!’ and they go nuts.”This week, with impeachment hearings in the House of Representatives dominating the headlines, the border wall may reappear as a distraction for Trump’s staunchest supporters.  Lawmakers have agreed in principle to adopt a stop-gap spending bill to avert a partial shutdown of the federal government on Thursday, with the hope that negotiators from Congress and the administration can use the 30-day reprieve it grants to finalize spending authorizations for the remainder of the fiscal year.A possible sticking point? Funding for the president’s wall.Last year, when Democrats refused to provide $5 billion in wall funding in a budget deal, the result was a 35-day shutdown.So, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared on the political talk show Face the Nation on Sunday, and said that she was optimistic that a deal would be reached to avoid a shutdown, the natural follow-up question was whether that meant that Democrats would be providing wall funding.Pelosi replied with a definitive “No.” She went on to suggest that she doesn’t believe that the president is truly committed to the effort.”The President hasn’t built any new wall in a whole term of office,” she said. “I think that his comments about the wall are really an applause line at a rally, but they’re not anything that he’s serious about.”Pelosi’s comments pointed to a central issue with regard to the border wall: widespread confusion about its current status.The first panels of levee border wall are seen at a construction site along the U.S.-Mexico border, Thursday, Nov. 7, 2019, in Donna, Texas. The new section, with 18-foot tall steel bollards atop a concrete wall, will stretch approximately 8 miles.President Trump asserts that wall construction is moving ahead. In both his Twitter feed and his public remarks, Trump regularly touts the “great progress” being made on constructing the barrier. In September, a Department of Defense spokesperson made a statement to reporters that implied new sections of wall were being built at the rate of a mile per day.However, the reality is somewhat different.On Friday, acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan told reporters that 78 miles (125 kilometers) of new border wall had already been built. However, under questioning, he acknowledged  it was actually 78 miles of replacement wall for “an existing form of barrier.”However, he added, workers have begun breaking ground in places in the Rio Grande Valley where no barrier currently exists.It may actually be a number of years before the government is able to begin construction on many sections of the proposed wall, according to analysts, because it does not own the land. Hundreds of private individuals hold title to land along the United States’ border with Mexico, and in order to build the wall on their land, the Trump administration would either have to convince them to sell it to the government or use its Eminent Domain authority to take the land without the owners’ consent.Many landowners have expressed unwillingness to sell, either because of opposition to the wall or for other reasons. The Trump administration has indicated that as soon as this week it could begin filing the court documents necessary to take possession of the land from owners who don’t want to give it up.According to reporting by NBC News, the government is considering the use of an expedited process that could avoid lengthy court battles over the land seizures. Success would hinge on convincing the courts that a state of emergency exists that justifies depriving owners the right to contest the seizures in court.”It’s a challenge to go through that process,” Morgan told reporters. However, he added, “I still think we’re on track to get the land we need for 450 miles” (724 kilometers) of new wall construction.Meanwhile, the Trump administration is exploring a novel way of calling public attention to the wall construction. Jared Kushner, a White House adviser and the president’s son-in-law, has reportedly proposed the installation of cameras that would allow the administration to live-stream video from construction sites.The Army Corps of Engineers and the CBP have both objected to the proposal, which is being driven, according to the Washington Post, directly by the president himself. The idea is that a 24-hour-per-day video stream showing construction in progress would silence critics — like Pelosi — who regularly dismiss the wall as more of a publicity stunt than a serious piece of border control policy.The web-cam proposal drew immediate fire from Democrats, who derided it as an election-year stunt for the president’s political benefit. Corey Booker, the New Jersey senator running for the Democratic presidential nomination, co-sponsored a bill to block the use of federal funds for a wall camera.”The only thing more senseless and wasteful than an ineffective border wall is installing a camera to livestream its construction,” he said in a statement.Democratic arguments that the wall is ineffective received further support earlier this month, when multiple news reports confirmed that drug smugglers have been able to breach border walls with the help of a portable reciprocating saw — a power tool available in hardware stores for under $100.
…

Democrats, Republicans React to Impeachment Testimony as Hearings Enter Week 2

House Republicans and Democrats are reacting Sunday to the first week of Impeachment hearings targeting U.S. President Donald Trump. Democrats say testimony hearing during the hearings confirms the president abused power by allegedly withholding military aid to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on a political foe.  Republicans say the proceedings have provided no hard evidence of wrongdoing.  VOA’s Arash Arabasadi reports
…

Poll: Buttigieg Surges Ahead of Democratic Rivals in Iowa

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg holds a clear lead among Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa, the state that will hold the first nominating contest in February, a new Des Moines Register/CNN/Mediacom opinion poll showed on Saturday.Buttigieg’s support climbed to 25%, a 16-point increase since the previous survey in September, CNN reported.It said there was a close three-way battle for second with Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren at 16%, and former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders each at 15%.Since September, Warren dropped six percentage points and Biden slipped five points, while Sanders gained four points, CNN said.Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, told the network the news was encouraging and his campaign felt growing momentum in the farm state, but there was “still a lot of work to do” in increasing his name recognition there.Buttigieg also led Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa in a Monmouth University poll released on Tuesday.A New York Times/Sienna poll released earlier this month also showed Buttigieg’s support surging in Iowa, but still behind Warren and Sanders. Nationally, he does not fare nearly as well, averaging around 8% in polls.Buttigieg’s campaign is betting a strong finish in the Iowa caucus on Feb. 3 will help quell questions about whether he is ready for the big stage, and persuade reluctant black and Hispanic voters to give him a second look.Buttigieg, 37, has invested heavily in Iowa from the start.His campaign has more than 100 staffers and 20 offices in the state, among the most of any candidate.Buttigieg finished the third quarter with $23.4 million in campaign cash on hand, ranking third behind Warren and Sanders at $25.7 million and $33.7 million, respectively. Biden had $8.9 million, forcing his campaign to abandon a promise to reject support from political action committees.
 
…

Week 2 of Trump Impeachment Hearings: Diplomat Sondland at Forefront   

Jennifer Williams, a special adviser to Vice President Mike Pence for Europe and Russia and who is a career Foreign Service officer, arrives for a closed-door interview on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 7, 2019.Impeachment hearings targeting U.S. President Donald Trump are heading into a second week, with key witnesses set to testify about how he pushed Ukraine to investigate one of his chief 2020 Democratic challengers, former Vice President Joe Biden, while temporarily withholding military aid Kyiv wanted.Eight more current and former government officials will appear before the House Intelligence Committee for nationally televised sessions, with a central figure, Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, set to appear Wednesday.In amended behind-closed-doors testimony, Sondland, a million-dollar Trump political donor before being tapped by Trump for the EU posting in Brussels, said that he had warned an aide to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in early September that it would not get the U.S. military assistance it wanted unless the Kyiv leader publicly committed to opening the investigation of Biden.FILE – President Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House, in Washington, Nov. 9, 2019.It was a reciprocal, quid pro quo deal that Trump has denied occurred but is central to the efforts of Democratic lawmakers to impeach the country’s 45th president. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and ridiculed the impeachment effort as a sham proceeding. Trump eventually released the $391 million in military aid on Sept. 11 without Ukraine launching a Biden investigation.Other figures linked to the impeachment inquiry have corroborated Sondland’s testimony. In a transcript of private testimony released Saturday, Tim Morrison, a White House national security aide, said late last month that Sondland had spoken with Trump about a half dozen times in recent months and had talked with a top Ukraine official about winning release of the military assistance Kyiv wanted to help fight pro-Russian separatists in the eastern part of the country in exchange for investigations that benefited Trump politically.“His mandate from the president was to go make deals,” Morrison said of Sondland. Morrison is set to testify publicly before the impeachment panel on Tuesday, alongside Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine who, as others have, testified that Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer named by him to oversee Ukraine affairs, was the driving force to get Kyiv to open the politically tinged investigation to help the U.S. leader.David Holmes, a career diplomat and the political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Ukaine leaves the Capitol Hill, Nov. 15, 2019, in Washington, after a deposition before congressional lawmakers.Late last week, David Holmes, an aide to William Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Kyiv, told impeachment investigations in private testimony that he overheard a July 26 cell phone conversation between Trump and Sondland at a Kyiv restaurant in which the president inquired whether Zelenskiy was going to pursue the investigations of Biden, his son Hunter Biden’s work for a Ukrainian natural gas company and a debunked theory that Ukraine had meddled in the 2016 election that Trump won.  U.S. intelligence community concluded Russia was behind the election meddling. Holmes said Sondland in the cell phone call assured Trump that Zelenskiy “loves your ass.””So, he’s gonna do the investigation?” Holmes quoted Trump as asking. Sondland, according to Holmes, replied, “He’s gonna do it,” while adding that Zelenskiy will do “anything you ask him to.”Holmes said he later asked Sondland if Trump cared about Ukraine, with the envoy replying that Trump did not “give a s**t about Ukraine.”“I asked why not, and Ambassador Sondland stated that the president only cares about ‘big stuff,’” Holmes testified, according to a transcript posted by CNN. “I noted that there was ‘big stuff’ going on in Ukraine, like a war with Russia, and Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant ‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the ‘Biden investigation.”’Before Sondland revised his testimony to say there had been a quid pro quo — the military aid for the Biden investigation — Trump had called Sondland a “great American.” But after Sondland changed his testimony, Trump said, “I hardly know the gentleman.”On Tuesday, the House Intelligence panel is also set to hear from Jennifer Williams, a foreign affairs aide to Vice President Mike Pence, and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, director for European affairs at the National Security Council. Both of them listened in on Trump’s July 25 call with Zelenskiy asking the Ukrainian leader for “a favor,” the investigations of the Bidens.Both Williams and Vindman have voiced concerns about Trump’s request. It is against U.S. campaign finance law to solicit foreign assistance for help in a U.S. election.Aside from Sondland, the Intelligence panel is also hearing Wednesday from Laura Cooper, a Defense Department official, and David Hale, the undersecretary of State for political affairs. Fiona Hill, the former National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia, is testifying Thursday.House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks with Democratic Counsel Daniel Goldman (L) and other staffers during testimony from Marie Yovanovitch, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, during a House Intelligence Committee hearing.Political analysts in Washington say the Trump impeachment drama could last for several months. If Trump is impeached by a simple majority in the House, perhaps by the end of the year as appears possible, a trial would be held in January in the Republican-majority Senate, where a two-thirds vote would be needed for his conviction and removal from office.The time frame could bump up against the first Democratic party presidential nominating contests starting in February, when voters will begin casting ballots on who they want to oppose Trump when he seeks a second four-year term in the November 2020 national election. Six Democratic senators are among those running for the party’s presidential nomination, but could be forced to stay in Washington to sit as jurors in the 100-member Senate as it decides Trump’s fate, rather than campaign full-time for the presidency. Trump’s removal from office remains unlikely, with at least 20 Republicans needed to turn against him and vote for his conviction. To date, while a small number of Republicans have criticized Trump for his actions on Ukraine, no Republican senator has called for his removal from office through impeachment, a drastic action that has never occurred in U.S. history.  
…

Democrats Hold Louisiana Governor’s Seat Despite Trump

Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards has stunned Republicans again, narrowly winning a second term Saturday as the Deep South’s only Democratic governor and handing Donald Trump another gubernatorial loss this year.In the heart of Trump country, the moderate Edwards cobbled together enough cross-party support with his focus on bipartisan, state-specific issues to defeat Republican businessman Eddie Rispone.Coming after a defeat in the Kentucky governor’s race and sizable losses in Virginia’s legislative races, the Louisiana result seems certain to rattle Republicans as they head into the 2020 presidential election. Trump fought to return the seat to the GOP, making three trips to Louisiana to rally against Edwards.The president’s intense attention motivated not only conservative Republicans, but also powered a surge in anti-Trump and black voter turnout that helped Edwards.Louisiana Republican gubernatorial candidate Eddie Rispone speaks as he is endorsed by President Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Bossier City, La., Nov. 14, 2019.Moderate candidateDemocrats who argue that nominating a moderate presidential candidate is the best approach to beat Trump are certain to point to Louisiana’s race as bolstering their case. Edwards, a West Point graduate, opposes gun restrictions, signed one of the nation’s strictest abortion bans and dismissed the impeachment effort as a distraction.Still, while Rispone’s loss raises questions about the strength of Trump’s coattails, its relevance to his reelection chances are less clear. Louisiana is expected to easily back Trump next year, and Edwards’ views in many ways are out of step with his own party.In the final days as polls showed Edwards with momentum, national Republicans beefed up assistance for Rispone. That wasn’t enough to boost the GOP contender, who wasn’t among the top-tier candidates Republican leaders hoped would challenge Edwards as they sought to prove that the Democrat’s longshot victory in 2015 was a fluke.Little-known RepublicanRispone is a longtime political donor who was little-known when he launched his campaign, had ties to unpopular former Gov. Bobby Jindal and offered few details about his agenda. Edwards also proved to be a formidable candidate, with a record of achievements.Working with the majority-Republican Legislature, Edwards stabilized state finances with a package of tax increases, ending the deficit-riddled years of Jindal. New money paid for investments in public colleges and the first statewide teacher raise in a decade.Edwards expanded Louisiana’s Medicaid program, lowering the state’s uninsured rate below the national average. A bipartisan criminal sentencing law rewrite he championed ended Louisiana’s tenure as the nation’s top jailer.Rispone, the 70-year-old owner of a Baton Rouge industrial contracting company, hitched his entire candidacy to Trump, introducing himself to voters in ads that focused on support for the president in a state Trump won by 20 percentage points.But the 53-year-old Edwards, a former state lawmaker and former Army Ranger from rural Tangipahoa Parish, reminded voters that he’s a Louisiana Democrat, with political views that sometimes don’t match his party’s leaders.“They talk about I’m some sort of a radical liberal. The people of Louisiana know better than that. I am squarely in the middle of the political spectrum,” Edwards said. “That hasn’t changed, and that’s the way we’ve been governing.”Millions spentRispone poured more than $12 million of his own money into the race. But he had trouble drawing some of the primary vote that went to Republican U.S. Rep. Ralph Abraham, after harshly attacking Abraham in ads as he sought to reach the runoff.Rispone also avoided many traditional public events attended by Louisiana gubernatorial candidates and sidestepped questions about his plans when taking office. He promised tax cuts, without saying where he’d shrink spending, and he pledged a constitutional convention, without detailing what he wanted to rewrite.Both parties spent millions on attack ads and get-out-the-vote work, on top of at least $36 million spent by candidates.
…

Trump Goes to Hospital for ‘Routine’ Checkup

U.S. President Donald Trump made an unexpected visit to a military hospital Saturday afternoon for what the White House said was an early start to his annual health checkup.“Anticipating a very busy 2020, the president is taking advantage of a free weekend here in Washington, D.C., to begin portions of his routine annual physical exam at Walter Reed,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.The president spent about two hours and 15 minutes at the medical complex in Bethesda, Maryland. A photographer saw him emerge from the facility with an open collar and no necktie.Grisham, just after Trump’s departure, said the president underwent a “quick exam and labs” and he “remains healthy and energetic without complaints, as demonstrated by his repeated vigorous rally performances in front of thousands of Americans several times a week.”The press secretary provided no additional details on what type of tests Trump underwent.The press secretary added that the president, while at the facility, also greeted medical staff “to share his thanks for all the outstanding care they provide to our Wounded Warriors, and wish them an early happy Thanksgiving.”Before departing Walter Reed, Trump also met with the family of a special forces soldier injured in Afghanistan, Grisham said.Trump, 73, was deemed fit by his official physician, U.S. Navy Commander Sean Conley, following an examination in early February at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.The motorcade of President Donald Trump waits at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., Nov. 16, 2019.The president, who has a taste for red meat and fast food, does not drink alcohol or smoke. He is not known to have had any significant medical issues since becoming president in January 2017 but has a history of elevated cholesterol and had been taking a low daily dose of aspirin for cardiac health.Four hours of testsOn February 8, Trump underwent four hours of routine tests at Walter Reed with Conley supervising a panel of 11 different board-certified specialists.Following the annual examination, Conley, in a memo to the White House, said the president was “in very good health and I anticipate he will remain so for the duration of his presidency and beyond.”That was the second such physical exam of his presidency. Questions were raised about the true health of the president after the first one in 2018.The White House doctor at the time, Navy Rear Admiral Ronny Jackson, declared Trump in “excellent health,” attributing it to “incredibly good genes.”The physician also declared that he had told the president he “might live to be 200 years old” if Trump would just eat food that was more healthful.After the 2018 physical, Jackson told reporters the president weighed 108 kilograms (239 pounds) and could reasonably lose approximately 4 to 7 kilograms (10 to 15 pounds).Jackson said Trump would undergo a colonoscopy in 2019. The procedure apparently was not performed in February of this year.  Jackson also said the president got a perfect score on a screening for cognitive impairment and was “mentally very sharp.”NominationJackson later was nominated by Trump to run the Department of Veterans Affairs, but the admiral withdrew his name after allegations of misconduct surfaced, including accusations he improperly dispensed medication.
 
The admiral denied the allegations, which Trump called “lies.”The president subsequently recommended Jackson for a second star (higher military rank) and promoted him to White House chief medical adviser.
…

Senior White House Official Testifies Privately in Trump Impeachment Probe

A senior White House budget official arrived on Capitol Hill Saturday to testify behind closed doors before congressional investigators who are conducting an impeachment inquiry against U.S. President Donald Trump.Mark Sandy, a longtime career official with the Office of Management and Budget, is the first agency employee to be deposed in the inquiry after three employees appointed by Trump defied congressional subpoenas to testify. It remains unclear if a subpoena had been issued to Sandy.Sandy could provide valuable information about the U.S. delay of nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine last summer, allegedly in exchange for the newly-elected Ukrainian president to launch investigations into 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden and his son at Trump’s request. Investigators are also exploring debunked claims promoted by Trump and allies that Ukraine, and not Russia, interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.Sandy was among the career employees who questioned the holdup, according to people with knowledge of the matter.His signature is on at least one document that prevented the provision of the aid to Ukraine, according to copies of documents investigators discussed during an earlier deposition. A transcript of the discussion has been publicly disclosed.Sandy appears before the House foreign affairs, intelligence, and oversight and reform committees.FILE – Members of Congress head to a resticted area for a closed-door deposition held as part of House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill in Washington, Oct. 23, 2019.In a statement, the three Democratic-led committees said they are investigating “the extent to which President Trump jeopardized national security by pressing Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election and by withholding security assistance provided by Congress to help Ukraine counter Russian aggression, as well as any efforts to cover up these matters.”Sandy’s deposition comes one day after the ousted former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, testified at the congressional impeachment inquiry into U.S. President Donald Trump that she was “shocked and devastated” over remarks Trump made about her during a call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.“I didn’t know what to think, but I was very concerned,” she told the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington. “It felt like a threat.”Her testimony was consistent with her closed-door testimony last month when she said she felt “threatened” and worried about her safety after Trump said “she’s going to go through some things.”A career diplomat, Yovanovitch was unceremoniously recalled to Washington after Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, and his allies waged what her colleagues and Democrats have described as a smear campaign against her. Two Giuliani associates recently arrested for campaign finance violations are accused of lobbying former Republican House member Pete Sessions of Texas for her ouster.Yovanovitch was mentioned in Trump’s July 25 call with Zelenskiy that triggered the impeachment probe after a whistleblower filed a complaint. According to the White House summary of the call, Trump said Yovanovitch was “bad news.”Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testifies before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 15, 2019.An unusual exchange occurred during the hearing that began when Trump took to Twitter to again criticize Yovanovitch.  He tweeted, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.”Democratic committee chairman Adam Schiff interrupted the proceedings to read the tweet and asked her to respond. Yovanovitch paused before saying, “It’s very intimidating” and added: “I can’t speak to what the president is trying to do, but the effect is to be intimidating.”Schiff responded that, “Some of us here take witness intimidation very, very seriously.”Trump’s Twitter attack drew the ire of Congresswoman Liz Cheney, the third highest-ranking Republican in the House.She said Trump “was wrong” and that Yovanovitch “clearly is somebody who’s been a public servant to the United States for decades, and I don’t think the president should have done that.”The White House later issued a statement denying accusations of intimidation.“The tweet was not witness intimidation, it was simply the President’s opinion, which he is entitled to,” the statement said. “This is not a trial, it is a partisan political process—or to put it more accurately, a totally illegitimate, charade stacked against the President. There is less due process in this hearing than any such event in the history of our country. It’s a true disgrace.”Yovanovitch also told lawmakers that she was the target of a “campaign of disinformation” during which “unofficial back channels” were used to oust her.Yovanovitch said repeated attacks from “corrupt interests” have created a “crisis in the State Department,” which she said “is being hallowed out within a competitive and complex time on the world stage.”A transcript of a phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is shown during former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony on Capitol Hill, Nov. 15, 2019.The veteran diplomat said that senior officials at the State Department, right up to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, failed to defend her from attacks from Trump and his allies, including Guiliani.Yovanovitch, who served as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine from July 2016 to May 2019, also testified last month that U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland had recommended she praise Trump on Twitter if she wanted to save her job.During opening remarks, Schiff said Yovanovitch was “smeared and cast aside” by Trump because she was viewed as an obstacle to Trump’s political and personal agenda.Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, described the hearings as nothing more than “spectacles” for Democrats to “advance their operation to topple a duly elected president.”Republicans, led by Nunes and their lead counsel, Steve Castor, tried to portray Yovanovitch as immaterial to the impeachment inquiry.Nunes suggested that Yovanovitch’s complaints are a personnel matter that is “more appropriate for the Subcommittee on Human Resources on Foreign Affairs” and declared she is “not a material fact witness.”Castor peppered Yovanovitch with questions aimed at proving her irrelevance, including whether she was involved in preparations for the July 25 call between Trump and Zelenskiy or plans for a White House meeting between the two leaders. She answered in the negative to all the questions.Republican Congressman Devin Nunes, left, talks to Steve Castor, Republican staff attorney, during testimony from former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 15, 2019.Nunes also read a rough transcript of an April call Trump had with newly elected Zelenskiy that shows Zelenskiy was eager to have Trump attend his inauguration in Ukraine. The White House released the transcript just minutes after the hearing began, apparently an attempt to dispel any notions of wrongdoing by the president.“I know how busy you are, but if it’s possible for you to come to the inauguration ceremony, that would be a great, great thing for you to do to be with us on that day.”Trump vowed to have a “great representative” attend the event if he was unable to.The U.S. delegation to inauguration was led by Energy Secretary Rick Perry after Vice President Mike Pence canceled the trip.Yovanovitch’s removal sent shockwaves through the foreign service, with more than 50 former female U.S. ambassadors writing a letter to Trump and U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to protect foreign service officers from political retaliation.William Taylor, acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, and George Kent, a senior State Department official in charge of U.S. policy toward Ukraine, testified on Wednesday during the first day of the historic televised hearings that could lead to a House vote on articles of impeachment before the end of the year.George Kent, senior State Department official, left, and Ambassador William Taylor, charge d’affaires at the U.S. embassy in Ukraine, are sworn in at at a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 13, 2019.All three diplomats have previously testified behind closed doors about Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and Biden’s son, Hunter, and to probe a discredited conspiracy theory regarding the 2016 president election.Democrats say the open hearings will allow the public to assess the credibility of the witnesses and their testimonies. Republicans hope to discredit the impeachment proceedings and poke holes in the witnesses’ testimony.Also Friday, David Holmes, a staffer at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, appeared before House investigators for closed-door testimony. Holmes testified he overheard Trump ask Sondland about the status of “investigations” during a phone call after Trump’s July 25 conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart.Sondland later explained the probes pertained to Biden, a former U.S. vice president, and his son, Hunter, according to Holmes. No wrongdoing by either Biden has been substantiated.Holmes’ testimony was one of the first direct accounts of Trump pursuing investigations of a political rival.Democrats launched the impeachment inquiry to determine if Trump withheld nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine unless President Zelenskiy publicly committed himself to investigating 2020 Democratic presidential rival Joe Biden for corruption.FILE – U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a bilateral meeting with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on the sidelines of the 74th session of the U.N. General Assembly in New York, Sept. 25, 2019.Trump also has repeated an unfounded claim that Ukraine, and not Russia, meddled in the 2016 presidential election on behalf of Democrats and their candidate, Hillary Clinton.Republicans have contended that Trump did not improperly pressure Ukraine to investigate political rivals for political advantage.Under pressure from Trump, Republican lawmakers have waged a vigorous defense of the president’s actions in dealing with Ukraine over a several-month period, and they have asserted that the Democrats’ case for impeachment against Trump is non-existent.Next week, the House panel will hold public hearings again. The schedule for testimony includes:
 
Tuesday: Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence; Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, former director for European Affairs at the National Security Council, Ambassador Kurt Volker, former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine; and Tim Morrison, a White House aide with the National Security Council focusing on Europe and Russia policy.
 
Wednesday: Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union; Laura Cooper, deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russian, Ukrainian and Eurasian Affairs; and David Hale, under secretary of state for political affairs.
 
Thursday: Fiona Hill, former National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia. 
…

NRA Tax Filing: Embattled CEO Earned About $2 Million in 2018

The National Rifle Association’s embattled top executive earned about $2 million last year at a time when the gun rights lobby is beating back challenges from regulators, longtime members and gun control groups, according to tax filings cited in media reports.The tax filings come as the NRA faces investigations in New York and Washington that threaten its nonprofit status. Nonprofits file tax documents every year, and they are a year behind, capturing the NRA’s finances for 2018 — the year before internal strife spilled into public view.The tax filings were not yet publicly available, but news reports in The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post cited the documents. The NRA refused to make them available to The Associated Press, saying its longtime policy is only to provide paper copies by mail.According to the filings, known as 990s, longtime NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre’s total compensation rose to more than $2 million. His base salary went from $1.17 million to $1.27 million, he received a bonus of about $455,000, and he got about $366,000 from a deferred compensation plan, according to the documents cited in media reports.Critics outragedNRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said in a statement that compensation for LaPierre and other senior officials followed a “detailed analysis conducted by an independent compensation committee. Mr. LaPierre’s compensation includes benefits made payable under his retirement plan.”The news reports drew immediate rebukes from critics.“This is further evidence that, at this point, LaPierre is more of a burden than an asset to American gun owners,” said Rob Pincus, a longtime NRA member and firearms instructor who is a member of Save the Second, a group calling for LaPierre’s resignation and seeking changes to the NRA.Long viewed as the most powerful gun lobby in the world, the NRA has been facing internal and external pressures over its operations and spending habits. Authorities have launched investigations, and there has been a revolt by members who are questioning the NRA’s finances and leadership.There are allegations that LaPierre expensed hundreds of thousands of dollars in luxury clothing he purchased in Beverly Hills and that the NRA has made tens of thousands of dollars in payments to a handful of influential board members.FILE – Images of NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre, Legislative Director Chris Cox and President Oliver North displayed during the National Rifle Association annual meeting at the Indiana Convention center in Indianapolis, Indiana, April 27, 2019.The NRA’s president, Oliver North, stepped down amid a rancorous annual meeting last spring. And Chris Cox, its top lobbyist who is widely viewed as a successor to LaPierre, resigned after being accused of being in cahoots with North in a failed attempt to oust LaPierre as CEO.The disputes even led to a split between the NRA and its longtime marketing firm, Oklahoma-based Ackerman McQueen, and each sued the other.The upheaval has left some wondering what role the NRA can play in the 2020 presidential election, especially after it was a significant source of money and support for President Donald Trump.Less debtThe latest tax filing shows that the NRA ended 2018 with a $2.7 million shortfall. That’s still a vast improvement from what it reported in 2017, when it was $17.8 million in the red, or in 2016, when it posted a shortfall of $45.8 million.“The spending of the NRA’s political arm fluctuates based on the needs of each political cycle,” Arulanandam said. “We remain a driving influence in key races where our Second Amendment freedoms are under attack, and we remain poised to further activate our funding and grassroots advocacy in support of the 2020 election.”Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action, a gun control advocacy group, said the tax filings show the NRA’s true motivations.“This eye-popping raise and other inside dealing is yet more evidence that the NRA is abandoning its members to focus on what is apparently its chief mission: enriching executives. Given the multiple ongoing investigations, I’d bet that come 2020, the NRA won’t be writing political checks, they’ll be answering subpoenas.”However, NRA President Carolyn Meadows said LaPierre’s compensation is justified, reflecting “his enormous contributions to our members and the freedoms for which they fight. His contributions to the NRA have been transformative.”
…

Trump Fights Back as Democrats Home In on Impeachment

As House Democrats bring witnesses to testify in the public impeachment inquiry, President Donald Trump continues to attack the witnesses and opposition Democrats. White House Correspondent Patsy Widakuswara takes a look at the president’s communications strategy and at his supporters and opponents in Congress.
…

Democrat Warren Outlines Three-Year Path to Medicare for All

White House hopeful Elizabeth Warren on Friday outlined how she would implement Medicare for All during her first term, including new legislation in her first 100 days that would give all Americans the option to enroll in the government health insurance plan.Warren’s timeline envisions a progression that would initially retain many aspects of the current system, including employer-based private insurance, while transitioning Americans to the government’s Medicare health insurance plan that currently covers individuals 65 and older.The proposal could help blunt criticism, including from a number of the Massachusetts U.S. senator’s Democratic presidential rivals, that her Medicare for All plan is too disruptive.”By the end of my first 100 days, we will have opened the door for tens of millions of Americans to get high-quality Medicare for All coverage at little or no cost. But I won’t stop there,” Warren wrote on the website Medium.FILE – Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign event in Scranton, Pennsylvania, Oct. 23, 2019.In the crowded field vying for the Democratic Party’s nomination to take on President Donald Trump in November 2020, Warren and progressive rival U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders argue the best route to cover millions of uninsured Americans and lower costs is to replace private insurance with Medicare for All.Moderate candidates such as former Vice President Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, support expanding the Affordable Care Act, while retaining forms of private insurance.In an acknowledgement of the steep road her proposal would face in Congress if she were elected, Warren said she would use a Senate procedural tactic to pass the first phase, requiring a simple 51-vote majority instead of the usual 60 votes.Such a move would likely hinge on Democrats regaining control of the Senate, where Republicans currently hold 53 seats in the 100-seat chamber. Democrats control the U.S. House of Representatives, although all 435 seats will also be on ballots in 2020.FILE – U.S. Democratic presidential candidate and mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg, responds to a question during a forum in Las Vegas, Nevada, Oct. 2, 2019.Warren’s first phase would lower the Medicare eligibility age to 50, offer other Americans the choice to buy into the government program, and provide coverage for children and low-income families.By the third year, Warren said, she would pass Medicare for All legislation that would allow only “supplemental private insurance that doesn’t duplicate the benefits of Medicare for All.”Biden’s campaign said it “doesn’t change the reality that Medicare for All will deny Americans the right to choose their insurance.”Buttigieg’s campaign said it would “eradicate choice.”Warren’s transition plan comes two weeks after she released a detailed proposal to pay for a Medicare for All system her campaign estimates would cost $20.5 trillion in additional government spending over a decade.
 
…

Twitter Details Political Ad Ban, Admits It’s Imperfect 

Twitter’s new ban on political ads will cover appeals for votes, solicitations for campaign contributions and any political content. But the company quickly acknowledged Friday that it expects to make mistakes as individuals and groups look for loopholes. Twitter is defining political content to include any ad that references a candidate, political party, government official, ballot measure, or legislative or judicial outcome. The ban also applies to all ads — even non-political ones — from candidates, political parties, and elected or appointed government officials. However, Twitter is allowing ads related to social causes such as climate change, gun control and abortion. People and groups running such ads won’t be able to target those ads down to a user’s ZIP code or use political categories such as conservative'' orliberal.” Rather, targeting must be kept broad, based on a user’s state or province, for instance. News organizations will be exempt so they can promote stories that cover political issues. While Twitter has issued guidelines for what counts as a news organization — single-issue advocacy outlets don’t qualify, for instance — it’s unclear if this will be enough prevent partisan websites from promoting political content. FILE – Attendees walk past a Facebook logo during Facebook Inc.’s F8 developers conference in San Jose, Calif.Twitter announced its worldwide ban on political ads October 30, but didn’t release details until Friday. The policy, which goes into effect next Friday, is in stark contrast to Facebook’s approach of allowing political ads, even if they contain false information. Facebook has said it wants to provide politicians with a level playing field for communication and not intervene when they speak, regardless of what they’re saying. Response to Twitter’s ban has been strong and mixed, with critics questioning the company’s ability to enforce the new policy given its poor history in banning hate speech and abuse from its service. The company acknowledges it will make mistakes but says it’s better to start addressing the issue now rather than wait until all the kinks are worked out. Aside from concerns about foreign interference in elections, the political advertising issue rose to the forefront in recent months as Twitter, along with Facebook and Google, refused to remove a misleading video ad from President Donald Trump’s campaign that targeted Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. In response, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, another presidential hopeful, ran her own ad on Facebook taking aim at Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The ad claimed — admittedly falsely to make its point — that Zuckerberg had endorsed Trump for re-election. Over the past several weeks, Facebook has been pressed to change its policy. But it was Twitter instead that jumped in with its bombshell ban. Drew Margolin, a Cornell University communications professor who studies social networks, said Twitter’s broad ban is a reflection that vetting is not realistic and is potentially unfair.'' He said a TV network might be in a position to vet all political ads, but Twitter and Facebook cannot easily do so. While their reliance on automated systems makes online ads easier and cheaper to run, Margolin said, it also makes them anattractive target” for spreading misinformation. Political advertising makes up a small sliver of Twitter’s overall revenue. The company does not break out specific figures each quarter but said political ad spending for the 2018 midterm election was less than $3 million. It reported $824 million in third-quarter revenue. Because of this, the ban is unlikely to have a big effect on overall political advertising, where television still accounts for most of the money spent. In digital ads, Google and Facebook dominate. FILE – A woman walks past the logo for Google at the China International Import Expo in Shanghai, Nov. 5, 2018.Unlike Facebook, which has weathered most of the criticism, Google has been relatively quiet on its political ads policy. It has taken a stance similar to that of Facebook and does not review whether political ads tell the truth. Twitter, Facebook and Google already take steps to prevent political manipulation by verifying the identities of some political advertisers — measures prompted by the furor over Moscow’s interference. But the verifying systems, which rely on both humans and automated systems, have not been perfect. 
…

Cory Booker on Ballot in New Hampshire, Last Day of Filing

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker is on the ballot in New Hampshire, where he hopes his patience will pay off.
                   
The Democratic presidential hopeful signed up for the first-in-the-nation presidential primary on Friday, the final day of the filing period. Though he lags behind in polls, Booker says he’s not one to switch strategies or states to focus on, as some other candidates have done.
                   
Booker’s latest trip to New Hampshire comes a day after former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick jumped into the race. Booker says it’s good to have robust competition, and that he doesn’t take it personally that some of his close friends are also running.
…

Roger Stone Guilty of Witness Tampering, Lying to Congress

 Roger Stone, a longtime friend and ally of President Donald Trump, has been found guilty at his trial in federal court in Washington.
Stone was convicted Friday. He was charged in a seven-count indictment that alleged he lied to lawmakers about WikiLeaks, tampered with witnesses and obstructed a House intelligence committee probe.
His trial highlighted how Trump campaign associates were eager to gather information about emails hacked emails damaging to Hillary Clinton that were released by the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks.
Prosecutors say Stone lied to Congress about his conversations about WikiLeaks with New York radio host Randy Credico and conservative writer and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi.
He’s also accused of trying to intimidate Credico and threatening to take his dog.
Stone had denied the allegations and decried the case as politically motivated.
…