February 4 and 5, 2017
News and Views
CONTENTIOUS PHONE CALLS DENIED
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/us/politics/us-australia-trump-turnbull.html?_r=0
U.S.-Australia Rift Is Possible After Trump Ends Call With Prime Minister
By GLENN THRUSH and MICHELLE INNIS
FEB. 2, 2017
Photograph -- Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull of Australia said that despite the bluntness of the discussion with President Trump, the United States had committed to upholding the arrangement to accept 1,250 refugees from an Australian detention center. Credit Mick Tsikas/European Pressphoto Agency
INTERNATIONAL MIGRANT CRISIS By MEGAN SPECIA and YARA BISHARA 2:22
Video -- The Life of a Refugee Questioned by Trump
President Trump on Wednesday questioned a deal to bring migrants held by Australia into the United States as refugees. Here is what daily life looks like for one of them, a Kurdish dissident from Iran. He has been held on Manus Island for over three years. By MEGAN SPECIA and YARA BISHARA on Publish Date February 2, 2017.
Photo by Ashley Gilbertson for The New York Times. Watch in Times Video »
WASHINGTON — A phone call between President Trump and the Australian prime minister is threatening to develop into a diplomatic rift between two stalwart allies after the two men exchanged harsh words over refugee policy, and Mr. Trump abruptly ended the call.
The phone call last Saturday between Mr. Trump and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull turned contentious after the Australian leader pressed the president to honor an agreement to accept 1,250 refugees from an Australian detention center.
Late Wednesday night, Mr. Trump reiterated his anger over the agreement on Twitter. He called the agreement a “dumb deal” and blamed the Obama administration for accepting it but then said that he would “study” it. The tweet was posted after The Washington Post reported details of the phone call.
Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!
10:55 PM - 1 Feb 2017
37,575 37,575 Retweets 150,441 150,441 likes
The leaders of the two allies did not seem to agree on the outcome of the conversation. Mr. Trump’s tweet suggested the agreement could be at risk while Mr. Turnbull said that, despite the bluntness of the discussion, the United States had committed to upholding the arrangement.
The flare-up — and conflicting characterizations of the call from Mr. Trump and Mr. Turnbull — threatened to do lasting damage to relations between the two countries and could drive Canberra closer to China, which has a robust trading relationship with Australia and is competing with Washington to become the dominant force in the Asia-Pacific region.
A senior Trump administration official said the president told Mr. Turnbull on Saturday that the refugees could include the “next Boston bombers.” He also said he was “going to get killed” politically by the deal, given that the day before he signed an executive order to stem the refugee flow into the United States and refuse visas for all citizens from seven Muslim countries.
The Trump administration official said the call was shorter than planned, and ended abruptly after Mr. Turnbull told the president it was necessary for the refugees to be accepted.
The details of the call were confirmed by a senior administration official with direct knowledge of the exchange who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly discuss the diplomatic talks.
Mr. Turnbull, speaking Thursday at a press briefing in Australia’s southern state of Victoria, refused to comment at length on the telephone call, or say whether it had ended sooner than expected. But he did acknowledge that it had been candid.
“I’ve seen that report,” Mr. Turnbull said of the Washington Post account, “and I’m not going to comment on the conversation, other than to say that in the course of the conversation, as you know and as was confirmed by the president’s official spokesman in the White House, the president assured me that he would continue with, honor the agreement we entered into with the Obama administration with respect to refugee resettlement.”
Pressed about Mr. Trump’s tone, and whether the president ended the call by hanging up, Mr. Turnbull refused to comment. “It’s better that these things, these conversations are conducted candidly, frankly, privately,” he said.
Mr. Turnbull again stated that Australia’s relationship with the United States remained robust, but if the deal to resettle the refugees falls through, Canberra will be left with a seemingly intractable political problem at home.
The Australian government has a policy that bars any refugees who attempted to arrive by boat from ever setting foot in the country. The majority of the refugees being held on the Pacific islands of Nauru and Manus are from Iran and Iraq. Both are Muslim-majority nations that are among the seven countries — including Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — whose citizens are barred from entering the United States for at least 90 days under an executive order signed by Mr. Trump last week.
“I can assure you the relationship is very strong,” Mr. Turnbull said. “The fact that we received the assurance that we did, the fact that it was confirmed, the very extensive engagement we have with the new administration underlines the closeness of the alliance.”
“But as Australians know me very well — I stand up for Australia in every forum — public or private.”
Bill Shorten, the leader of Australia’s opposition Labor Party, said there were two versions of the conversation between Mr. Turnbull and Mr. Trump over the refugee deal, and Mr. Turnbull should be “straight with the Australian people.”
Mr. Turnbull “made it clear he had a constructive discussion” over the refugee deal, Mr. Shorten said. “But now it appears another, different version of the same conversation has emerged.”
Kim Beazley, a former Australian ambassador to the United States who served in Washington during much of the Obama administration, said the impact of the flare-up would be “minimal” if the refugee deal remained in force. But he added, “If the tonality is true you wouldn’t want to have too many conversations like that.”
It was not the only awkward call last week between Mr. Trump and a world leader. Earlier, on Friday, Mr. Trump joked to President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico that he would deploy troops to Mexico if the Mexican government failed to control “bad hombres down there.”
On Wednesday night, the senior Trump administration official said the president’s comments to Mr. Peña Nieto were made in jest and the comments reflected Mr. Trump’s standing offer to help Mexico battle drug gangs and control border crossings. The official said the conversation between the two presidents was friendly, and Mr. Peña Nieto did not appear to be offended.
The Mexican government issued a statement denying the A.P. report and said it did not “correspond to reality.”
Glenn Thrush reported from Washington, and Michelle Innis from Sydney, Australia. Jane Perlez contributed reporting from Beijing.
Follow The New York Times’s politics and Washington coverage on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the First Draft politics newsletter.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/02/mexico-denies-report-that-trump-threatened-to-send-in-troops-to-stop-bad-hombres.html
Mexico denies report that Trump threatened to send in troops to stop 'bad hombres'
Published February 02, 2017 FoxNews.com
The Mexican government Wednesday denied reports that President Trump threatened its president that he would send U.S. troops to stop “bad hombres down there” unless the Mexican military acts, The Los Angeles Times reported.
The government denied the report in a tweet, saying, such a threat “did not happen.”
The Associated Press, citing a transcript of the conversation it obtained, reported earlier that Trump made the threat in a phone call.
"You have a bunch of bad hombres down there," Trump told President Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. "You aren't doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn't, so I just might send them down to take care of it."
A White House spokesman did not respond to requests for comment.
A person with access to the official transcript of the phone call provided an excerpt to The Associated Press. The person gave it on condition of anonymity because the administration did not make the details of the call public.
The Mexican website, Aristegui Noticias, on Tuesday published a similar account of phone call, based on the reporting of journalist Dolia Estevez. The report described Trump as humiliating Pena Nieto in a confrontational conversation.
Mexico's foreign relations department denied that account, saying it "is based on absolute falsehoods," and later said the statement also applied to the excerpt provided to AP.
"The assertions that you make about said conversation do not correspond to the reality of it," the statement said. "The tone was constructive and it was agreed by the presidents to continue working and that the teams will continue to meet frequently to construct an agreement that is positive for Mexico and for the United States."
The Associated Press contributed to this report
SALE OF FEDERAL LANDS KILLED
“This ain’t about politics, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican or Libertarian or vegetarian, these lands belong to you,”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/conservationists-rally-and-kill-bill-to-sell-off-federal-land-200712286.html
Conservationists rally and kill bill to sell off federal land
Yahoo News Christopher Wilson Yahoo News
February 2, 2017
Photograph -- Members of conservation groups gathered on Jan. 30 in Helena, Mont., to protest a plan to transfer public lands to the states or sell them off to private individuals or companies. (Photo: William Campbell/Corbis via Getty Images)
Photograph -- Demonstrators gather at the state capitol in Helena, Mont., for a rally in support of federal public lands. (Photo: William Campbell/Corbis via Getty Images)
Following backlash from conservationists across the Western states, Rep. Jason Chaffetz announced that he is pulling a bill that would have sold off more than 3 million acres of federal land.
“I am withdrawing HR 621,” Chaffetz, a Utah Republican, wrote in an Instagram post Wednesday night about the proposed legislation. “I’m a proud gun owner, hunter and love our public lands. The bill would have disposed of small parcels of lands Pres. Clinton identified as serving no public purpose but groups I support and care about fear it sends the wrong message. The bill was originally introduced several years ago. I look forward to working with you. I hear you and HR 621 dies tomorrow.”
The bill was introduced to the House on Jan. 24 and would have directed the secretary of the interior to sell off lands in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming. A 1997 report to Congress identified the acreage but warned that “many lands identified appear to have conflicts which may preclude them from being considered for disposal or exchange.” The parcels, whose borders haven’t changed in the intervening years, comprise an area roughly the size of Connecticut.
The pushback to Chaffetz’s bill culminated in a rally of more than 1,000 people at the Montana statehouse Monday.
“This ain’t about politics, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican or Libertarian or vegetarian, these lands belong to you,” Montana Gov. Steve Bullock said during the demonstration. “They’re our heritage. They’re our economy. They’re our quality of life. Jeopardizing what it means to be a Montanan and transferring those lands is wrong-headed. I’m pleased to stand here today and say loud and clear — I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again — wholesale transfer of public lands will not happen. Not on my watch.”
The Public Lands in Public Hands rally was set up by an alliance of conservation groups and featured speeches from Bullock and U.S. Senator Jon Tester (via cell phone). More than 46,000 people have signed one petition against the land transfer. Hundreds more from across the political spectrum gathered for a similar protest in Santa Fe, N.M.
“I’ve never been a public activist before, but, boy, I am now,” Montana resident Teri Sinopoli told the Great Falls Tribune.
The Montana-based outdoors group Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, of which Donald Trump Jr. is a member, was a major opponent of the legislation. The group also opposed the rumored nomination of Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., for secretary of the interior due to her “misguided positions on public lands.” The Cabinet nomination went to Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana.
“Representative Chaffetz should never have introduced this ill-conceived bill,” said BHA President and CEO Land Tawney in a statement Thursday, “but the instant and overwhelming response by sportsmen and women forced him to listen and ultimately abandon HR 621, which would have seized millions of acres of public lands. His fellow lawmakers should take note of the ire and rapid response by hunters and anglers. We aren’t going away.”
But conservationists, including Tawney, are not done fighting legislation introduced by Republican members of Congress.
“Unfortunately, there are those who will continue to perpetrate bad deals like this one,” Tawney’s statement said. “American hunters and anglers will be there every step of the way. Mr. Chaffetz took the first step. Now he needs to kill HR 622, the Local Enforcement for Local Lands Act, which would eliminate hundreds of critical law enforcement jobs with the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. Our law enforcement officers are on the frontlines of conservation and already do more with less. Let’s give them the resources they need to do their jobs.”
In January, Congress passed a rule, also opposed by the BHA, that would make it easier to transfer federal land to the states, disregarding their economic value for tourism and recreation. Arizona congressman Paul A. Gosar submitted a resolution earlier this week that would hamper the National Park Service’s ability to limit drilling and mining in national parks.
FOLLOWUP TO LAST WEEK’S TRUMP ACTIONS
“SO-CALLED JUDGE”
http://terror-alert.com/news/dhs-secretary-john-kelly-reportedly-refused-to-comply-with-stephen-bannon-s-plan-for-green-card-holders?uid=44756
DHS Secretary John Kelly reportedly refused to comply with Stephen Bannon's plan for green card holders
2017-2-4 10:40 am Terror Alert
Early Saturday morning, President Trump tweeted an angry reaction to a federal judge's temporary block on his immigration executive order:
The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 4, 2017
That post came after a series of tweets in which the president defended the substance of his order. "When a country is no longer able to say who can, and who cannot , come in & out, especially for reasons of safety &.security - big trouble!" Trump argued, adding, "Interesting that certain Middle-Eastern countries agree with the ban. They know if certain people are allowed in it's death & destruction!"
Trump also took another swipe at The New York Times, reiterating his "fake news" label for the newspaper, and bookended his tweetstorm by declaring, "We must keep 'evil' out of our country!" and "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
U.S. District Judge James Robart, who issued the block, is a George W. Bush appointee in Seattle, and Trump's comment questioning his legitimacy prompted immediate backlash. "This is dangerous language," said MSNBC host Joe Scarborough. "Judicial independence is the bedrock of the US Constitution." Conservative independent candidate Evan McMullin similarly argued that though Trump is welcome to disagree with the court's decision, "undermining the legitimacy of a judge and the Judiciary Branch is a threat to the Republic." Bonnie Kristian
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-executive-orders-memorandum-proclamations-presidential-action-guide-2017-1
Trump has already signed 22 executive actions — here's what each one does
Rebecca Harrington
Feb. 3, 2017, 6:26 PM
This article is many pages long, and the details of each order are hidden. Go to website to unfold and read them all.
NEUROCORE -- STRANGE – THE DEVOS FAMILY’S NEUROCORE SHARES A NAME WITH AN APPARENTLY UNRELATED PLANT SUPPLEMENT PRODUCT. COPYRIGHT ISSUE PERHAPS? ANOTHER UNDESIRABLE MATTER IS THE FACT THAT HER NEUROLOGICAL “CURE” FOR A HALF DOZEN VEXING AND ELUSIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL OR BRAIN CONDITIONS THAT ARE NOW MEDICATED -- WITH VARYING LEVELS OF SUCCESS, BUT OFTEN VERY WELL – HAS NOT YET BEEN PROVEN TO BE SUCCESSFUL. FINALLY, THE NEUROCORE TREATMENTS ARE BEING “MARKETED” TO PARENTS OF SUCH CHILDREN, WHO ARE AT THEIR WITS END TO FIND A CURE, WITH A HARD SELL METHOD AND PERSONAL TESTIMONIALS. TO ME THAT ALWAYS SCREAMS “SCAM!”. FROM WHAT I’VE SEEN IN THIS NYT DESCRIPTION OF THE TREATMENT, IT IS ALMOST CERTAINLY HARMLESS AS A TREATMENT, EXCEPT FOR THE OUTRAGEOUS PRICE THEY ARE CHARGING FOR IT. THEY HAVE YET TO PUT FORWARD ANY RESULTS FOR OTHER SCIENTISTS TO TRY TO REPLICATE, AND UNTIL THEY DO THE INSURANCE COMPANIES WON’T PAY THE FEE.
THE NEUROCORE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCEDURE ISN’T PROVEN, OR PERHAPS PROVABLE. THE “TREATMENT” IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS LIKE ACUPUNCTURE AND A SLEW OF OTHERS, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT REALLY DO SOMETHING. MANY PEOPLE ARE “CURED” BY THE PERSONAL ATTENTION FROM THE “DOCTOR,” AND BY THEIR OWN FAITH IN THE PROCESS. IT’S LIKE WHEN YOU KISS YOUR BABY’S BOOBOO AND MAKE IT QUIT HURTING.
IN OTHER WORDS, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE NYT THAT IT IS IN THE CATEGORY OF QUACKERY, AND SHOULD NOT BE THE PRIMARY INCOME SOURCE (FROM WHICH SHE REFUSES TO DIVEST HERSELF) OF AN IMPORTANT GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIAL.
I ALSO AM DEAD SET AGAINST HER “CONSERVATIVE” PLAN TO KILL THE US PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM AND REPLACE IT WITH PROFIT-BASED SCHOOLS. WHAT A THOROUGHLY REPUBLICAN THOUGHT PATTERN THAT IS.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/business/dealbook/betsy-devos-neurocore.html?_r=1
Betsy DeVos Won’t Shed Stake in Biofeedback Company, Filings Show
By MATTHEW GOLDSTEIN, STEVE EDER and SHERI FINK
JAN. 20, 2017
Photograph -- Betsy DeVos, the education secretary nominee, and her husband own part of a company that operates nine “brain performance centers.” Credit Al Drago/The New York Times
Betsy DeVos, the billionaire school choice advocate selected by President Donald J. Trump to serve as education secretary, is a strong supporter of using biofeedback technology to help children and teenagers enhance their performance in school.
Ms. DeVos and her husband, Richard DeVos Jr., are major financial backers of Neurocore, a Michigan company that operates drug-free “brain performance centers” that claim to have worked with 10,000 children and adults to overcome problems with attention deficit disorder, autism, sleeplessness and stress.
In an agreement with the Office of Government Ethics made public Friday, Ms. DeVos said that she had stepped down from the Neurocore board but that she would retain her financial interest in the company. She valued that stake at $5 million to $25 million in her financial disclosure statement.
On Friday evening, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, the Republican chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said he would delay the initial vote on Ms. DeVos’s nomination by a week, until Jan. 31, as Democrats argued that the process had been rushed through, without enough time to answer remaining questions about her financial disclosures.
Ms. DeVos and her husband promote Neurocore heavily on the website for Windquest Group, a family office the couple use to manage some of their many investments. The website, for instance, includes a link to a Washington Post article about Kirk Cousins, a Washington Redskins quarterback who describes how he “retrained” his brain to better perform on the field by going to a Neurocore center.
But the claims that Neurocore’s methods can help children improve their performance in school could present a conflict for Ms. DeVos if she is confirmed as education secretary — especially given that the company is moving to expand its national reach.
Neurocore, founded about a decade ago, operates seven of the brain performance centers in Michigan and recently opened two in Florida. It has said it has plans to open as many as seven other centers across the country this year. Ms. DeVos’s financial disclosure shows that she and her husband have an indirect interest in the company through a family partnership.
Richard W. Painter, a White House ethics adviser under President George W. Bush, said he was familiar with Neurocore and applauded the business and education concepts behind it — but he said the DeVoses would be better off selling their interests in the company.
“This is not an appropriate investment for the secretary of education,” Mr. Painter said in an email. “How schools respond to attention issues is a vitally important policy question and ties right into achievement. In my view, there should be support, including financial support, for alternatives to A.D.H.D. drug treatments that are covered by health insurance whereas alternatives often are not covered.”
He added, “The secretary would be barred from participating in that important policy decision if she or her husband owned an interest in this company.”
Ms. DeVos has drawn criticism from some Democrats and public education supporters because she has been an outspoken critic of public schools and supports charter schools as an alternative. In Michigan, she and her husband have been active in promoting charter schools.
She caused a stir this week at her confirmation hearing, which took place before the Office of Government Ethics had released her financial disclosure form, when she said that some schools might want to keep guns on hand to deal with possible grizzly bear attacks. She also did not seem to be familiar with a federal law that requires equal treatment for children with disabilities.
In her agreement with the ethics office, Ms. DeVos said she would “not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter” that could benefit Neurocore and seven family businesses in which she would continue to have a financial interest.
Ms. DeVos’s financial holdings may be the most complex by any of Mr. Trump’s cabinet nominees. At 108 pages, her financial disclosure form is longer than the one Mr. Trump himself filed last year.
She and her husband, according to the disclosure filing, have $583 million to $1.5 billion in assets.
The size of the family’s wealth is no surprise. Mr. DeVos’s father founded Amway, a multilevel marketing firm that specializes in selling health and beauty aids and had over $9 billion in sales in 2015. Richard DeVos Sr. is the 88th-richest person in the world, according to Forbes magazine.
The DeVoses’ financial holdings include a minority stake in Major League Baseball’s Chicago Cubs and an interest in the N.B.A.’s Orlando Magic, as well as an array of private equity firms and real estate entities.
In her filing, Ms. DeVos said she also had a financial interest in Theranos, the embattled blood-testing firm that was once a darling of Silicon Valley but was forced to close its laboratories and lay off 40 percent of its workers after a series of articles in The Wall Street Journal raised questions about its technology.
Ms. DeVos, in her filing, said that within 90 days of being confirmed, she would divest herself of her financial interest in 102 companies and investment funds.
Neurocore, however, appears to be an investment that Ms. DeVos and her husband have a particular interest in.
The company’s website claims impressive outcomes: for example, that 90 percent of people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder report improvement and 76 percent “achieve a nonclinical status.” But Neurocore has not published results in the peer-reviewed literature.
A year ago, the company hired Dr. Majid Fotuhi, a physician and neuroscientist trained at Harvard and Johns Hopkins University, as its chief medical officer. He said Neurocore had recently begun analyzing its data and results would be published soon in a scientific journal.
Dr. Fotuhi said that Neurocore had no immediate plans to team up with schools but that he could envision that happening.
“Betsy DeVos really believes in improving brain performance and helping children who have syndromes such as attention deficit disorder,” he said.
An article in September in MiBiz in Michigan about Neurocore’s expansion plans said the DeVoses’ family office, Windquest Group, was the company’s main financial backer. In the article, Mark Murrison, Neurocore’s chief executive, said, “We’re a local company with sights on national expansion.”
On its website, Neurocore claims to use “data-driven, brain-based diagnostics and treatments” to help children and adults. The company says it uses “data from quantitative electroencephalography” to help diagnose problems and then treats them with “proven neurofeedback therapy.”
Neurocore, which charges about $2,000 for a recommended treatment of 30 sessions, has a deal with Prosper Funding, an online lending platform, to provide financing to clients. Neurocore also says that some insurance plans may cover treatments.
But in 2015, the Michigan State Department of Insurance and Financial Services upheld a denial of coverage determination by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan for a person who had sought treatment from Neurocore for migraine headaches. The insurer had denied coverage, saying the “treatment was investigational.”
In its marketing materials, Neurocore makes a direct pitch to parents, featuring the personal stories of numerous children in YouTube videos and offering tips on Twitter about helping students focus at school.
On Friday, Neurocore posted a typical tweet — “Do you suspect your child may have teen ADHD? Check out these common signs” — with a link to its website and a photo of a student at his desk.
Not all experts are convinced of the effectiveness of Neurocore’s methods. A 2013 article in The Detroit News questioned the efficacy of diagnostic testing for A.D.H.D. through electroencephalography, citing an article in the American Academy of Pediatrics News that suggested more research was needed.
Still, Dr. Fotuhi expressed confidence in the field. “It’s in its infancy,” he said, “but I can envision in the coming years, we’ll have objective data.”
Correction: January 24, 2017
An article on Saturday about financial disclosures of Betsy DeVos, the education secretary nominee, misstated the name of the Michigan publication that reported on one company, Neurocore, that Ms. DeVos and her husband back. It is MiBiz, not West Michigan Business News and Information.
Sarah Cohen and Kate Zernike contributed reporting.
HERE IS A SIZABLE LIST OF OTHER THINGS WHICH ARE, TO ME ANYWAY, IN THE SAME “BASKET OF MAGIC AND GYPS.” MY FAVORITE IS THE COPPER BRACELET CURE FOR ARTHRITIS.
http://www.gaiam.com/discover/146/article/10-ways-detoxify-body/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_healing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiropractic_treatment_techniques, http://www.acupuncture.com/education/theory/acuintro.htm, https://naturalmedicines.therapeuticresearch.com/
http://www.arthritis.org/living-with-arthritis/treatments/natural/other-therapies/magnetic-copper-bracelets.php
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy
http://board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=69066 – “NeuroCore,” as discussed on this website is not a brain related treatment, but a herbal substance used as a performance enhancer for athletes and bodybuilders. The brand name “Neurocore” is a preworkout drug put out by Muscle Tech. The article states:
Re: Neurocore - What is this stuff?
Just in case you or sister friend are planning to do any sort of competition where you may be subject to drug testing, be aware that geranium robertianum is a banned substance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_medicine
See also: Quackery, Pseudoscience, and Pseudomedicine
Alternative medicine
Unconventional medicine, unorthodox medicine, heterodox medicine, complementary medicine, integrative medicine, new-age medicine, mumbo jumbo
A person discovering that they have been transformed into se Wellcome V0011124.jpg
"They told me if I took 1000 pills at night I should be quite another thing in the morning", an early 19th-century satire on Morison's Vegetable Pills, an alternative medicine supplement.
This article is part of a series on
Alternative and pseudo-medicine
Outline-body-aura.png
Alternative medicine Quackery History of alternative medicine Rise of modern medicine Pseudoscience Pseudomedicine Antiscience Skepticism Skeptical movement
Fringe Medicine and Science[hide]
Anthroposophic medicine Chiropractic Eugenics Homeopathy Acupuncture Humorism Naturopathy Osteopathy Parapsychology Phrenology Radionics Scientific racism
Conspiracy theories[hide]
Anti-fluoridation movement Anti-vaccine movement Vaccines causing autism Chemtrails GMO conspiracy theories HIV/AIDS origins
NCCIH classifications[hide]
Alternative medical systems Mind–body intervention Biologically-based therapy Manipulative methods Energy therapy
Traditional medicine[hide]
Ayurveda African Greek Roman European Faith healing Japanese Shamanism Siddha Chinese Korean Mongolian Tibetan Unani
v t e
Alternative medicine or fringe medicine are practices claimed to have the healing effects of medicine but are disproven, unproven, impossible to prove, or only harmful.
Alternative therapies or diagnoses are not part of medicine or science-based healthcare systems.
Alternative medicine consists of a wide variety of practices, products, and therapies—ranging from those that are biologically plausible but not well tested, to those with known harmful and toxic effects. Contrary to popular belief, significant expense is paid in testing alternative medicine, including over $2.5 billion spent by the United States government, with almost none showing any effect beyond that of false treatment. Perceived effects of alternative medicine may be caused by placebo, decreased effects of functional treatment (and therefore also decreased side-effects), and regression toward the mean where improvement that would have occurred anyway is credited to alternative therapies. Alternative medicine is not the same as experimental medicine.
Alternative medicine has grown in popularity and is used by a significant percentage of the population in many countries. While it has extensively rebranded itself: from quackery to complementary or integrative medicine—it promotes essentially the same practices. Newer proponents often suggest alternative medicine be used together with functional medical treatment, in a belief that it "complements" (improves the effect of, or mitigates the side effects of) the treatment. However, significant drug interactions caused by alternative therapies may instead negatively influence treatments, making them less effective, notably cancer therapy. Despite it being illegal to market alternative therapies for any type of cancer treatment in most of the developed world, many cancer patients use them.
Alternative medical diagnoses and treatments are not included in the science-based curriculum taught in medical schools, and are not used in medical practice where treatments are based on scientific knowledge. Alternative therapies are often based on religion, tradition, superstition, belief in supernatural energies, pseudoscience, errors in reasoning, propaganda, or fraud. Regulation and licensing of alternative medicine and health care providers varies between and within countries.
Alternative medicine has been criticized for being based on misleading statements, quackery, pseudoscience, antiscience, fraud, or poor scientific methodology. Promoting alternative medicine has been called dangerous and unethical. Testing alternative medicine that have no scientific basis has been called a waste of scarce medical research resources. Critics have said "there is really no such thing as alternative medicine, just medicine that works and medicine that doesn't", and the problem is not only that it does not work, but that the "underlying logic is magical, childish or downright absurd". There have also been calls that the concept of any alternative medicine that works is paradoxical, as any treatment proven to work is simply "medicine".
https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2017/02/03/12362/
janresseger
"That all citizens will be given an equal start through a sound education is one of the most basic, promised rights of our democracy. Our chronic refusal as a nation to guarantee that right for all children…. is rooted in a kind of moral blindness, or at least a failure of moral imagination…. It is a failure which threatens our future as a nation of citizens called to a common purpose… tied to one another by a common bond." —Senator Paul Wellstone — March 31, 2000
Betsy DeVos and Neurocore: Profiting from Quack Medicine?
Posted on February 3, 2017 by janresseger
The NY Times editorialized this morning against the confirmation of Betsy DeVos: Wanted: One Republican with Integrity to Defeat Betsy DeVos. The final confirmation vote by the Senate is currently scheduled for Monday, and unless one more Republican Senator makes a decision of conscience, Vice President Mike Pence will break the tie. All Democrats have pledged to vote “no,” along with Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski.
But whatever happens on Monday, there is something that bears watching in upcoming months—DeVos’s refusal to divest from Neurocore, a medically questionable brain therapy company in which she and her husband Dick DeVos, the Amway heir, have reported an investment of between $5 and $25 million. They have invested in Neurocore through their family company, Windquest Group.
This blog commented on DeVos’s huge investment in Neurocore last week, based on blog reports from Mitchell Robinson and Jennifer Berkshire. Then earlier this week—lost in the coverage of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee vote to report the DeVos nomination to the full Senate—reporters for the New York Times explored the problem of Neurocore.
The NY Times reports that while Neurocore’s results are trumpeted by the company as astonishing, this is very likely a story of marketing and quack science: “A group of brain performance centers backed by Betsy DeVos, the nominee for education secretary, promotes results that are nothing short of stunning: improvements reported by 91 percent of patients with depression, 90 percent with attention deficit disorder, 90 percent with anxiety. The treatment offered by Neurocore, a business in which Ms. DeVos and her husband, Dick, are the chief investors, consists of showing movies to patients and interrupting them when the viewers become distracted, in an effort to retrain their brains. With eight centers in Michigan and Florida and plans to expand, Neurocore says it has assessed about 10,000 people for health problems that often require medication… But a review of Neurocore’s claims and interviews with medical experts suggest its conclusions are unproven and its methods questionable.”
Here is how, according to the reporters, Neurocore has violated standard medical practice: “Neurocore has not published its results in peer-reviewed medical literature. Its techniques—including mapping brain waves to diagnose problems and using neurofeedback, a form of biofeedback, to treat them—are not considered standards of care for the vast majority of the disorders it treats, including autism. Social workers, not doctors, perform assessments, and low-paid technicians with little training apply the methods to patients, including children with complex problems.”
The reporters quote a child psychiatrist and professor at Tufts School of Medicine who worries that programs like Neurocore “divert attention, hope, and resources” from more proven treatments.
Neurocore is designed to cure serious medical problems through behavioral conditioning: “At Neurocore’s clinics, children and adults with A.D.H.D., anxiety, depression, autism and other psychological and neurological diagnoses sit before monitors watching movies or television shows… with sensors attached to their scalps and earlobes. Whenever they become distracted or anxious, the video automatically freezes. That feedback, known as conditioning, leads the vast majority of clients, company officers say, to experience improvements in their disorders after 30 45-minute sessions….”
A serious problem is the expense—over $2,000, which is only sometimes covered by insurance. Amanda Farmer, who worked as a technician administering the sessions for eight months in 2012, expresses concerns she heard from prospective patients: “A lot of people were skeptical, and they gloss over any of the real questions: ‘Are you sure? This seems like a lot of money. What happens if it doesn’t do anything?'”
Neurocore is led by chief medical officer, Dr. Majid Fotuhi. “Dr. Fotuhi has impressive credentials: an M.D. from Harvard and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from Johns Hopkins. However, his short-lived previous venture, NeurExpand Brain Centers in Maryland, folded after Medicare refused to reimburse services and demanded repayment for lack of scientific evidence of their effectiveness.” Dr. Fotuhi says of Neurocore: “the company would be publishing its results in peer-reviewed scientific literature soon.”
According to the NY Times reporters, “Neurocore is the creation of Timothy G. Royer, a licensed psychologist with a master’s degree in theology, who served as division chief of pediatric psychology at the Helen DeVos Children’s Hospital in Grand Rapids, Mich. Originally called Hope 139, after Psalm 139 from the Bible, the company marketed itself to schools—especially religious ones—in Michigan to help children improve academic scores and lessen the need for medication to treat certain ailments. Ms. DeVos and her husband began supporting the company in 2008, for a time hosting the company in the offices of Windquest.”
Related
Betsy DeVos Is Celebrated at Week-Long Pep Rally Sponsored by Group Whose Board She Chaired
In "Danger of Privatization"
DeVos Hearing Today: Why the Senate Should Not Confirm Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary
In "Addressing Child Poverty & Inequality"
Recent Important Coverage of Betsy DeVos, Part 1
In "Danger of Privatization"
REINSTATE TRAVEL BAN? NYET!
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/court-denies-doj-request-to-immediately-reinstate-travel-ban/
Rush for entry as court denies bid to reinstate travel ban
CBS/AP
February 5, 2017, 4:51 AM
Photograph -- Munther Alaskry, accompanied by his wife Hiba, son Hassan and daughter Dima have a luggage mishap as they leave New York’s JFK International Airport, in New York, Feb. 3, 2017. The family arrived in New York after the Trump administration reversed course and said he and other interpreters who supported the U.S. military could come to America. They spent nearly a week in limbo in Baghdad, thinking their hopes of starting a new life had been shattered. AP
CHICAGO -- Visa holders from seven majority-Muslim countries who were turned away from the United States due to President Donald Trump’s travel ban are rushing to try again, hoping to make it through a narrow window opened by legal challenges.
The federal appeals court in San Francisco denied Mr. Trump’s effort to immediately reinstate the ban early Sunday. For now, it remains blocked by a judge’s temporary restraining order, and federal officials have told their staffs to comply.
Will travel ban battle go to Supreme Court?
Play VIDEO
Will travel ban battle go to Supreme Court?
Advocates weren’t taking any chances, telling people who could travel to get on the earliest flights they could find after the week-old ban was blocked Friday by U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle.
“We’re telling them to get on the quickest flight ASAP,” said Rula Aoun, director of the Arab American Civil Rights League in Dearborn, Michigan. Her group sued in federal court in Detroit, challenging Mr. Trump’s executive order as unconstitutional.
CBS News justice reporter Paula Reid says it is entirely possible that the battle over the travel ban will end up in the Supreme Court within several months. She notes that the Trump Administration “didn’t do itself any favors” in drafting the executive order that brought it into force.
Reid notes that the federal judge in Seattle who issued the initial stay on the travel ban pointed out that the Administration initially failed to address issues including travelers from the seven banned countries who had already been granted U.S. visas -- including some who got them for helping the U.S. government or military in war zones.
“The way they drafted it, it is pretty clear they weren’t thinking six, seven steps ahead to the Supreme Court, and therefore it is unlikely that this will prevail on the merits if it’s the constitutional case that gets to the Supreme Court,” Reid said.
Protesters slam Trump immigration ban
34 PHOTOS
Protesters slam Trump immigration ban
Vice President Mike Pence said on Sunday morning talk show appearances that “it’s quite clear the president has the ability to decide who has access to this country.”
He called the San Francisco court’s decision “frustrating” and added on “Fox News Sunday” that the administration intends to “move very quickly” and will use “all legal means to stay that order.”
Pence said quick action is needed so Mr. Trump can take the action needed “to protect our country.”
Protesters sought to keep up the pressure, meanwhile, gathering in Denver and other U.S. cities to demonstrate against the ban. Meanwhile, legal advocates waited at airports in case anything went wrong with new arrivals.
Renee Paradis was among 20-25 volunteer lawyers and interpreters who stationed themselves inside John F. Kennedy’s Terminal 4 in New York in case anyone needed help. They were carrying handmade signs in Arabic and Farsi “that say we’re lawyers, we’re here to help. We’re not from the government,” Paradis said.
“We’re all just waiting to see what actually happens and who manages to get through,” she said.
Some people have had to make hard choices.
A Yemeni family expected to arrive at John F. Kennedy International Airport on Sunday from Egypt after leaving two of their four children behind. The father and two children are U.S. citizens and the mother has an immigrant visa, but the other two are waiting don’t have their papers yet.
“They just don’t want to take a chance of waiting,” she said.
Judge lifts travel ban, causing Trump to lash out
Play VIDEO
Judge lifts travel ban, causing Trump to lash out
The State Department has advised refugee aid agencies that refugees who had been scheduled to travel before the order was signed will now be allowed into the U.S. A State Department official said in an email obtained by The Associated Press that the government is “focusing on booking refugee travel through February 17,” and they were working to have arrivals resume as soon as Monday.
U.S. officials have said up to 60,000 foreigners had their visas “provisionally revoked” to comply with Trump’s order. Confusion during the rollout of the ban initially found green card holders caught in travel limbo, until the White House on Wednesday clarified that they would be allowed to enter and leave the U.S as they pleased.
Even so, green card holder Ammar Alnajjar, a 24-year-old Yemeni student at Southwest Tennessee Community College, cut short his planned three-month visit with his fiancee in Turkey, paying $1,000 to return immediately when the ban was lifted.
“I got to study. I got to do some work,” said Alnajjar, who arrived at JFK on Saturday. He said he fled civil war in Yemen and moved to the U.S. from Turkey in 2015. “I’m Muslim. I’m proud of it. Islam means peace.”
Despite the government’s suspension of the travel ban pending a resolution in court, some airlines were slow to let aboard people from the seven countries.
Iraqis fighting ISIS respond to ban on entering U.S.
Play VIDEO
Iraqis fighting ISIS respond to ban on entering U.S.
Royal Jordanian Airlines, which operates direct flights from Amman to New York, Chicago and Detroit, said it would resume carrying nationals from the seven countries as long as they presented a valid U.S. visa or green card.
A Qatar Airways spokeswoman said the airline would begin boarding travelers from the seven countries - Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iran and Somalia. But immigration attorney Julie Goldberg said a Qatar Airways representative told her that immigrants from the seven countries were still not allowed to fly Saturday afternoon.
Goldberg said she was trying to arrange flights for dozens of Yemeni citizens who have immigrant visas and were stranded in the African nation of Djibouti.
She said a supervisor at Turkish Airlines told her that people holding immigrant and non-immigrant visas from the seven countries still were being banned unless they had a special email from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection with the person’s name and passport number.
A 12-year-old Yemeni girl whose parents and siblings are U.S. citizens living in California was finally allowed to depart after “an hour-and-half of fighting” with officials, Goldberg said. It was unclear when she would arrive.
“Her mother is on pins and needles ... her father is on the plane with her,” Stacey Gartland, a San Francisco attorney who represented the girl, said in an email.
Refugees also awaited word on their fates.
A Somali refugee said about 140 refugees whose resettlement in the U.S. was blocked by Trump’s executive order were sent back to their refugee camp and it was unclear if or when they could travel.
Nadir Hassan said the group of Somali refugees was relocated to Dadaab camp in eastern Kenya on Saturday. They had been expected to settle in the U.S. this week and had been staying at an International Organization for Migration transit center in Nairobi.
“I was hoping to start a new life in the U.S.” Hassan said. “We feel bad.”
In Tehran, the semi-official Fars news agency reported that a ban on U.S. wrestlers has been lifted following the judge’s ruling, allowing them to take part in the Freestyle World Cup later this month in the Iranian city of Kermanshah.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-robart-seattle-judge-who-blocked-trumps-travel-ban-was-known-as-conservative-jurist/
Seattle judge who blocked Trump's travel ban was known as conservative jurist
CBS/AP
February 4, 2017, 9:01 PM
SEATTLE -- The Seattle judge derided by President Donald Trump on Twitter Saturday after blocking Trump’s executive order on immigration is known for his conservative legal views, for a record of helping disadvantaged children that includes fostering six of them, and for dramatically declaring “black lives matter” during a hearing on police reform in 2015.
Judge James L. Robart, 69, was appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush in 2004, following a distinguished 30-year career in private practice that included his selection to the American College of Trial Lawyers, an honor bestowed on less than 1 percent of lawyers.
Will travel ban battle go to Supreme Court?
Play VIDEO
Will travel ban battle go to Supreme Court?
The judge made the most high-profile ruling of his tenure Friday when he temporarily invalidated Trump’s ban on travel to the U.S. from seven primarily Muslim nations. Washington state sued to block the order - with support from Minnesota and major corporations including Microsoft, Amazon and Expedia - arguing that it’s unconstitutional and would harm its residents, and Robart held that the state was likely correct.
The Department of Justice filed a notice Saturday night to appeal Robart’s decision, requesting that implementation of the controversial executive order resume immediately.
The ruling did not sit well with the president, who on Twitter called Robart a “so-called judge” and the ruling “ridiculous.” The president later falsely claimed the decision meant “anyone, even with bad intentions, can come into U.S.”
The comments are unlikely to sway Robart, said those who know him.
“Jim will give a wry smile, maybe adjust his bowtie a little bit and go back to doing his business,” said former Seattle U.S. attorney John McKay, who worked with Robart for a decade at the law firm of Lane Powell Spears Lubersky. “He’s a very careful judge, and he’s conservative in the sense he looks at the law and tries to determine what that is, not what he wants. He’s conservative in his review of the law, but courageous in his application of it.”
White House vows to appeal ruling blocking travel ban
Play VIDEO
White House vows to appeal ruling blocking travel ban
Another former Seattle U.S. attorney, Jenny Durkan, called Robart exacting: “We won some in front of him and we lost some in front of him, but we knew anytime we walked into his courtroom we’d better be prepared.”
That was evident Friday when Robart grilled a Justice Department lawyer, Michelle Bennett, asking if foreign nationals from the seven countries named in the order had been arrested for plots in the U.S. since 9/11. Bennett said she didn’t know.
“The answer to that is none, best I can tell,” Robart said. “You’re here arguing on behalf of someone that says we have to protect the United States from these individuals coming from these countries, and there’s no support for that.”
He added that he was tasked with determining whether the president’s order was “grounded in facts, as opposed to fiction.”
Robart, a graduate of Georgetown Law School, is an expert in patent and intellectual property law, and he issued a landmark decision - later upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - in a lawsuit between Microsoft and Motorola that provided guidance in how to calculate reasonable rates for use of another company’s patents.
He’s considered a tough sentencing judge in criminal matters, especially in cases involving white-collar defendants, and he has overseen reforms at the Seattle Police Department since 2012, when it agreed to make changes in response to Justice Department findings that its officers were too quick to use force, especially in low-level situations.
Robart was holding a hearing in that case in summer 2015 - a time fraught with tension over violence by and against police officers around the country - when he surprised the courtroom by adopting the mantra of protesters.
“The importance of this issue to me is best demonstrated by the news,” he said, shaking his head and sighing heavily. “According to FBI statistics, police shootings resulting in death involve 41 percent black people, despite being only 20 percent of the population living in those cities. Forty-one percent of the casualties, 20 percent of the population: Black lives matter.”
Robart donated to the state Republican party and to GOP candidates before becoming a judge, but was picked for the bench with the help of a bipartisan selection panel. He helped lead his law firm’s efforts to provide free legal services to those who couldn’t afford them, and he served as president of Seattle Children’s Home, which offers mental health services and special education for at-risk children.
And as U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., noted during his confirmation hearing, he and his wife had fostered six children themselves.
Robart drew high praise from Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who cited his “exceptional qualifications” and his work representing southeast Asian refugees.
“Working with people who have an immediate need and an immediate problem that you are able to help with is the most satisfying aspect of the practice of law,” Robart said then. “If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the Senate, I will take that experience to the courtroom with me, recognize that you need to treat everyone with dignity and with respect, and to engage them so that when they leave the courtroom they feel like they had a fair trial and that they were treated as a participant in the system.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pence-trump-criticism-so-called-judge-simply-expressing-frustration/
Pence says Trump's criticism of "so-called judge" was the President "simply expressing a frustration"
By EMILY SCHULTHEIS CBS NEWS
February 5, 2017, 11:06 AM
Photograph -- Vice President Mike Pence sits down with CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Feb. 5, 2016.
Vice President Mike Pence said Sunday that President Donald Trump wasn’t questioning the legitimacy of a federal judge who halted his immigration executive order when he lambasted the judge on Twitter this weekend -- he was “simply expressing a frustration.”
“I don’t think he was questioning the legitimacy of the judge,” Pence told CBS’ “Face the Nation. “...This was more about the president simply expressing a frustration with a judge who is involving himself in the clear prerogatives of the President of the United States.”
On Friday night, U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle imposed a nationwide hold on Mr. Trump’s travel ban, which halts the refugee program worldwide and stops immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries.
In response, Mr. Trump took to Twitter to criticize Robart, referring to him as a “so-called judge” and calling his ruling a “terrible decision” that “opens up our country to potential terrorists.”
Pence defended Mr. Trump’s words, saying “every president has a right to be critical of the other branches of the federal government.”
He also noted that the Department of Homeland Security “fully complied” with the judge’s ruling as soon as it was issued and that the administration is going through the court system to appeal Robart’s decision.
“The executive order is on a solid constitutional and statutory foundation,” he said. “One court in Boston confirmed that, another court in Washington came to a different decision, but we’re very confident that as we move through the process of these appeals that the president’s authority in this area will be upheld.”
Pence conceded that the rollout of the executive order could have been smoother, noting that the administration had not partaken in the “usual Washington niceties” of informing Congress before the order was signed.
“At the outset of an administration that is as busy keeping our promises to the American people as this one we’ll concede that sometimes the usual Washington niceties of informing members of Congress were not, you know, fully implemented as they have been in the past,” he said.
Asked about an interview Mr. Trump did with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, in which he seemed to equate extrajudicial killings of journalists and dissidents in Russia to similar actions in the U.S., Pence said Mr. Trump was expressing his desire to “start afresh with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and to start afresh with Russia.” In the interview, O’Reilly called Russian President Vladimir Putin “a killer.”
“You think our country is so innocent?” Mr. Trump replied.
Pence said Mr. Trump was not trying to say the U.S. is on the same moral plane as Russia.
“I simply don’t accept that there was any moral equivalency in the president’s comments,” he said. “Look, President Trump, throughout his life, his campaign and this administration, has never hesitated to be critical of government policies by the United States in the past, but there was no moral equivalency there.”
Asked whether he believes the U.S. is “morally superior to Russia,” Pence did not give a yes or no answer. He replied: “I believe that the ideals that America has stood for throughout our history represent the highest ideals of humankind.”
GERMANY GETS INTO THE ACT IN A SPECTACULAR WAY (LOOK AT THE MAG COVER.)
http://www.businessinsider.com/der-spiegel-trump-cover-immigration-ban-america-first-2017-2
Der Spiegel published a very graphic cover on Trump's immigration ban
Rebecca Harrington
February 3, 2017
[Do go to businessinsider website to see the cover. It’s not only good art, it’s devastating.]
German news weekly Der Spiegel's newest cover pulled no punches in its criticism of President Donald Trump's executive order barring citizens and refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the US.
The simple headline, "America First" appears beside Trump holding aloft a beheaded Lady Liberty, with a bloody knife in his other hand:
Trump's immigration ban has received sharp criticism from tens of thousands of protesters across the US, from top Republican and Democratic senators, and from US business titans.
The administration tempered part of the ban on Sunday, indicating that green card holders would be allowed back in the country.
Federal judges in several states issued emergency rulings staying the executive order on Saturday and Sunday. The White House — and Trump loyalists — continue to defend the action, insisting it was "not about religion" but about "protecting our own citizens and border."
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the global fight against terrorism was no excuse for the measures and "does not justify putting people of a specific background or faith under general suspicion," her spokesman said on Sunday.
Der Spiegel continued to mock the president on Twitter, tweeting links to the cover story along with a popular meme of Trump holding the image up in place of an executive order:
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
DER SPIEGEL ✔ @DerSPIEGEL
Das neue Heft ist da!https://magazin.spiegel.de/SP/2017/6/?utm_source=spon&utm_campaign=centerpage …
12:03 PM - 3 Feb 2017
751 751 Retweets 1,173 1,173 likes
The magazine cover was even more graphic in the online version, where an animation showed the Statue of Liberty dripping blood:
der spiegel trump animation Der Spiegel
It's not the first time Der Spiegel has taken aim at the new US president. Last January, the magazine featured a cover of Trump in front of an American flag covered in flames. And after the US election, the cover was of Trump's head fashioned as a meteor hurtling toward Earth.
SEE ALSO: Trump has already signed 19 executive actions — here's what each one does
DON'T MISS: Tens of thousands protest Trump's immigration ban in cities and airports across the US
NOW WATCH: Kellyanne Conway referred to a terror attack that never occurred as a catalyst for Trump's immigration ban
THE ATTACK THAT WASN’T
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/03/kellyanne-conway-cites-bowling-green-massacre-that-never-happened-to-defend-travel-ban/?utm_term=.0a2a0f5aac33
Morning Mix
Kellyanne Conway cites ‘Bowling Green massacre’ that never happened to defend travel ban
By Samantha Schmidt and Lindsey Bever February 3 at 4:27 PM
Video -- In an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Feb. 2, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway defended President Trump's travel ban with inaccurate claims of a “Bowling Green massacre,” and an Iraqi refugee ban under former president Barack Obama. She later said she misspoke. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)
Kellyanne Conway has taken “alternative facts” to a new level.
During a Thursday interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, the counselor to the president defended President Trump’s travel ban related to seven majority-Muslim countries. At one point, Conway made a reference to two Iraqi refugees whom she described as the masterminds behind “the Bowling Green massacre.”
“Most people don’t know that because it didn’t get covered,” Conway said.
The Bowling Green massacre didn’t get covered because it didn’t happen. There has never been a terrorist attack in Bowling Green, Ky., carried out by Iraqi refugees or anyone else.
It appeared initially that Conway was referring to two Iraqi citizens living in Bowling Green who were arrested in 2011 and eventually sentenced to federal prison for attempting to send weapons and money to al-Qaeda in Iraq for the purpose of killing U.S. soldiers, according to a statement from the Justice Department.
On Friday morning, she acknowledged that with a tweet:
Follow
Kellyanne Conway ✔ @KellyannePolls
On @hardball @NBCNews @MSNBC I meant to say "Bowling Green terrorists" as reported here:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131 …
8:14 AM - 3 Feb 2017
Photo published for Exclusive: 'Dozens' of Terrorists May Be in US as Refugees
Exclusive: 'Dozens' of Terrorists May Be in US as Refugees
Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI...
abcnews.go.com
2,762 2,762 Retweets 5,694 5,694 likes
Bowling Green city officials said Friday in a statement that “while in 2011, two Iraqi nationals living in Bowling Green were arrested for attempting to provide money and weapons to terrorists in Iraq, there was no massacre in Bowling Green.”
“I understand during a live interview how one can misspeak,” Mayor Bruce Wilkerson said of Conway’s remarks, “and we appreciate the clarification.”
[Fact Checker: Kellyanne Conway’s claim of a ‘Bowling Green massacre’]
The arrests in Bowling Green were indeed covered, contrary to what Conway initially said. A Lexis search of major papers turned up about 90 news stories. That’s not counting TV coverage, as in the ABC news story she attached to her tweet.
Follow
Daniel Pike @DPikeBGDN
I was the @bgdailynews' city editor when the Bowling Green Massacre didn't happen.
10:39 PM - 2 Feb 2017
336 336 Retweets 868 868 likes
Follow
Daniel Pike @DPikeBGDN
We couldn't cover the Bowling Green Massacre because it didn't happen, but this newspaper has written close to 100 stories about that case.
10:46 PM - 2 Feb 2017
176 176 Retweets 222 222 likes
As a result of the Bowling Green investigation, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 25, was sentenced to life in federal prison. Waad Ramadan Alwan, 31, was sentenced to 40 years in federal prison, followed by a life term of supervised release.
Both men pleaded guilty to federal terrorism charges and admitted to having taken part in attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq, not in Bowling Green.
Here’s what the Justice Department said in a Jan. 29, 2013, statement:
Hammadi and Alwan both admitted, in FBI interviews that followed waiver of their Miranda rights, to participation in the purported material support operations in Kentucky, and both provided the FBI details of their prior involvement in insurgent activities while living in Iraq. Both men believed their activities in Kentucky were supporting AQI. Alwan admitted participating in IED attacks against U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and Hammadi admitted to participating in 10 to 11 IED attacks as well as shooting at a U.S. soldier in an observation tower.
Court documents filed in this case reveal that the Bowling Green office of the FBI’s Louisville Division initiated an investigation of Alwan in which they used a confidential human source (CHS). The CHS met with Alwan and recorded their meetings and conversations beginning in August 2010. The CHS represented to Alwan that he was working with a group to ship money and weapons to Mujahadeen in Iraq. From September 2010 through May 2011, Alwan participated in ten separate operations to send weapons and money that he believed were destined for terrorists in Iraq. Between October 2010 and January 2011, Alwan drew diagrams of multiple types of IEDs and instructed the CHS how to make them. In January 2011, Alwan recruited Hammadi, a fellow Iraqi national living in Bowling Green, to assist in these material support operations. Beginning in January 2011 and continuing until his arrest in late May 2011, Hammadi participated with Alwan in helping load money and weapons that he believed were destined for terrorists in Iraq.
Conway also reiterated claims from Trump that his refugee policy is similar to “what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.” Conway said it was “brand new information” to people that Obama enacted a “six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program.” Breitbart also reported this week that “Obama suspended Iraq refugee program for six months over terrorism fears in 2011.”
As The Washington Post reported, that was not the case. Obama administration officials told The Post that there was never a point when Iraqi resettlement was stopped or banned. In the aftermath of the arrests of the two Iraqis living in Kentucky, the Obama administration imposed more extensive background checks on Iraqi refugees, and the new screening procedures created a dramatic slowdown in visa approvals.
[Trump’s facile claim that his refugee policy is similar to Obama’s in 2011]
State Department records show there was a significant drop in refugee arrivals from Iraq in 2011, The Post’s Glenn Kessler reported. There were 18,251 in 2010, 6,339 in 2011 and 16,369 in 2012. One news report said the “pace of visa approvals” had “slowed to a crawl,” indicating some were still being approved.
Conway’s interview was by no means the first time the arrests of the two Iraqis in Bowling Green had been politicized as support for blocking refugees from reaching the United States.
In December 2015, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) released a dramatic campaign video ad featuring images and video footage of the two Iraqi nationals, while criticizing then-rivals in the presidential race Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). In the 90-second ad, the faces of Alwan and Hammadi are featured with pounding, dismal music, establishing that the men were “welcomed into America, given public housing and public assistance — as refugees.”
Conway’s comments made the front page of the local newspaper in Bowling Green.
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
BGrueskin @BGrueskin
Congratulations to the Bowling Green Daily News (@bgdailynews) for this front page and one-word headline. cc @DrMarioRGarcia
1:49 PM - 3 Feb 2017
291 291 Retweets 418 418 likes
They were also shared widely on social media.
One journalist tweeted that the American Civil Liberties Union had created a “Bowling Green Massacre Victims Fund,” which actually redirected to the ACLU’s website.
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
Bradd Jaffy ✔ @BraddJaffy
ACLU has created a “Bowling Green Massacre Victims Fund”—which redirects to donate to the ACLU
Trolling level: high https://www.bowlinggreenmassacrefund.com/
1:39 PM - 3 Feb 2017
2,245 2,245 Retweets 3,929 3,929 likes
But the organization said it wasn’t responsible.
Follow
ACLU National ✔ @ACLU
Not us! https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/827587277111050241 …
2:13 PM - 3 Feb 2017
1,116 1,116 Retweets 2,750 2,750 likes
The “Bowling Green Massacre” was the No. 1 topic trending on Twitter, and Conway’s interview prompted many to share memories of where they were “when the Bowling Green Massacre didn’t happen.”
But on a more serious note, Chelsea Clinton called the massacre “completely fake” and urged people not to “make up attacks.”
Follow
Chelsea Clinton ✔ @ChelseaClinton
</i>9:04 AM - 3 Feb 2017
35,385 35,385 Retweets 96,944 96,944 likes
Then Conway called her out, tweeting, “@ChelseaClinton & others, you can’t ‘invent’ quality candidates either. I misspoke; you lost the election.”
Follow
Bowling Green NPS @BowlingGreenNPS
We'll be sharing photos and fun facts about the #BowlingGreenMassacre as soon as it happens. #staytuned
1:47 PM - 3 Feb 2017
529 529 Retweets 1,450 1,450 likes
Follow
Alec MacGillis ✔ @AlecMacGillis
One still shudders to think how bad the Bowling Green massacre would've been if not for the heroic intervention of Fred Douglass.
11:15 PM - 2 Feb 2017
8,838 8,838 Retweets 22,035 22,035 likes
Follow
Michael Blackman @ParaComedian09
Brian Williams won a Purple Heart for his service at the Bowling Green Massacre.
12:21 AM - 3 Feb 2017 · Los Angeles, CA
237 237 Retweets 615 615 likes
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
Roy Clendaniel @rclendan
We shall never forget...#BowlingGreenMasacre
3:38 PM - 3 Feb 2017
14,848 14,848 Retweets 22,591 22,591 likes
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
Richard M. Nixon @dick_nixon
Moments before the Bowling Green Massacre. - RZ
12:13 AM - 3 Feb 2017
723 723 Retweets 1,414 1,414 likes
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
Sam Z Comedy @SamZComedy
Here are all the names of the people that perished in the Bowling Green Massacre. May they Rest In Peace
12:31 AM - 3 Feb 2017
1,707 1,707 Retweets 3,571 3,571 likes
And then came this tweet from comedian Justin Shanes:
Follow
Justin Shanes @justinshanes
Finding these Bowling Green Massacre jokes to be a little too soon. Out of respect, we should wait until it takes place.
i>1:23 AM - 3 Feb 2017
24,842 24,842 Retweets 59,098 59,098 likes
Controversial comments from Kellyanne Conway that made headlines
View Photos Conway, counselor to President Trump, coined the term ‘alternative facts’ and referred to a ‘Bowling Green massacre’ that never happened.
We asked Bowling Green residents what they were doing on the day of the 'Bowling Green Massacre' Play Video2:00
Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to President Trump, defended his travel ban to seven Muslim-majority countries by referring to a “Bowling Green massacre” that never actually happened. (Alyse Young/For The Washington Post)
This story has been updated.
Read more:
Kellyanne Conway gave a master class in not answering questions in her Fox News interview
‘They never saw this coming’: A Q&A with Kellyanne Conway
How Kellyanne Conway ushered in the era of ‘alternative facts’
5.6K Comments
Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via Email
Samantha Schmidt is a reporter for The Washington Post's Morning Mix team. She previously worked as a reporting fellow for the New York Times.
Lindsey Bever is a general assignment reporter for The Washington Post. Follow @lindseybever
NOT FAKE NEWS. WATCH THE WORDS COME OUT OF TRUMP’S MOUTH. TWO ARTICLES.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/frederick-douglass-vs-the-first-donald-trump_us_5895eaace4b061551b3dff0c
Frederick Douglass vs. The First Donald Trump
Theodore Hamm
02/04/2017 09:54 am ET | Updated 1 day ago
At first glance, President Trump’s present-tense declaration on the first day of Black History Month that Frederick Douglass “has done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more” seems ridiculous. And it deservedly sparked a firestorm of denunciation and ridicule on social media.
But one can also make a case that Trump was, most unwittingly, correct. Douglass’s legacy is alive and well, and in the current era, it may very well become “more and more” relevant.
Though he has toned down his anti-black rhetoric, Trump’s rise to political prominence began with his racist birther assault on Obama. His most powerful Cabinet appointee, Jeff Sessions, has deep affinities for the Confederacy and has been credited by Steve Bannon as the Founding Father of the white nationalist alt-right.
Douglass observed first-hand an earlier version of this swing from racial progress to racist reaction in the White House—when a figure he admired, Abe Lincoln, gave way to a successor he despised, Andrew Johnson.
Lincoln was assassinated a week after the Confederacy conceded in April 1865, and Douglass quickly became one of the most outspoken critics of Johnson. The nation’s foremost black leader drove home his views of the transition in two memorable speeches he delivered in Brooklyn.
In “The Assassination and Its Lessons,” presented at the Brooklyn Academy of Music in late January 1866, Douglass waxed poetically about the fallen president, with whom he had met in the White House on two occasions (and spoken to on one other notable occasion). Abe, he recalled, was “A man who took life at the roughest, with brave hands grappled with it and conquered.”
Johnson, however, had retreated from the commitment to full black equality that Lincoln had begun to display late in the war. Among the worst of the new president’s many actions, for Douglass, was the appointment of former Confederate leaders as provisional governors of Southern states.
“What shall be said…[of a] man who wants to enfranchise our enemies and disfranchise our friends?” Douglass thus asked. The question answered itself.
Shortly after the BAM speech, Douglass led a delegation that met with Johnson at the White House, during which the president, unlike his predecessor, treated his black guests with condescension—and dismissed their call for full black voting rights. The New York Times, then a Republican Party organ, followed suit, arguing in an editorial that Douglass should be more “humble” and insisting, rather absurdly, that “No one has the welfare of the emancipated class more thoroughly at heart than President Johnson.”
Johnson’s actions quickly proved Douglass, not the Times, to be correct about the president’s character, as he vetoed both the Freedmen’s Bureau Bill and the Civil Rights Bill, two central pieces of Reconstruction legislation.
When Douglass returned to Brooklyn in December of 1866, his ire against Johnson’s betrayal of Lincoln’s legacy had by no means subsided. At Henry Ward Beecher’s Plymouth Church in Brooklyn Heights, the great orator delivered “Sources of Danger to the Republic,” which he had debuted a few days earlier in Hoboken.
This time Douglass dispensed with the rhetorical devices and instead issued more direct fire. The biggest source of danger to the republic, he declared, was the power invested by our constitution in the executive branch—because when the White House fell into the wrong hands, the entire nation would suffer the consequences.
As Douglass explained what he viewed as design flaws in the Constitution—including too much power in the executive branch, a needless office of vice president, and the veto power—it’s not hard to figure out the real target of his wrath.
After ticking off the names of presidents despised by abolitionists—Franklin Pierce, Millard Fillmore, and James Buchanan—Douglass then singled out “the vilest of the vile, the basest of the base, the most execrable of the execrable—he who shall be nameless.”
It didn’t take long for Douglass to utter that name, however. “We are under great obligations to Andrew Johnson,” he said, “for disclosing to us the unwisdom” of excessive executive power.
Just over 150 years later, we can thank Douglass for a truly “amazing job” of speaking to the future.
Theodore Hamm is the editor of Frederick Douglass in Brooklyn.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/03/seth-meyers-mocks-trump-black-history-fail-you-think-frederick-douglass-is-still-alive.html
SAD!
Seth Meyers Mocks Trump’s Black History Fail: You Think Frederick Douglass Is Still Alive?
The ‘Late Night’ host summed up President Trump’s second week in office, including his troubling comments to kick off Black History Month.
MATT WILSTEIN
02.03.17 1:08 AM ET
As President Donald Trump’s second week in office comes to a close, Seth Meyers told viewers Thursday night that it has been “as chaotic as his first.” And nothing was more bizarre than Trump’s introduction to Black History Month on Wednesday.
“Trump commemorated Black History Month by praising abolitionist Frederick Douglass,” the Late Night host said, “but from his comments, it seemed pretty clear that, not only did Trump not know who Frederick Douglass was, he also seemed to think that Douglass, who died in 1895, might still be alive.”
As Trump said, Douglass has been getting “more and more” recognition for the “amazing job” he’s been doing. “Keep your eye on that Fred Douglass kid, he’s going places,” Meyers said as Trump. Remarkably, White House press secretary Sean Spicer “also thought Douglass might be still alive.”
“Who among us wouldn’t panic if asked to recite stuff we learned in high school,” Meyers said, “but how did you not have time between the president’s comments and your press briefing to Google Frederick Douglass? And not his whole biography, but simple stuff like, ‘Is Frederick Douglass alive?’”
Later, Meyers said “nothing has been more troubling than the incompetence Trump’s administration displayed in rolling out his controversial travel ban on refugees in seven Muslim-majority countries,” revisiting an issue he took on earlier in the week. The host went after Spicer once more for denying that the policy is a “ban” on anyone.
“Yeah, where could the lying, dishonest media possibly get the idea that this is a ban?” Meyers asked, before showing multiple videos of Spicer, Trump, and Kellyanne Conway using that term. “That’s a classic case of gotcha journalism, in that they gotcha on camera saying ‘ban’ like a million times.”
Finally, during a commentary on Trump’s education secretary nominee Betsy DeVos, who may end up getting blocked by members of the president’s own party, Meyers came back to where he started.
“Republicans want to defund our schools and roll back public education, which could be disastrous,” he said, “because then, you end up not knowing who Frederick Douglass is!”
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2017/02/03/cbs-news-poll-country-divided-on-travel-ban-trump/
CBS News Poll: Country Divided On Travel Ban, Trump
February 3, 2017 9:37 PM By Mike Hellgren
Baltimore (WJZ) – It’s been two weeks since President Donald Trump took office, and the country remains divided among partisan lines. The president’s actions have stirred passionate debate across Maryland, and the nation.
According to a new CBS News Poll, a majority of Republicans approve of President Trump and his recent executive orders while Democrats decisively disapprove.
Protestors filled BWI Marshall Airport last weekend after the president announced an executive order temporarily restricting entry for immigrants from seven countries that are majority Muslim.
The poll sampled 1,019 adults from across the political spectrum and found 45 percent of Americans approve, and 51 percent disapprove of the travel ban.
Doctor Mileah Kromer heads Goucher’s Field Politics Center.
“Despite some of the demonstrations, people are really divided on this issue of immigration and refugees,” says Dr. Kromer.
Our poll found strong party divisions with 85 percent of Republicans approving, and 85 percent of Democrats disapproving of the executive order. And 36 percent believe it will make America more dangerous, angering people worldwide.
“It’s a recruitment tool for terrorist organizations and puts Americans traveling abroad at risk. I think the numbers will get even more lopsided against what the president is trying to do,” says Senator Ben Cardin (D).
Yet, 36 percent believe it will make America safer and prevent unwanted people from entering the country.
“The vast majority of Muslim countries, of course, don’t come under this temporary halt of immigration for those countries,” says Maryland Rep. Andy Harris (R).
The polls also showed more than seven-in-ten Americans do not believe there should be a ban on all Muslims entering the United States.
On the president’s refugee ban, 45 percent approve and 51 percent disapprove and 35 percent believe the ban reflects the founding U.S. principles, and 51 percent believe it’s against them.
“We’ve been polling and asking questions about immigration issues in the united states, and this has always been a really divisive issue among American, so it’s not surprising that we see this come out,” says Dr. Kromer.
Meanwhile, more Americans think the Senate should vote to confirm his Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch than vote against him.
President Trump’s approval rating is the lowest of any president just after his first inauguration since the Gallup Poll began taking those measures back in 1953. Only 40% of Americans approve while 48% disapprove of the job he is doing in office.
Follow @CBSBaltimore on Twitter and like WJZ-TV | CBS Baltimore on Facebook
Mike Hellgren
WJZ general assignment reporter Mike Hellgren came to Maryland's News Station in the spring of 2004 from KARK-TV, an NBC affiliate station in Little Rock, Arkansas where he worked as a general assignment reporter, as well as fill-in anchor. Solid...
More from Mike Hellgren
GOATS AND SODA
http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/02/05/513252650/long-before-there-was-fake-news-there-were-fake-photos
Long Before There Was 'Fake News,' There Were 'Fake Photos'
February 5, 2017 7:00 AM ET
ANGUS CHEN
Photograph -- Orientalist Study, 1858. The two men are in fact white Europeans, posing in a London studio.
Roger Fenton (English, 1819–1869)/Featured at the Clark Art Institute
On display at the "Photography and Discovery" exhibit at the Clark Art Institute in Williamstown, Mass., is a photo of two men dressed in traditional Arab garb in a carpeted room (above). They're smoking a pipe. It's a beautiful photo, but it's not from the Middle East. It was shot in a studio in London by photographer Roger Fenton. The men in the photo are white Europeans, dressed up and posing as Arabs.
The whole thing is staged — as are several of the exhibit's images. The photos were taken in the 19th and early 20th centuries, roughly the first 75 years of photography. This was also a time of rising European colonial power. European empires needed justification for subjugating vast swaths of earth, and photography could frame the Arab and Asian world in a way that supported the empire, says Ali Behdad, a professor of literature at UCLA and author of Camera Orientalis: Reflections on Photography of the Middle East.
The Pyramids of El-Geezeh from the South West, from Egypt, Sinai and Jerusalem: A Series of Twenty Photographic Views, c. 1860.
Francis Frith/Featured in Clark Art Institute
Take the photo of the pyramids at Giza, shot by prominent 19th-century photographer Francis Frith. The pyramids are in the background, and the surrounding sands are desolate save for two picnickers and a pack animal. The terrain is majestic and the pyramids tall and timeless, if crumbling slightly.
GOATS AND SODA
PHOTOS: A Drone's View Of The World
Like the photo of the pipe smokers, this photo was staged. The picnickers are members of Frith's photography crew, as the museum label notes. And the people of Giza — the third largest city in Egypt – are nowhere to be seen. "It's to make it seem this place is a historical ruin that needs to be fixed up by Europeans or appropriated by them," Behdad says. The British occupied Egypt 20 years after the photo was taken.
Because of the camera's eyewitness quality, people believed that what they saw was true, says Luke Gartlan, a professor of art history at the University of St. Andrews.
The museum takes care to explain the story behind the images, says Jay Clarke, the exhibit curator. Labels beside the exhibited photographs identify when white men engaged in brown face, and the photos of crowded France beside a barren Burma add to the idea that some countries were barely populated.
"The exhibition certainly does present a Eurocentric view," Clarke says. "We only recently began to collect works by non-Western artists."
The idea of using photos to make a political statement, meanwhile, continues to this day. In the Middle East, Behdad says, news and contemporary photography often depicts Arabs as "terrorists, people who oppress their women. That perpetuates the kinds of policies of exclusion that we see in Europe, Holland, France and the United States now. It's about image. It's about perception."
POLITICS
How Does One Create A 'Fake News Masterpiece' And What Happens Next?
But in recent years, there has been more and more photographic and video documentation from people in developing countries. Video blogs from locals in besieged Aleppo flew across the world through news coverage and social media, for example. "Our history has always been written by people other than us, specifically in photo," says Sima Diab, a Syrian-born photojournalist based in Cairo. "In the last six to 10 years, however tough it's been, [news and life in the Middle East] has been documented extensively by locals."
Water Carrier, Cairo, c. 1875.
Henri Béchard (French, active in Egypt, late 19th century)/ Featured at the Clark Art Institute
That's a far cry from the days when two white Europeans could pose as Arabs in a London studio. But whether this new wave of photos will have the same influence as the images of the past is still an open question.
SANDERS/WARREN AND OTHER PROGRESSIVES IN NEW DNC CAMPAIGN
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-on-trump-this-guy-is-a-fraud_us_58974cfde4b0406131375923
Bernie Sanders On Donald Trump: ‘This Guy Is A Fraud’
The former Democratic presidential candidate slammed the president for his shift on economic policy.
Ariel Edwards-Levy
Staff Reporter and Polling Director, The Huffington Post
02/05/2017 12:50 pm ET
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) criticized President Donald Trump for his actions toward Wall Street, saying that he’d abandoned the populist rhetoric he used while on the campaign trail.
“You know, it is hard not to laugh to see President Trump alongside these Wall Street guys,” Sanders told CNN’s Jake Tapper. “I have to say this, Jake. And I don’t mean to be disrespectful. This guy is a fraud.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly attacked his rival, Hillary Clinton, for her ties to Wall Street, promising to “drain the swamp” in Washington. Since then, he’s assembled an economic team that draws heavily on Goldman Sachs alumni and laid out a deregulation-friendly agenda.
“This guy ran for president of the United States saying, ‘I, Donald Trump, I’m going to take on Wall Street. These guys are getting away with murder,’” Sanders said. “And then, suddenly, he appoints all these billionaires. His major financial adviser comes from Goldman Sachs. And now he is going to dismantle legislation that protects consumers.”
“This is a guy who ran for president saying, ‘I’m going ― I’m the only Republican, I’m not going to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,’” Sanders continued. “And then he appoints all of these guys who are precisely going to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.”
On Friday, Trump signed executive orders intended to roll back some of the Obama administration’s financial regulations.
“You know, he’s a good showman,” Sanders said. “I will give you that. He’s a good TV guy.”
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/317905-sanders-praises-ruling-to-halt-trump-immigration-ban
Sanders praises ruling to halt Trump immigration ban
BY BROOKE SEIPEL - 02/04/17 09:59 AM EST
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) on Saturday applauded the ruling by a federal judge to immediately halt President Trump's travel ban on Muslim-majority countries.
"I'm heartened by this decision to halt Trump's immigration order, which runs afoul of our constitution and who we are as a nation," Sanders tweeted Saturday morning.
"This was a good day for our system of checks and balances," Sanders added in a statement.
Following Trump's executive order last Friday, Sanders condemned the ban as "anti-Muslim."
"Trump's anti-Muslim order plays into the hands of fanatics wishing to harm America. Love and compassion trump hatred and intolerance," Sanders tweeted at the time. "Demagogues survive by fostering hatred. We won't allow anyone to divide us up by our religion, country of origin or the color of our skin."
Federal judge James Robart, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003, ruled Friday that the executive order would be stopped nationwide, effective immediately.
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, a Democrat, filed the lawsuit three days after Trump signed the executive order. The suit argued that the travel ban targets Muslims and violates constitutional rights of immigrants and their families.
The ruling, made at the request of Washington and Minnesota, is the broadest to date against Trump's executive order.
Trump's action bans people from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan and Somalia from entering the U.S. for 90 days. It also temporarily halts the United States' refugee resettlement program for 120 days, while indefinitely suspending resettlement for refugees from Syria.
“The administration's executive order raises very serious constitutional questions, has thrown the enforcement of our immigration laws into chaos and further sewn [sic] divisive, xenophobic and hateful rhetoric into our national discussion,” Sanders said in his Saturday statement.
ONCE AGAIN, ELIZABETH WARREN “TELLS IT LIKE IT IS!” SO MANY PROGRESSIVES OF ALL AGES AND TYPES FLOCKED TO SANDERS BECAUSE HE SPEAKS FOR THE PEOPLE, FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, FOR THE STRONG REDUCTION OF THE CLIFF-LIKE GAP BETWEEN THE RICH AND THE POOR. HE'S RESPECTED AS WELL AS AN EXCITING AND BOLD LEADER, BECAUSE HE "WALKS THE WALK". HE HAS MARCHED FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, AND FOR UNION ACTIONS. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL BE A LOST CAUSE IF THEY DON'T MOVE BACK AWAY FROM THAT RIGHT EDGE WHERE THEY STAND NOW. THEY LOST BECAUSE THEY FAILED THEIR PEOPLE UNTIL THEY WERE NO LONGER RESPECTED AS STANDING FOR SOMETHING MEANINGFUL. IT'S A TERRIBLE SHAME. THEY'RE THE SALT THAT HAS LOST IT'S SALTINESS.
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/317912-elizabeth-warren-democrats-need-to-grow-a-backbone
Warren: Democrats need to ‘grow a backbone’
BY MAX GREENWOOD - 02/04/17 11:37 AM EST
Democrats need to take some responsibility for Donald Trump’s electoral win, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Saturday, urging party faithfuls to cast aside more moderate calls for strategic campaign reforms and “grow a backbone.”
Speaking at the Progressive Congress Strategy Summit in Baltimore, the progressive firebrand painted Trump’s election as a failure by Democrats to address floundering economic opportunity and a growing wealth gap in the U.S.
“There are some in the Democratic Party who urge caution,” she said, according to prepared remarks. “They say this is just a tactical problem. We need better data. We need better social media. We need better outreach. We need better talking points. “
“Better talking points? Are you kidding me?” she continued. “People are so desperate for economic change in this country that Donald Trump was just inaugurated as President, and people think we just have a messaging problem?”
Warren also blasted Republican leaders for bowing to Trump’s nationalist brand of politics, painting it as a move to pursue the party’s agenda at all costs.
“Donald Trump has stirred ugly racism, sexism, and hatred in this country, and the Republican politicians smiled and climbed right into bed with him,” she said. “That stink will be on them for decades to come. The national party that embraced bigotry.”
But she also aimed her criticism at members of her own party, arguing that some had turned to making excuses to absolve Democrats of responsibility for former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s unexpected loss.
Trump rose to the presidency after a bitter and often chaotic campaign season, marked by a succession of controversies.
Warren has been among Trump’s most vocal critics, and has gained a reputation as one of the prominent members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
I CAN’T LET THIS DNC COMPLAINT THAT SANDERS IS JUST “REOPENING” THE OLD WOUNDS GO BY. HE IS ARGUING FOR A CHANGE IN DIRECTION AND VOTER BASE BACK TO WHO THE PARTY USED TO BE WHEN IT WAS A WINNER. I’M AFRAID THE “SOUL OF THE PARTY” HAS TRANSMIGRATED OVER TO THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, HOWEVER; BUT IF THE PROGRESSIVES CONTINUE TO ARGUE THEIR POINT, PERHAPS IT WILL CHANGE BACK. EITHER THAT, OR THE PROGRESSIVES MAY GROW INTO A FORCE WORTH COURTING BY THE DNC. THE DEMS WILL TRULY HAVE TO REPENT, I BELIEVE, AND INCORPORATE PROGRESSIVES INTO THE PARTY STRUCTURE IN A POSITION OF INFLUENCE. THEY SHOULD ALSO COURT THE GREENS, WHO ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THE BERNIE PROGRESSIVES. THE WAY OF THE FUTURE IS TO HELP THE 50% OR SO WHO ARE VERY FAR BELOW THE MOST WEALTHY, AND ARE TRULY HURTING. SANDERS IS RIGHT ABOUT THAT.
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/317770-sanders-reopens-dem-primary-wounds
Sanders reopens Dem primary wounds
BY JONATHAN EASLEY - 02/03/17 12:00 PM EST
Autoplay: Bernie Sanders is opening old wounds.
Sanders’s recent swipe against former Vice President Joe Biden has angered Democratic party officials, who are accusing the onetime Democratic presidential candidate of refighting a bitter primary season that ripped the party in two.
The independent senator from Vermont has also infuriated supporters of Tom Perez, a top contender for Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman, after an unprovoked attack against the former Labor secretary.
Sanders, who backs Perez rival Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) for DNC chairman, has shaken up a race that has until now featured few fireworks.
The DNC campaign changed this week after Biden endorsed Perez for chairman. Sanders let loose, saying that it’s time to move beyond the “failed status-quo approach” of Biden and Perez.
The remark has elicited a furious response from Perez’s supporters, who accuse Sanders of relitigating his Democratic primary fight with Hillary Clinton when the party needs to unite behind a new leader.
Sanders's critics are firing back, noting that he isn't even a member of the Democratic Party.
“It is very concerning that Bernie Sanders is so intent on taking over a party that he’s not even a member of that he’d insult the beloved vice president — and really the president — about a failed status quo approach,” said Texas Democratic chairman Gilberto Hinojosa, a Perez supporter and one of 447 DNC members who will vote in late February to elect the next chairman.
“This is coming from a man who is not even a member of our party,” Hinojosa continued. “We lost an election and all of a sudden we’re all a part of a failed status quo? When he puts Joe Biden and Tom Perez in this category and paints with a broad brush he insults all of us. This is an election between loyal, qualified Democrats who love our party and the country. There’s no need for him to lower himself to that level.”
Sanders’s statement was emailed from his political account and did not come from Ellison’s campaign for DNC chairman. A spokesman for Sanders has not returned a request for comment.
The seven major candidates for DNC chairman have agreed not to attack one another and have largely kept to that promise.
But Democrats involved with the race have been frustrated by press reports characterizing the contest as a proxy battle between the party’s leftist Sanders wing, represented by Ellison, and a more moderate Barack Obama-Clinton wing, represented by Perez.
Ellison has run as a unity candidate, framing himself as someone who can bridge the divide. While he has support from figures on the left, like Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), he has also garnered endorsements from more establishment figures like Senate Democratic leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.).
Perez, meanwhile, has the support of Biden and other White House officials who Sanders casts as the establishment. But Perez also boasts an impressive progressive resume, with stints as Labor secretary and as a Justice Department civil rights attorney.
But Sanders’s statement adds fuel to the notion that the race to be the next party leader will be a statement about whether the grassroots or the establishment wins out.
“I'm disappointed in that,” said South Carolina Democratic chairman Jaime Harrison, himself a candidate for DNC chairman. “This is my message to everybody—the 2016 primary is done, over. Sen. Sanders, Sec. Clinton, both were not victorious in 2016. We need to focus on how we become victorious in 2018, how we become victorious in 2020…we have to stop the infighting because somebody may win the battle, but ultimately we'll lose the war.”
Some supporters of Ellison, like DNC vice chairman R.T. Rybak, another voting member, believe the controversy is being blown out of proportion.
“From the beginning people have tried to project a proxy fight onto what is, in reality, a pretty tame tactical discussion about how Democrats organize,” Rybak said. “It’s not as sexy as a narrative about Bernie-Hillary revenge, but the reality is we’re looking forward, not back.”
And Jeri Shepherd, a voting DNC member from Colorado who backs Ellison, noted that Sanders said in his statement that he considers Biden a friend has “a lot of respect” for Tom Perez.
She argued that those who took offense to Sanders’s remark are themselves looking for any reason to reignite the Sanders-Clinton debate.
“Bernie is not one to make personal attacks. That’s not his style,” Shepherd said. “The irony is that many of us aren’t interested in rehashing the primary, but there are some who are and who still see Bernie supporters as interlopers into the party. They’ll feel how they want to feel, but I don’t think it’s productive to read too much into what he said.”
For many Democratic operatives, though, the “failed status-quo” remark was an ad hominem attack typical of Sanders, one that evoked bitter memories from the primaries.
“The DNC forums and these campaigns for chair have all been about unity, unity, unity, and Bernie put out a different message,” said one Clinton ally. “He’s opening these old wounds and it looks to me also like his ego is at play. Perez and Ellison are cut from the same progressive cloth. Either one would be a strong leader.”
Jamal Simmons, a Democratic strategist whose firm handled communications for one of the DNC chairman forums, noted that Sanders can join the Democratic Party but has repeatedly declined.
“He doesn’t get to set the standard for a party he’s not a member of,” Simmons said. “It’s up to those 447 longtime members of the party. If he’d like to have a vote, he should join the Democratic Party. We’d love to have him. The truth is we can’t win without the Bernie wing, but we also can’t have someone who is just a voice for Bernie Sanders. The lines are not that clear. There is overlap.”
Still, it’s a fight that some progressives, emboldened by Sanders’s surprisingly successful run and energetic protests against President Trump, are eager to have.
“Bernie was right,” said Jonathan Tasini, a prominent progressive organizer who is backing Ellison. “The party is in a shambles. For the people who were at the helm to pretend like that isn’t the case is just whistling past the graveyard. This is a fight for the soul of the party and two very different views about what the party should do and stand for. It’s not a bad thing to have that debate.”
But most liberals are at ease with Ellison and Perez as the top two contenders and eager to put the divisions revealed during the 2016 campaign in the rearview for good.
“I don’t think it’s in anyone’s interest to overstate what’s at stake,” said Gara LaMarche, president of Democracy Alliance, an influential network of liberal activist groups. “Both candidates have a strong connection to social progressive movements and want to democratize the party. Whoever wins, the other side shouldn’t feel as if they lost the fight for the soul of the Democratic Party.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/at-gathering-on-politics-of-love-sanders-warns-trump-could-start-a-war-201026254.html
At gathering on ‘politics of love,’ Sanders warns Trump could start a war
Garance Franke-Ruta Yahoo News
February 3, 2017
Photograph -- Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks at the Sister Giant conference on Feb. 2. (Photo: Garance Franke-Ruta/Yahoo News)
ARLINGTON, Va. — Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, speaking at a conference on the “Politics of Love” Thursday evening, said he feared that President Trump would plunge the nation into war.
“This is one of the things that scares me most: For a demagogue to succeed, they need to cultivate hatred. Now the hatred may be against immigrants — we’re all supposed to hate immigrants, and maybe it’s other minorities, African-Americans, Latinos,” Sanders said. “But also I worry that the hatred will spill over to foreign affairs, and that we are maybe entering into a situation where a Trump needs a war — and war and war — to rally public support.”
Sanders spoke before a rapturous audience at the second Sister Giant conference, hosted by bestselling spirituality author Marianne Williamson, author of “A Return to Love” and “The Age of Miracles.” The conference was part of a movement Williamson has dubbed the Great Resistance of 2017. Attendees were overwhelmingly female — fans and followers of Williamson, who is among the leading figures in the New Spirituality movement in America.
The gathering, billed as “Creating a Politics of Love,” illustrates how normally inward-looking communities, especially of women who had expected Hillary Clinton to win even if they were not all-in on her candidacy, have been galvanized into action by the polarizing 2016 election outcome.
While the Women’s March on Washington and its sister marches around the country struck a chord with the crafting lifestyle community — so much so that the marches wound up being visually defined by their pink hand-knitted and crocheted “pussy hats” — Sister Giant is seeking to mobilize what Williamson calls the “higher consciousness community” to resist Trump’s agenda and reach out to Americans who hold political views different from their own.
The conference, which drew 1,800 guests and an online audience of more than 3,000, opened with a video featuring a medley of words and phrases: “Say Hell No to Tyranny,” “Rise Up,” “Resist” and “Don’t Be Gaslighted.” The stage was backed by a banner showing a woman in lotus position silhouetted against a stylized American flag; on either side stood tall shelves holding candles. The Washington Unity Choir sang “My Country ’Tis of Thee” and “America the Beautiful.” A handful of women in the audience held up Bernie signs, and when he walked out to take his seat in the speakers’ section, one shouted, “2020!”
Sanders, the conference’s keynote speaker, told the audience that the enthusiasm for his message at the first-ever Sister Giant in 2015 in Los Angeles helped encourage him to run for president.
Not knowing precisely what to do next, but feeling called to action, was a common refrain Thursday. “With what’s happening today, I don’t know exactly what to do,” Williamson said.
“We have more than a political problem. We have an emotional problem, in that this moment scares us. It scares us. We have a psychological problem in that we are all being bullied in this moment. We have a spiritual problem in that hate has been harnessed for political purposes,” she said.
Sanders echoed her remarks. “If you think that you don’t have the answers, trust me, you are not alone,” he said. “What is imperative as never before is that we really think this thing through, because the stakes are so extraordinary for this country and for the world. And on behalf of my seven grandchildren, and the children all over this planet: We cannot fail.”
“I know that some of your friends say, ‘Wow, this sucks,’” added Sanders. He acknowledged that some people are reacting to the moment by wanting to turn off the news, stop reading the papers “and kind of sink slowly into despair.”
“And to those people who say this, I say, as loudly as I can — not only for your lives, but for the lives of future generations — despair is not an option.”
Sanders assured the audience: “On every important issue facing this country, the views of Donald Trump and his friends are a minority position — and don’t ever forget that.”
And yet, he said, being in the majority is not enough. “Let me suggest to you, and some will disagree with me, that’s OK too. Let me suggest to you that what happened on November 8th, Trump’s victory, was not a victory for Trump or his ideology. It was a gross political failure of the Democratic Party.”
This won Sanders a partial standing ovation.
“Some people may disagree with me, but if you think that everybody who voted for Donald Trump is a racist or a sexist or a homophobe, you would be dead wrong,” Sanders said. Instead, he said, what happened is that “hardworking decent people” had a lot of questions about their lives, about long hours and poor wages and their declining standard of living and school debt and Wall Street destroying the economy.
“So Trump comes along, and Trump is, among many other qualities, a pathological liar. So bad that he practically has no ideology at all. Tomorrow he may come out for a single health care payer program, I don’t know. He doesn’t believe in anything. It’s just what sounds right at the moment,” Sanders said.
But what Trump did do, “if you listen carefully to what he said, he said, ‘I, Donald Trump, I’m going to take on the establishment,’” Sanders said.
He won because “there are people in this country who are hurting, and they are hurting terribly,” Sanders said. “And for years they looked to the Democratic Party, which at one time was the party of working people. And they looked and they looked and they looked and they got nothing in return, and out of desperation they turned to Mr. Trump.”
“All over this country there are people who are hurting, and our job is to communicate and talk to and stand up and fight with those people for a government that listens to them,” he said.
“It is always easy to come to beautiful conferences like this, where we look to our friends over here, friends over there, and we’re all in basic agreement,” he counseled. “It is a hell of a lot harder to start talking to people who have a worldview very different than yours. But that is exactly what we have to do.”
Sanders said he planned to go to McDowell County in West Virginia with MSNBC to hold a town hall. McDowell County, which voted 74 percent for Trump, is the poorest county in West Virginia and also has one of the worst opium and prescription-drug abuse problems in the nation. The needs and problems in McDowell are so acute that West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, and his wife have been for years now seeking to rally influential figures in Washington and around the country to give the place more attention.
Sanders, who is positioning himself as a leading voice of the opposition to Trump, also plans to debate Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on CNN Feb. 7 in a 90-minute show devoted to the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans have vowed to repeal.
Sanders encouraged conference attendees to run for office, especially school boards, city councils and state legislatures. “To people who don’t have confidence to run for office … I’m a member of the Senate. You should see some of the Senate. If you have any doubt about your ability to run for office, turn on C-SPAN,” he joked.
The conference runs through the end of the day Saturday and features such other speakers as Black Lives Matter co-founder Opal Tometi, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the first Indian-American woman in the House, and activist attorney Zephyr Teachout.
Read more from Yahoo News:
Lady Liberty’s flame extinguished on New Yorker cover
Conservationists rally and kill bill to sell off federal land
Senators flooded with calls, letters ahead of DeVos vote
A CONWAY BOO BOO, OR AN ATTEMPTED PROPAGANDA PLOY?
http://www.bgdailynews.com/news/social-media-sensation-community-responds-to-trump-adviser-s-false/article_dd9ff34d-bb37-5110-8c9d-4418ced2d443.html
Social media sensation Community responds to Trump adviser's false reference to 'massacre'
AARON MUDD amudd@bgdailynews.com
February 4, 2017 15 hrs ago 0
When presidential adviser Kellyanne Conway referenced a terrorist “massacre” in Bowling Green that never happened, it drew national attention to the city – as well as surprise and some good-natured ribbing from locals.
Among the community members having fun at Conway’s expense was Laura Chandler, who stood in line Friday at Home Cafe to order her own “Bowling Green Massacre Pizza.” The pizza, which was a special, included garlic butter, mozzarella, mac and cheese, blackened chicken, jalapeños and Sriracha sauce.
“I think it is hilarious the way that people are reacting,” Chandler said after snapping a picture of the specials menu with her phone. “At least something funny is coming out of it.”
Conway, who made the remark in a nationally televised interview that aired Thursday night on cable network MSNBC, was attempting to defend President Donald Trump’s travel ban involving seven majority-Muslim countries. Although she didn’t mention their names, Conway seemed to be referring to the May 2011 arrests of Waad Ramadan Alwan and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi in Bowling Green.
The two al-Qaida-linked Iraqi men were arrested on terrorism charges after an FBI investigation.
“I bet there was very little coverage, I bet it’s brand-new information to people that President (Barack) Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalized and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre,” Conway said during the interview. “I mean, most people don’t know that because it didn’t get covered.”
On Friday morning, Conway wrote in a tweet that “I meant to say ‘Bowling Green terrorists’ as reported here,” and included a link to an ABC News report about the arrests.
Later Friday morning, Bowling Green Mayor Bruce Wilkerson said in a statement “I understand during a live interview how one can misspeak, and we appreciate the clarification.”
Although both Alwan and Hammadi had been involved in insurgent operations against U.S. troops in Iraq before coming to the United States, no attack was carried out in Bowling Green. After fleeing from Iraq to Syria, the men were mistakenly allowed into the country as refugees in 2009. Their arrests two years later prompted tighter security measures on entry into the U.S.
Conway’s remark was a sensation on social media, leading to a deluge of jokes and online memes. On Friday morning, “Bowling Green Massacre” was the top trending topic nationally on Twitter.
While some in Bowling Green joined in through their own social media accounts, others went to Home Cafe to have a slice of the pizza on special Friday.
Josh Poling, owner of Home Cafe, served up the pizzas around lunch.
“It’s on pace to be our highest-selling pizza ever,” he said.
Poling said Conway was obviously misspeaking.
“It’s all in good fun, very lighthearted,” he said.
Anna Yacovone enjoyed her own pizza in the cafe, describing it as having a “nice balance of zest and spice, not overwhelming on the cheese.”
She saw Conway’s mistake as a “careless error” and said those in the White House should be more careful in their messages to the public. Although she wasn’t sure about Conway’s intentions, she described the error as a “rookie move” to make.
“I think having a pizza at one of Bowling Green’s gems is a great way to poke fun at what’s currently happening politically,” she said.
Earlier Friday, employees at the Bowling Green Area Convention and Visitors Bureau received several requests for information about the nonexistent massacre.
“We have gotten everything from people asking if there’s further information about the massacre ... or if it’s even true,” said Telia Butler, public relations manager for the bureau. She said someone called about possibly visiting a monument dedicated to it and that an information request came in from as far away as Germany.
“It’s just been one of those mornings where Twitter was going crazy,” she said. “People have been asking a lot of questions.”
Butler stressed the importance of fact checking.
“You always have to just check for credibility,” she said.
Despite the hysteria, Butler said it’s a good chance to promote Bowling Green.
“We just like to remind everyone that Bowling Green is safe and that we’re welcoming to all,” she said.
— Follow education reporter Aaron Mudd on Twitter @BGDN_edbeat or visit bgdailynews.com.
ROBART FOR PRESIDENT !!
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/state-dept-reverses-visa-revocations-allowing-previously-banned-travelers-to-enter-us/ar-AAmBVS0?li=AA5a8k
State Dept. reverses visa revocations, allowing previously banned travelers to enter U.S.
The Washington Post
Robert Barnes, Matt Zapotosky and Anne Gearan
February 4, 2017 11:53 AM
The State Department says previously banned travelers will be allowed to enter the United States after a federal judge in Washington state on Friday temporarily blocked enforcement of President Trump’s controversial immigration ban.
“We have reversed the provisional revocation of visas under” Trump’s executive order, a State Department spokesman said Saturday. “Those individuals with visas that were not physically canceled may now travel if the visa is otherwise valid.”
Department of Homeland Security personnel “will resume inspection of travelers in accordance with standard policy and procedure.”
The new measures continue what has been a chaotic rollout of Trump’s order just more than a week ago that installed a temporary ban on entry by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries as well as refugees.
Behnam Partopour, a Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) student from Iran, is greeted by friends at Logan International Airport after he cleared U.S. customs and immigration on an F1 student visa in Boston.© Brian Snyder
U.S. District Judge James L. Robart on Friday entered a temporary but nationwide stop to the order, saying he concluded the court “must intervene to fulfill its constitutional role in our tripart government.”
The Trump administration said it would go to court as quickly as possible to dissolve Robart’s order, and the president himself issued an extraordinarily personal criticism of Robart.
“The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Trump said in a Saturday morning tweet.
Robart has been on the bench since 2004, and was nominated by President George W. Bush.
“This ruling is another stinging rejection of President Trump’s unconstitutional Muslim ban,” said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “We will keep fighting to permanently dismantle this un-American executive order.”
Robart granted a request from attorneys for the state of Washington who had asked him to stop the government from acting on critical sections of Trump’s order. Justice and State department officials had revealed earlier Friday that about 60,000 — and possibly as many as 100,000 — visas already have been provisionally revoked as a result of Trump’s order. A U.S. official said that because of the court case, officials would examine the revoking of those visas so that people would be allowed to travel.
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson (D) hailed the case as “the first of its kind” and declared that it “shuts down the executive order immediately.”
Robart said in his written order that U.S. officials should stop enforcing the key aspects of the ban: the halting of entry by refugees and citizens from certain countries. He did not specifically address the matter of those whose visas already had been revoked.
Following the ruling, government authorities immediately began communicating with airlines and taking steps that would allow travel by those previously barred from doing so.
At the same time, though, the White House said in a statement that the Justice Department would “at the earliest possible time” file for an emergency stay of the “outrageous” ruling from the judge. Minutes later, it issued a similar statement omitting the word “outrageous.”
“The president’s order is intended to protect the homeland and he has the constitutional authority and responsibility to protect the American people,” the White House said.
The president, however, was less cordial on Twitter.
“When a country is no longer able to say who can, and who cannot , come in & out, especially for reasons of safety &.security — big trouble!” Trump said on Twitter.
He also claimed that “certain Middle-Eastern countries agree with the ban.”
“They know if certain people are allowed in it’s death & destruction!” he said.
The judge’s order does not mean the United States has no say on who can enter it, only that the new restrictions in Trump’s executive order cannot be implemented.
Since it was first rolled out a week ago, Trump’s travel ban has been evolving — both because of legal challenges and as a result of decisions by the administration to back off aspects of it. Green-card holders from the affected countries, for example, no longer need waivers to get into the United States, as they did when the order took effect. And the Department of Homeland Security asserted Friday that the order does not apply to dual citizens with passports from countries other than the seven listed.
The numbers of visas revoked, too, demonstrated the far-reaching effect of the order. Families have been split, students unable to pursue their education, and those in the United States unable to leave for fear of not being able to return — and not by the handful, but by the tens of thousands.
During a hearing in a lawsuit by two Yemeni brothers who arrived at Virginia’s Dulles International Airport last Saturday and were quickly put on a return flight to Ethiopia because of the new restrictions, a Justice Department attorney said 100,000 visas had been revoked.
The figure, though, was immediately disputed by the State Department, which said the number of visas revoked was about 60,000. A spokeswoman said earlier Friday that the revocations have no effect on the legal status of people already in the United States, but if those people left the country, their visas would no longer be valid.
Washington state and Minnesota had filed a broad legal challenge to Trump’s order, alleging it was “separating families, harming thousands of the States’ residents, damaging the States’ economies, hurting State-based companies, and undermining both States’ sovereign interest in remaining a welcoming place for immigrants and refugees.” Jeffrey P. Bezos, the owner of The Washington Post and a Washington state resident, has spoken out against the ban.
In the past several days, federal judges in New York, California, Massachusetts and Virginia have issued rulings temporarily blocking aspects of the Trump order — though the orders all seemed to be limited to people who had made their way to U.S. airports, or, in Virginia’s case, to certain people.
The New York and Massachusetts rulings both blocked the government from detaining or deporting anyone from the seven affected countries who could legally enter the United States, and the Massachusetts ruling added the critical phrase “absent the executive order.” In California, a judge declared that U.S. officials were also prevented from “blocking” people from entering who had a valid visa.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/03/trump-signs-executive-order-on-financial-regulation.html?doc=104260685&_tsrc=mobifone
Trump's executive order directs Treasury to submit a report on possible financial regulation changes within 120 days
Jacob Pramuk | @jacobpramuk
February 3, 2017
President Donald Trump took action on Friday to start easing regulations on the financial industry.
The order starts a review of the financial system regulations including the Dodd-Frank reform act, the banking industry rules passed after the 2008 financial crisis that he heavily criticized on the campaign trail. A second action was expected to delay a rule intended to require financial advisors to give customers advice that is in their best interest.
Trump, who won the White House on a populist platform filled with jabs at Wall Street titans, said he would cut "a lot" of the Dodd-Frank changes before a Friday advisory meeting that included JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and Blackstone CEO Steve Schwarzman. Trump has argued the Obama-era rules enacted after the crisis have stifled business and job creation.
Bank stocks popped after Trump's move.
The president's order directs the Treasury Department to review whether existing laws and regulations follow what Trump identified as "core principles" of his administration. He directed the Treasury secretary to file a report within 120 days on possible regulatory changes or legislative recommendations.
The order said the review will focus on several broad administration goals that largely relate to his campaign pledges to reduce government involvement in business and make American companies more competitive. It said Trump aims to "empower Americans to make independent financial decisions," "prevent taxpayer-funded bailouts" and create economic growth through "more rigorous regulatory impact analysis."
The order also outlined goals to "enable American companies to be competitive with foreign firms" and "advance American interests in international financial regulatory negotiations." Trump's White House also wrote it wants to "make regulation efficient, effective and appropriately tailored" and "restore public accountability with federal financial regulatory agencies."
Supporters of the Dodd-Frank reforms, which were designed to make the financial system safer, say they increased the stability and liquidity of key institutions. Critics, many in the financial industry, have said they make it more difficult to lend and harm smaller banks.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer contended on Friday that the rules held back economic growth. He said Dodd-Frank is "frankly not doing what it's supposed to do."
Major changes to Dodd-Frank will likely require congressional action.
Key Senate Democrats criticized Trump's move. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Trump is letting big banks "write the rules of the road."
"If there was any doubt that President Trump had absolutely no intention to follow through on his campaign promises to working families across the country, this executive order should erase that doubt. It seems President Trump's campaign promises to rein in Wall Street weren't worth the bank notes they were printed on," Schumer said in a statement.
Wall Street critic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said the second action, delaying the fiduciary rules, would "make it easier for investment advisors to cheat you out of your retirement savings" and "will put two former Goldman Sachs executives in charge of gutting the rules that protect you from financial fraud and another economic meltdown."
Warren was referring to Trump Treasury nominee Steven Mnuchin and economic advisor Gary Cohn, who both worked at Goldman. Trump repeatedly targeted the firm on the campaign trail as evidence of wealthy elites' influence on the financial system.
http://www.npr.org/2017/02/03/513187940/the-johnson-amendment-in-five-questions-and-answers
The Johnson Amendment In 5 Questions And Answers
February 3, 20173:11 AM ET
Tom Gjelten 2010
Photograph -- Religious organizations are prohibited from taking a position with respect to political candidates.
iStockphoto
In his address to the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday, President Trump vowed to "get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution."
Some conservative Christian groups will welcome the promise, but many Americans may wonder what Trump was talking about. Here are five basic questions that we can answer.
1. What is the Johnson Amendment?
The Johnson Amendment regulates what tax-exempt organizations such as churches can do in the political arena.
Under terms of the 1954 legislation (named for its principal sponsor, then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson), churches and other nonprofit organizations that are exempt from taxation "are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office," according to the IRS website.
Organizations claiming tax-exempt status cannot collect contributions on behalf of political campaigns or make any statement for or against a particular candidate. Clergy are not allowed to endorse candidates from the pulpit. (Despite Trump's promise to "totally destroy" the amendment, the president does not have the authority to do so on his own. Only Congress can repeal a law, in this case an amendment to the tax code.)
2. Does this prohibit all types of political activity in churches?
No.
The law is fairly narrow in scope. Nonpartisan voter education activities and church-organized voter registration drives are legal. Pastors are free to preach on social and political issues of concern. Churches can publish "issue guides" for voters.
3. Who wants the Johnson Amendment repealed?
Though white evangelical Protestants have been active in pushing for the amendment's repeal, other religious groups have been more likely to test its limits.
A 2016 study by the Pew Research Center found that black Protestants have been more likely than other Christian groups to report having heard their clergy speak out clearly on the merits or faults of a particular candidate. The study found that 28 percent of black Protestants heard their clergy speak in support of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign, while about 1 in 5 black Protestants, about 20 percent, said they had heard their ministers denounce Donald Trump.
By comparison, just 4 percent of white evangelicals reported having heard their clergy speak in favor of a presidential candidate (2 percent each for Trump and Clinton), while 7 percent heard their clergy speak against a candidate (mostly Clinton).
4. Is this just about free speech for churches and pastors?
No. It's also about money and politics.
Conservative groups that favor a greater role for religion in the public space, such as the Alliance Defending Freedom, have long sought to repeal the amendment, arguing that it restricts free speech by censoring the content of a pastor's sermon.
Overturning the law, however, would also have major implications for campaign finance. If churches or clergy are allowed to participate in political campaigns, tax-free donations to the churches could go to support a political candidate. Religious organizations could become bigger money players in politics.
5. Have any churches landed in trouble for violating the Johnson Amendment?
Not really.
Despite the controversy surrounding the Johnson Amendment, the Internal Revenue Service has not been especially active in enforcing it. Since 2008, the Alliance Defending Freedom has organized "Pulpit Freedom Sunday," encouraging pastors to give explicitly political sermons in defiance of the law.
The IRS, however, has rarely moved to take away a church's tax exemption. According to the alliance, as reported by the Washington Post, only one of more than 2,000 Christian clergy deliberately challenging the law since 2008 has been audited, and none has been punished.
I REALLY DO LOVE LAPROGRESSIVE, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST I'VE SEEN.
https://www.laprogressive.com/trump-prays/
Are You There, God? It’s Me, Donald: A President on His Knees
BY PETER LAARMAN
POSTED ON FEBRUARY 3, 2017
President Trump breezed through yesterday’s National Prayer Breakfast in his own special way. He opened with a nasty dig at Arnold Schwarzenegger (“pray for his ratings”), bragged about his material success while maintaining that it’s less important than “spiritual success,” spoke of combating worldwide religious extremism “viciously, if we have to” (“it won’t be pretty for a while”), defended his immigrant ban by declaring “we will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our nation,” and even managed to associate the name of Thomas Jefferson with his pledge to “totally destroy” the so-called Johnson Amendment that currently bars tax-favored congregations (and other non-for-profit 501c3 organizations) from engaging in overt political activity. Trump appeared to be unaware of Mr. Jefferson’s insistence on a “wall of separation” between church and state.
One imagines that President Trump might actually have had a go at prayer on the eve of yesterday’s breakfast appearance. What follows is an imaginative reconstruction.
_____________________________
Dear Father God.
Hello?
I can call you Father, right? or maybe Jesus? And who’s the third guy? I forget. Whatever.
I’ll just say “God.” OK?
I’ll take that as a yes. Beautiful.
So, God, I’ve got this breakfast thing tomorrow, which is really more Mike Pence’s crowd than mine. They’ve been so good to me. But boy, they love Mike, this crowd.
I looked at the speech Steve gave me. I’m definitely gonna use this line: “I have met amazing people whose words of worship and encouragement have been a constant source of strength.”
That’s a good one. So smart. They do worship me. You saw those crowds at the inauguration? What a flock, right? You had a great view, I bet, the original Eye in the Sky. Back me up, it was over a billion people. Huge.
But I’m confused about this other line: “the quality of our lives is not defined by our material success but by our spiritual success.” I don’t get it. “Spiritual success”? Sounds like a dumb deal. Ewww…I don’t have money, I have my feeeelings…
What do you think, Lord? What if I say that some of the rich are “very, very miserable, unhappy people?”
Will that fix it? It’s horseshit, but…oh, sorry, it’s manure. Of course I do know a few unhappy rich people, but they’re all lushes. Not my problem. Losers. Sad.
I gotta give these Christians some red meat. Steve is telling me to go after something called the Johnson Amendment? Something about how churches can’t do politics out in the open? Had no idea that was a thing. I should destroy it, big league. Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat, very bad man, weak, couldn’t do a deal with the Vietnamese. Sad.
I’m also gonna drop Thomas Jefferson’s name, because he started the religious liberty thing. Liberty is fabulous, the best. All Americans should be free to take religious liberties.
Oh, and that Turnbull guy, is he serious? I’m supposed to care about what Australia thinks? Gimme a break.
Gonna talk about that tomorrow. Gonna say that I know how to play rough, gonna tell them all that fighting the bad guys won’t be pretty for a while. Let’s see if the Sunday School types at the Hilton tomorrow are ready to face reality.
OK, God, this has been a good conversation. You’ve been great. So great.
I’ve always been the best at praying. You know who told me that? Billy Graham himself. He told me, “Donald, you pray better than I do, and I am the most famous Christian in the world.” He told me that last week in a great, great phone call.
Oh, and Fred Douglass. I need to get his input, too. Just this morning I told them, the great African Americans who supported me completely, what an amazing job Fred is doing, being recognized more and more. They loved it. They love me. My speech was a the [sic] biggest success in the history of black people.
The media lied about it, of course. They said I didn’t know Douglass. They just can’t stop lying.
Oh, gotta go, that’s my man Douglass on the phone right now.
#amen #maga
Peter Laarman
Religion Dispatches
No comments:
Post a Comment