Pages

Thursday, November 30, 2017



November 29 and 30, 2017


News and Views

THIS SHOWS HOW WRONG WE CAN BE. THANK GOODNESS THERE WAS NO MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. WILL PRESIDENT TRUMP APOLOGIZE FOR THE THINGS HE SAID ABOUT MACOR? DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/kate-steinle-shooting-mexican-man-232500821.html?soc_trk=gcm&soc_src=ecd5e8af-dc90-3332-9efb-d522bf6b8dfa&.tsrc=notification-brknews
Kate Steinle shooting: Mexican man found not guilty of woman's murder in case Trump used to tout border wall
The Independent
Jeremy B White
The Independent • November 30, 2017


Photograph -- A jury largely cleared Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, seen here at his arraignment in San Francisco on July 7, 2015: REUTERS/POOL/Michael Macor

The undocumented immigrant accused of murdering Kate Steinle has been found not guilty of homicide, capping a closely-watched trial that magnified a contentious national debate over immigration policy.

The verdict came on the jury's fifth day of deliberation. Ms Steinle was slain in 2015 by a ricocheting bullet as she strolled along the San Francisco waterfront with her father. Prosecutors argued that defendant Jose Ines Garcia Zarate intentionally killed her, while his defense said it was an accident.

Mr Zarate said he found the gun on on the pier. The firearm had disappeared from a U.S. Bureau of Land Management ranger’s car before the shooting, but prosecutors did not present evidence establishing that Mr Zarate stole it. Jurors found him guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm, the only charge for which he was convicted.

While the jury was tasked with settling a murder charge, the case became a national lightning rod for a larger debate about immigration policy. Donald Trump has regularly invoked Ms Steinle’s death as a justification for more stringent immigration enforcement.

Mr Zarate is a native of Mexico who had been deported five times and served time in federal prison for illegally re-entering the United States. Before Ms Steinle’s death, Mr Zarate was released from the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department after charges related to selling marijuana were dropped.

Sheriff’s officials did not comply with a request by federal immigration authorities to hold onto Mr Zarate, who then went by the name Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez. The department had in place policies limiting how much information on detainees it could share with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the type of so-called “sanctuary city” resistance to assisting federal immigration authorities.

Mr Trump and his administration have blasted those jurisdictions, saying they undermine public safety by protecting lawbreakers and trying to punish them by withholding federal funds. California recently enacted a so-called “sanctuary state” law that fortifies restrictions against jails and police officers working with ICE.

“This senseless and totally preventable act of violence committed by an illegal immigrant is yet another example of why we must secure our border immediately,” Mr Trump said in 2015.

Earlier this year, a federal judge tossed a lawsuit brought by Ms Steinle’s family against former San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi faulting him, along with the city and county of San Francisco, for allowing Ms Steinle's death.


THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH OUR LAWS HERE ABOUT THINGS WHICH MAY NOT FIT SPECIFICALLY INTO THE TERM “HATE SPEECH,” BUT WHICH ARE DEFINITELY HATE-INSPIRED, HATE-FILLED, AND JUST PLAIN ABUSIVE AND UNACCEPTABLE. I NOTICE THAT IN ENGLAND THAT IS APPARENTLY NOT A BREACH OF ANYONE’S “RIGHTS,” FOR WHICH THE PERSON HAS TO SUE TO GET ANY RECOMPENSE, BUT IT IS A CRIME. THAT’S WHAT WE NEED. ABUSIVE LANGUAGE, TONE OF VOICE, OR BEHAVIOR NEEDS TO BE A CRIME. GIVING SOMEONE “THE FINGER,*” MAY MAKE US FEEL TEMPORARILY HAPPIER, BUT GOING TO JAIL FOR IT OR PAYING A FINE WOULDN’T.

THAT WOULDN’T STOP SOME ABUSERS, BUT IT WOULD STOP MOST, I THINK. NOBODY REALLY WANTS TO GO TO JAIL, EVEN FOR ONE NIGHT. I WANTED TO USE A TERM I HAD SEEN RECENTLY BUT DON’T REMEMBER, FOR “THE FINGER,” BECAUSE THE PHRASE WAS FUNNY. IT’S THE “... SALUTE.” I COULDN’T FIND IT, BUT I DID FIND A GOOD ARTICLE ON THE HISTORY OF “THE FINGER” AS A RUDE GESTURE. THAT IS RIGHT BELOW THIS INCREASINGLY SERIOUS ARTICLE ON YET ANOTHER TRUMP ESCAPADE.

The White House transcript of the conversation states that Shah said, "No," before the rest of his comment, although that was not picked up by the audio recordings.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-tweets-britain-first-jayda-fransen-appeal-us-president-help/
CBS NEWS November 30, 2017, 5:13 AM
"Britain First" deputy appeals directly to Trump for help

Last Updated Nov 30, 2017 5:56 AM EST

LONDON -- Jayda Fransen, the deputy leader of the fringe Britain First party*, whose anti-Islamic posts were retweeted Wednesday morning by President Donald Trump, appealed directly to Mr. Trump in a one-minute long video posted hours later to help keep her out of jail.

The She [sic] is due in court next month to face charges of using "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior" in a speech she gave over the summer in Belfast, Northern Ireland.

During that the [sic] August rally in Belfast, Fransen declared Islam "the biggest threat to civilization across the world."

"We are at war with Islam. The world is at war with Islam. Jihad and Islam are one and the same," Fransen said, going on to disparage the Muslim holy book, before telling her gathered supporters that, "every single Muslim is obliged to kill you, and your husbands and your wives and your children... Islam says that every single one of you wonderful people here today, deserves to be killed."

Fransen insists that everything she said was protected free speech, and that her arrest over it is evidence that "Britain has become sharia-compliant, and our establishment have now instituted legislation that constitutes blasphemy laws."

U.K. sentences radical Islamic preacher for ISIS support

"I am appealing to you for your help," she said in her Wednesday night video addressed to Mr. Trump. "I am appealing for your intervention before I am thrown in jail, and others receive the same treatment, for simply speaking out. God bless you, President Donald Trump."

In 2016, Fransen was convicted of religiously aggravated harassment for shouting at a Muslim woman during one of her group's so-called "Christian patrols" through neighborhoods with large Muslim populations. Fransen admitted telling the Muslim woman that men of the faith force women to cover up to avoid rape, "because they cannot control their sexual urges," adding: "That's why they are coming into my country raping women across the continent."

The president's retweets of Fransen were raised as a point of order Wednesday in the British Parliament, where Yvette Cooper reminded her fellow lawmakers that Fransen, "has indeed already been convicted of hate crime" in the U.K.

"Given the significance and the seriousness of the president of the United States giving her such a huge platform," she called on ministers to condemn Mr. Trump's actions.

Prime Minister Theresa May's spokesperson said in a statement that it was, "wrong for the president to have done this." The statement added:

"Britain First seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions. They cause anxiety to law-abiding people. British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudiced rhetoric of the far-right, which is the antithesis of the values that this country represents - decency, tolerance and respect."

Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labor party tweeted, "I hope our government will condemn far-right retweets by Donald Trump. They are abhorrent, dangerous and a threat to our society."

.@Theresa_May, don’t focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom. We are doing just fine!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 30, 2017

Mr. Trump was dismissive of the British government's reaction, urging May to "focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom" instead, adding, "We are doing just fine!"

Earlier in the day, White House press secretary Sarah Hukabee Sanders argued that, regardless of the veracity of the videos tweeted by Fransen, Mr. Trump's retweeting of them was merely intended to show his determination to secure the U.S. and its borders in the face of the threat from Islamic extremism.

White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah also defended the president's retweets, saying Mr. Trump has consistently prioritized national security, including through his travel order.

Shah's response to a reporter's question aboard Air Force One, however, undermined the government's repeated argument to challenges against its various travel ban versions that they always insisted had nothing to do with religion. U.S. courts have shot down previous versions of the travel ban because they were perceived as discriminatory based on religion.

"Does President Trump think Muslims are a threat to the U.S.?" a reporter asked.

"The president has addressed these issues with the travel order that he issued earlier this year, and the companion proclamation," Shah said. "There are plenty of Muslim-majority nations whose citizens can come to the U.S. without travel restrictions. But those that pose public safety or terrorism threats, for our worldwide security review that was overseen by the Department of Homeland Security, is why there were certain travel restrictions put in place."

The White House transcript of the conversation states that Shah said, "No," before the rest of his comment, although that was not picked up by the audio recordings.

Meanwhile, London Mayor Sadiq Khan -- the city's first Muslim mayor -- added his voice on Thursday to calls for Mr. Trump's state visit to the U.K. to be canceled over his retweets of Fransen's posts.

Khan accused Mr. Trump of promoting "a vile, extremist group," and said an official state visit to Britain "would not be welcomed."

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



PREPARE YOUR MIND FOR WHAT YOU WILL FIND IN THIS SKY.COM ARTICLE BELOW. THESE AND OTHER THINGS ARE LISTED AS “POLICIES” THAT THE PARTY WANTS TO PROMOTE/FOSTER/REQUIRE:

“BAN THE WORD "RACISM" IN THE MEDIA
SCRAP FOREIGN AID BUDGET
NATIONAL SERVICE FOR HABITUAL OFFENDERS”

THERE IS ONE INTERESTING THING ON THIS LIST OF BRITAIN FIRST POLICIES THAT I BASICALLY THINK WOULD HELP MANY OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY, AND THAT IS A PERIOD OF MANDATORY NATIONAL SERVICE – AS TRAINING, NOT AS PUNISHMENT -- AFTER SCHOOL IS COMPLETED, WHETHER COLLEGE OR HIGH SCHOOL; OF WHICH THE MILITARY IS ONLY ONE KIND. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO BACK FOR MORE SCHOOLING OR EMPLOYMENT TRAINING AFTER THEIR PERIOD OF SERVICE; THE SERVICE TO COUNTRY COULD BE USED AS A BASIS FOR COLLEGE OR JUNIOR COLLEGE TUITION. THAT WOULDN’T BE A GIFT OR A LOAN, BUT AN EARNED BENEFIT LIKE MILITARY VETERANS GET WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR TWO YEARS.

MANY YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE US HAVE LITTLE UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD OF ADULT LEVEL WORK. SUGGESTIONS AS TO WHAT THEY COULD BE GIVEN TO DO TO HELP THE NATION COULD COME FROM CITY, COUNTY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS, SCHOOL SYSTEMS, HOSPITALS, CHILD CARE SERVICES, HELPING THE HOMELESS, TUTORING ADULTS OR CHILDREN IN COMMUNITY CENTERS, LAWN CARE AND GARDENING, FOR INSTANCE. SEVERAL OF THOSE THINGS REQUIRE A BASIC EDUCATION UP TO HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA, BUT BY NO MEANS ALL DO.

BESIDES THE YOUNG WORKERS WOULD LEARN SPECIFIC SKILLS AS WELL AS PROPER WORK BEHAVIOR AND DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC. I HAVE ALWAYS FOUND THAT BOOKS ALONE WILL NOT TEACH A WORKER WHAT HE OR SHE NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT BEING ON TIME, BEING POLITE, BEING CLEAN AND NEAT, AND WORKING HARD – NOT “HARDLY WORKING.” AMERICAN TEENS FROM ALL HOME ENVIRONMENTS LACK THAT SORT OF RESPONSIBILITY TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE UNLESS THE PARENTS DID REQUIRE THAT THEY DO THOSE THINGS AT HOME -- MOST NO LONGER DO. MANY AMERICAN TEENS CAN’T EVEN COOK A FULL MEAL.

BRITAIN FIRST PARTY* --
https://news.sky.com/story/the-far-right-what-is-britain-first-11149915
The far-right: What is Britain First?
The group at the centre of the latest Trump row is widely condemned as racist and campaigns against Islam and multiculturalism.
15:53, UK,
Thursday 30 November 2017

Deputy leader Jayda Fransen at a march in central London

Britain First classes itself as a "patriotic political party and street movement" with nearly two million Facebook followers.

This week, President Donald Trump provoked an outcry when he shared anti-Muslim videos posted online by the far-right group's deputy leader Jayda Fransen.

Britain First was formed in 2011 by former members of the British National Party and actively campaigns against multiculturalism and the "Islamisation" of the UK. It is widely condemned as racist.

It is led by former BNP [British National Party] councillor Paul Golding* and former English Defence League member Jayda Fransen.*

:: Activities

Image: Paul Golding during a protest following the Westminster terror attack in April

The group conducted "Christian patrols" in Tower Hamlets, east London, in February 2014. Activists filmed themselves holding a banner stating "We Are The British Resistance" and emptying beer cans outside a mosque.

In May 2014, Britain First invaded ten mosques in Bradford, along with others in Glasgow, Luton and east London.

In July 2014, members of the group entered the Crayford Mosque in south London, demanding that its segregated entrances be removed.

Both Golding and Ms Fransen were charged with causing religiously aggravated harassment in September 2017 in relation to leaflets distributed in Thanet and Canterbury.

Golding was also jailed for eight weeks in December 2016 for breaking a court order banning him from entering mosques.

:: Election history

Golding turns his back on Sadiq Khan after he won the London mayor race in May 2016
Image:
Golding turns his back on Sadiq Khan after he won the London mayor race in May 2016

2014 European elections - Candidates stood in Wales and Scotland. The party failed to win any seats, finishing 8th of 11 in Wales with 6,633 votes and 7th of nine in Scotland with 13,639 votes.

During the campaign it used the phrase "Remember Lee Rigby"* - a reference to the fusilier killed in 2013 in London - which was widely condemned.

2014 Rochester and Strood by-election - Fransen stood as a candidate. She lost her deposit, winning only 56 votes. The seat was won by UKIP.

Royal Mail had refused to deliver a leaflet for the party during the by-election, claiming its contents were illegal.

2016 London mayor election - Golding stood as the Britain First candidate, but won only 1.2% of the votes (31,372).

He was pictured at the count turning his back on Labour's winning candidate Sadiq Khan.

Britain First was deregistered by the Electoral Commission in November after failing to confirm its registered details and pay a £25 fee.

That means it cannot now place candidates on ballot papers under the name Britain First.

:: Policies
A supporter wears a Britain First logo during a rally in Rochester in 2014
Image:
A supporter wears a Britain First logo during a rally in Rochester in 2014

The group has a number of policies centred around immigration and the maintenance of British national sovereignty.

They include:

Halt any further immigration except in special cases
Reject and deport asylum seekers who do not originate from countries bordering the UK
Bar followers of Islam from public office
A comprehensive ban on Islam in the UK, including halal slaughter, Sharia courts, religious publications and the operation of mosques
Ban on the use of Islamic face coverings, including the burka
Ban the word "racism" in the media
Scrap foreign aid budget
National Service for habitual offenders
Restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers

Sky Views: A Trump state visit may now be unthinkable

Facebook
Google+

About Sky News
About Us
Sky News International
Contact Us
Sky logo © 2017 Sky UK


BRITAIN FIRST, PAUL GOLDING* -- A "FASCIST PARAMILITARY GROUP"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Golding
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul Anthony Golding (born 25 January 1982) is a British nationalist politician and convicted criminal. He is the leader of Britain First, an organisation described by some journalists as a "fascist paramilitary group", from its founding.[2]

In December 2016, Golding was sentenced to eight weeks in prison for breaching a court order banning him from entering a mosque or encouraging others to do so in England and Wales. He took six months leave from the party and Jayda Fransen, the deputy leader, acted as leader during his absence.[3]



“THE STATEMENT SAID: “WE WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASISE [SIC] THAT LEE WOULD NOT WANT PEOPLE TO USE HIS NAME AS AN EXCUSE TO CARRY OUT ATTACKS AGAINST OTHERS.” THIS YOUNG MAN WAS KILLED, “HACKED TO DEATH,” ACCORDING TO THIS REPORT. HORRIFIC AS THAT WAS, IT IS JUST AN EXCUSE TO INCITE VENGEANCE MURDERS IF THE ORGANIZATION IS ALLOWED TO USE IT FOR THEIR POLITICAL GAINS.

“REMEMBER LEE RIGBY”* --

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-first-continue-to-use-picture-of-lee-rigby-against-the-familys-wishes-a6721201.html
NewsUKHome News
Britain First use picture of Lee Rigby against the family's wishes
The Electoral Commission apologised in 2014 after Britain First used images of Fusilier Rigby on their voting slips
Olivia Blair @livblair Wednesday 4 November 2015 16:15 GMT


PHOTOGRAPH -- The image on the far-right group's Facebook page was captured 'Lest we forget' EPA

Far-right group Britain First have shared a picture of Lee Rigby on their Facebook page - against the wishes of the murdered soldier’s family.

Captioning the image of a uniformed Fusilier Rigby: ‘Lest we forget’, the Facebook post soon attracted comments from users telling the group that his family had opposed the move, according to the Huffington Post.

One user wrote: “Disgusting that you use this image despite the family repeatedly telling you not to”, while another commented: “You have no respect! If you did you would abide by Lee’s poor grieving mother’s wishes that you don’t use him like this.”

Fusilier Rigby’s family, including his mother, stepfather and wife Rebecca, released a statement through the Ministry of Defence in June of this year, saying they did not want far-right groups using the soldier in their campaigns.

The statement said: “We would like to emphasise that Lee would not want people to use his name as an excuse to carry out attacks against others.

“We would not wish any other families to go through this harrowing experience and appeal to everyone to keep calm and show their respect in a peaceful manner.”

In April, 2014 the Electoral Commission apologised after signing off Britain First's use of ‘Remember Lee Rigby’ as a slogan on their voting slips for the European elections.

Fusilier Rigby, 25, was murdered by Islamist extremists Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale in 2013, a short distance from the Royal Artillery barracks in Woolwich, south east London.



I THINK WHOEVER WROTE THIS WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE WAS HAVING A LITTLE FUN WITH IT -- “THE GESTURE COMMUNICATES MODERATE TO EXTREME CONTEMPT, AND IS ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT IN MEANING TO "FUCK OFF," "FUCK YOU," "SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS," "UP YOURS," OR "GO FUCK YOURSELF."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_finger
The finger
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Western culture, the finger or the middle finger (as in giving someone the (middle) finger or the bird[1] or flipping someone off[1]) is an obscene hand gesture. The gesture communicates moderate to extreme contempt, and is roughly equivalent in meaning to "fuck off," "fuck you," "shove it up your ass," "up yours," or "go fuck yourself." It is performed by showing the back of a hand that has only the middle finger extended upwards, though in some locales, the thumb is extended. Extending the finger is considered a symbol of contempt in several cultures, especially in the West. Many cultures use similar gestures to display their disrespect, although others use it to express pointing without intentional disrespect toward other cultures. The gesture is usually used to express contempt but can also be used humorously or playfully.

The gesture dates back to Ancient Greece and it was also used in Ancient Rome. Historically, it represented the phallus. In some modern cultures, it has gained increasing recognition as a sign of disrespect, and has been used by music artists (notably more common among hardcore punk bands and rappers), actors, celebrities, athletes, and politicians. Most still view the gesture as obscene. The index finger and ring finger besides the middle finger in more contemporary periods has been likened to represent the testicles.[2]

. . . . The gesture has been involved in notable political events. During the USS Pueblo incident, in which an American ship was captured by North Korea, the captured American crewmembers often discreetly gave the finger in staged photo ops, thus ruining the North Koreans' efforts at propaganda. The North Koreans, ignorant of what the gesture meant, were at first told by the prisoners that it was a "Hawaiian good luck sign", similar to the shaka. When the guards finally figured things out, the crewmembers were subjected to more severe mistreatment.[34] Abbie Hoffman used the gesture at the 1968 Democratic National Convention.[4] Ronald Reagan, while serving as the Governor of California, gave the middle finger to counterculture protestors in Berkeley, California.[4] Nelson Rockefeller, then the Vice President of the United States, directed the gesture to hecklers at a 1976 campaign stop near Binghamton, New York, leading it to be called the "Rockefeller gesture".[4] Pierre Trudeau, then the Prime Minister of Canada, gave the finger to protesters in Salmon Arm, British Columbia,[35] earning the incident the nickname the "Salmon Arm salute".[36] The gesture itself has also been nicknamed the "Trudeau salute".[citation needed] Former president George W. Bush gave the finger to the camera at an Austin production facility during his term as governor of Texas, saying it was "just a one-finger victory salute."[37] Anthony Weiner gave the finger to reporters after leaving his election headquarters the night he lost the 2013 primary election for Mayor of New York City.[38]

During World War II, the 91st Bombardment Group of the United States Army Air Forces referred to the gesture as the "rigid digit" salute. It was used in a more jocular manner, to suggest an airman had committed an error or infraction; the term was a reference to British slang terms for inattentiveness (i.e. "pull your finger out (of your bum)").[39] The "order of the rigid digit" continued after the war as a series of awards presented by the veteran's association of the 91st, marked by wooden statuettes of a hand giving the single finger gesture.[40] In 2005 during the war in Iraq, Gunnery Sergeant Michael Burghardt gained prominence when the Omaha World-Herald published a photo of Burghardt making the gesture towards Iraqi insurgents he believed to be watching after an improvised explosive device failed to kill him.[41] . . . .



IT’S JUST ONE DAY, AND I HAVE THREE ARTICLES ON SEXUAL MISBEHAVIOR/CRIME/SIN. I’M STRINGING THEM ALL DOWN HERE TOGETHER WITH JUST ONE COMMENT. I FEEL THE SAME WAY ABOUT THE BEHAVIOR NO MATTER WHO IS DOING IT, INCLUDING WOMEN. THE IMPULSE TO ALLOW SEXUAL FANTASIES TO GROW AND FROM THERE COMES AN “INAPPROPRIATE” INCIDENT. I’M GLAD TO SEE MEN FIRED FOR IT. IN THE PAST THE WOMEN WERE FIRED, BUT THE MEN WEREN’T.

IT’S AN AREA OF MALE PRIVILEGE THAT HAS BEEN UNQUESTIONED UNTIL RECENTLY. THIS UNMASKING PROCESS THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH LATELY IS DEPRESSING, BUT CLEANSING; AND I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT UNTIL WE DO IT WE WILL BE A MORE CORRUPT CULTURE. ALL PRIVILEGE OF ANY KIND DAMAGES US AS A PEOPLE. THIS ISN’T JUST A “PURITANICAL” VIEWPOINT, BUT A DEMOCRATIC ONE. IN ALMOST ALL OF THESE CASES, THERE IS AN ELEMENT OF COERCION INVOLVED. IF IT WERE A STORY ABOUT TRULY MUTUAL LOVE BETWEEN FREE AND EQUAL PARTNERS, BUT OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE, I WOULD FEEL MUCH MORE FORGIVING ABOUT IT -- UNLESS A SPOUSE AND FAMILY HAD BEEN HURT. AT BEST, IT IS ALWAYS A COMPLEX SITUATION, AND USUALLY ONE WITH DAMAGES DONE.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/matt-lauer-fired-by-nbc-news-accused-of-inappropriate-sexual-behavior/
CBS/AP
November 29, 2017, 7:14 AM
Matt Lauer fired by NBC News, accused of "inappropriate sexual behavior"

NEW YORK -- NBC News has fired longtime "Today" show host Matt Lauer for "inappropriate sexual behavior."

Lauer's co-anchor Savannah Guthrie made the announcement at the beginning of Wednesday's "Today" show.

Guthrie read a statement from NBC News chairman Andy Lack, stating that the company had received a detailed complaint from a colleague Monday night "about inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace" by Lauer. Lack's statement said the company found that after a serious review of the complaint it represented "a clear violation" of the company's standards, and Lauer was terminated as a result.

Lack added in his statement that it was the first complaint about Lauer in more than 20 years at NBC, but "we were also presented with reason to believe this may not have been an isolated incident."

"We are deeply saddened by this turn of events," Lack wrote. "But we will face it together as a news organization -- and do it in as transparent a manner as we can."

Guthrie began Wednesday's broadcast by saying it is "a sad day here at NBC News." She noted that Lack had sent the announcement to staff just moments before she and Hoda Kotb went on air.

Matt Lauer has been terminated from NBC News. On Monday night, we received a detailed complaint from a colleague about inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace by Matt Lauer. As a result, we’ve decided to terminate his employment. pic.twitter.com/1A3UAZpvPb

— TODAY (@TODAYshow) November 29, 2017
"We just learned this moments ago, just this morning," a visibly emotional Guthrie said. "As I'm sure you can imagine, we are devastated, and we are still processing all of this. And, I will tell you right now, we do not know more than what I just shared with you. But we will be covering this story as reporters, as journalists. I'm sure we will be learning more details in the hours and days to come."

Guthrie added that she was "heartbroken," both for her "dear friend" Lauer and "the brave colleague who came forward to tell her story and any other women who have their own stories to tell."

Two hours later, NBC's Megyn Kelly noted the anguish on the faces of her colleagues but said, "what we don't see is the pain on the faces of those who found the courage to come forward, and it is still a terrifying thing to do."

Kelly, who has written about being sexually harassed by former boss Roger Ailes at Fox News Channel, has covered the issue aggressively on the third hour of "Today," helping stabilize her hour of the program after it got off to a rocky start this fall.

The firing of Lauer drew an immediate response from President Trump on Twitter.

Wow, Matt Lauer was just fired from NBC for “inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace.” But when will the top executives at NBC & Comcast be fired for putting out so much Fake News. Check out Andy Lack’s past!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 29, 2017
The news comes a week after CBS News fired "CBS This Morning" co-host Charlie Rose over allegations of sexual misconduct.

Lauer had been co-host of "Today" since 1997, propelling the show to the top of the morning show ratings with co-host Katie Couric. It fell to second place behind ABC's "Good Morning America" following the departure of longtime news anchor Ann Curry in 2012 after just a year as co-host.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.



SEE KEILLOR'S VIDEO FROM 1994 IN WHICH HE DISCUSSED THE ISSUES FROM A POINT THAT I BELIEVE WE SHOULD SERIOUSLY CONSIDER. LIFE WITHOUT FLIRTATION? NO, THANKS!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/garrison-keillor-fired-from-minnesota-public-radio-for-alleged-improper-behavior/
CBS/AP November 29, 2017, 12:36 PM
Garrison Keillor fired from Minnesota Public Radio for alleged improper behavior

Photograph -- In this July 26, 2017 photo, "A Prairie Home Companion" creator and former host Garrison Keillor talks at his St. Paul, Minn., office. JEFF BAENEN / AP

MINNEAPOLIS -- Garrison Keillor, the former host of "A Prairie Home Companion," says he's been fired by Minnesota Public Radio (MPR) over allegations of improper behavior.

Keillor told the Associated Press of his firing in an email. In a follow-up statement, he says he was fired over "a story that I think is more interesting and more complicated than the version MPR heard." He didn't give details of the allegation.

Garrison Keillor signs off

MPR confirmed Keillor had been fired, saying it learned of "allegations of his inappropriate behavior with an individual who worked with him" and doesn't know of any other similar allegations. The station said it was ending its contracts with Keillor while an internal investigation continues.

Keillor, 75, retired as host of his long-running public radio variety show in 2016. His hand-picked successor, mandolinist Chris Thile, is in his second season as "Prairie Home" host.

The statement came shortly after Keillor, an avowed Democrat, wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post published Wednesday that the notion that Minnesota Sen. Al Franken should resign for his own misbehavior is "pure absurdity."

Keillor started his Saturday evening show in 1974, featuring tales of his fictional Minnesota hometown of Lake Wobegon -- "where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average." The show featured musical acts, folksy humor, parody ads for fake products such as Powdermilk Biscuits and the centerpiece, Keillor delivering a seemingly off-the-cuff monologue, "The News From Lake Wobegon," in his rich baritone voice.

Keillor bowed out with a final show at the Hollywood Bowl in July 2016 and turned the show over to Thile, a mandolinist and frequent "Prairie Home" guest musician. Keillor went on a 28-city bus tour this summer, vowing it would be his last tour, but he continues on the road with solo shows.

Keillor still produces the radio show, "The Writer's Almanac," for syndication, and is finishing a Lake Wobegon screenplay and a memoir about growing up in Minnesota.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.


http://time.com/5041770/garrison-keillor-sexual-harassment/
Garrison Keillor Once Said a World Without Sexual Harassment Would Be a World Without Flirtation
By Alana Abramson November 29, 2017


See Video -- Keillor press conference

Former Prairie Home Companion host Garrison Keillor was fired Wednesday following an allegation of inappropriate behavior during his time on the show. While Minnesota Public Radio did not detail the allegations against Keillor, he told the Minnesota Tribune he had put his hand on a woman’s bare back, leading the woman to recoil. He said he had apologized for the incident.

“If I had a dollar for every woman who asked to take a selfie with me and who slipped an arm around me and let it drift down below the beltline, I’d have at least a hundred dollars,” Keillor told the Tribune.

Following the revelation, comments about sexual harassment that Keillor made during a 1994 speech at the National Press Club resurfaced on social media. The comments, in which he claimed that “a world in which there is no sexual harassment at all is a world in which there will not be any flirtation,” were made in the context of Keillor discussing Bill Clinton’s presidency.

“When scandal breaks, and we get to see the humanity of the great and the powerful revealed, naked and dumb in front of us, there’s always a cry for new rules or at least some new awareness that will prevent this from ever happening again” he said, according to a video of the remarks broadcast by C-SPAN.

He continued: “We should be careful though, not to make the world so fine and good that you and I can’t enjoy living in it. A world in which there is no sexual harassment at all is a world in which there will not be any flirtation. A world without thieves will not have entrepreneurs. A government in which there are no friendly connections or favors between politicians and powerful people would be the first in the history of mankind.”



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-on-sexual-misconduct-most-americans-believe-politicians-accusers/
CBS NEWS November 29, 2017, 1:54 PM
Poll: On sexual misconduct, most Americans believe politicians’ accusers

Photograph -- Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Judge Roy Moore speaks during a campaign event at the Walker Springs Road Baptist Church on Nov. 14, 2017, in Jackson, Alabama. GETTY

A healthy majority of Americans are inclined to believe the recent accounts of women who have accused politicians and public figures of sexual misconduct, according to a new poll from the Economist and YouGov. Respondents weren't quite as sure, however, that the accused figures should lose their jobs.

Asked about Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore, who has been accused by multiple women of making sexual advances on them when they were underage teenagers and he was in his 30s, 57 percent of respondents said they believe Moore "definitely" or "probably" did what he's accused of doing. Only 14 percent said he "definitely" or "probably" did not, and 29 percent said they aren't sure.

A bare majority of 50 percent of respondents said Moore should drop out of the Alabama Senate race. Twenty-one percent said he should remain in the race.

Respondents were also asked about longtime Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, who has been accused by two former staffers of sexual harassment. One of the accusers was paid a settlement in 2015 using taxpayer money. Fifty-nine percent of Americans said Conyers "probably" or "definitely" engaged in misconduct, while only 7 percent voiced some level of doubt about the accusations.

Fifty percent of respondents said Conyers, currently the longest-serving lawmaker in Congress, should resign, and only 14 percent said he should stay put.

Americans also weighed in on Sen. Al Franken, the Minnesota Democrat who has been accused of making unwanted advances toward a radio host in 2006, and groping several women during photo opportunities. Sixty-two percent said they Franken probably or definitely committed the 2006 incident involving the radio host, and only 10 percent said he probably or definitely didn't do it.

Only 39 percent of respondents suggested Franken should lose his job as a result, though. Twenty-seven percent said Franken should stay in the Senate.

On the question of how often members of Congress sexually harass their staff members, 12 percent of respondents said they believe it happens very often. Thirty-five percent wagered it happens somewhat often, 39 percent answered "not too often," and 15 percent said it doesn't happen often at all.

And Americans believe it's roughly an equal problem in both parties: 21 percent said Democrats are worse on the subject of sexual harassment, 20 percent said Republicans are worse, and 42 percent said the two are "about the same."

The Economist/YouGov poll surveyed 1,500 Americans between November 26 and 28. Results contain a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percent.

Tune into Face the Nation this Sunday for the latest political news and analysis. Click here to check local listings for airtimes.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



I’M NOT BIG ON GADGETS IN GENERAL, BUT I DO LOVE DRONES! SOME MORE OR BETTER ENFORCED LAWS ARE IN ORDER, THOUGH, BECAUSE THEY ARE CERTAINLY "MORE DANGEROUS THAN BIRDS."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/faa-research-finds-drones-more-damaging-than-birds/
CBS NEWS November 29, 2017, 7:48 AM
FAA research finds drone collisions more damaging than bird strikes to airplanes

New research commissioned by the FAA finds a high-speed collision between a drone and an airliner would be worse than a bird strike. Newly-released animation shows how a drone could cause significant damage to a plane's engine or tail area. This year, the FAA has received an average of 250 reports of drones near airports every month, up from 159 for most of last year.

The study confirms what many in the aviation world long suspected: drones, which are made of heavy plastic, metal, batteries and cameras, are far more destructive than a bird when they hit something. It was birds that stopped the engine on the now-famous "Miracle on the Hudson" flight.

Iranian drone makes "dangerous maneuver" close to U.S. fighter jet
Trump approves test program to expand domestic drone flights

The new research appears to confirm what pilots are already seeing as a very real threat to passenger safety, reports CBS News correspondent Kris Van Cleave.

The Los Angeles Police Department depends on its helicopters to get on scene fast and be the eyes in the sky. They fly fast and they fly low, which has pilot Kevin Cook always looking out for drones.

"If we impact a drone, now we're going to have 5,500 pounds of aircraft with 130 gallons of jet petroleum coming down into a residential neighborhood," Cook said.

In August 2015 a drone came within 50 feet of an LAPD helicopter as it was circling, searching for a suspect. The pilot dove to avoid a collision and the drone operator pleaded no contest to obstructing an officer.

A drone hit an army helicopter over Staten Island damaging a rotor and the windshield earlier this year. The chopper made an emergency landing. Last weekend, a man was arrested for allegedly dropping leaflets from his drone over the crowd at a 49ers game. The stadium is in the flight path of the San Jose airport. Despite rules against flying drones in Times Square, one crashed right into a building.

These newly-released animations show just how dangerous a drone strike can be. A drone slams into a jet engine, snapping its blades and likely rendering it useless. Another shows the potential damage to the tail section.

ctm-112917-faa.jpg
Animation showing the potential damage to the tail section of the plane. FAA

The damage was found to be consistently worse than if a bird of the same weight hit a plane and bird strikes can do plenty of damage. Ross Aimer, a retired airline pilot captain, worries most about a low altitude collision.

"The danger becomes when aircraft are close to the ground during takeoff and landing. And these drones have obviously the range that they could do damage to the aircraft," Aimer said.

Researchers also found the drone's lithium ion battery tended to shatter in high-impact collisions, but in cases where it remained even partially intact, those batteries started to heat up, raising the potential for a fire danger if a damaged battery were to get lodged in the plane after a collision. Drones are not allowed to be flown within five miles of an airport or above 400 feet.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



THIS FINE FEMINIST J L SIGMAN HAS MADE A COMMENT SO CREATIVE AND POINTED THAT I WILL QUOTE IT. IT SAYS ALL THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID. GREETINGS TO “THEMUSLIMGUY” AS WELL FOR RETWEETING IT, AND FOR BEING PROUDLY MUSLIM. PERSONALLY, I DON’T “TWEET,” BUT I AVIDLY READ TWEETS.

JL Sigman on the Internet since 1993 Retweeted

Arsalan Iftikhar‏Verified account
@TheMuslimGuy
12h12 hours ago
More
Dear @Twitter...

By tweeting Anti-Muslim conspiracy theory videos which are fake...

@RealDonaldTrump has violated your terms of service by jeopardizing the safety of 7 million American Muslims & you should suspend his account...

Signed,
The World


WHILE AT THESE IMPORTANT PRESIDENTIAL TWEETS, SUBJECT, LOOK AT THE UK PARLIAMENT ON CSPAN, SEE THIS FROM YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsqC1NZIbts

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-anti-muslim-tweet-videos-anti-islam-far-right-britian-first-uk-politician/
CBS NEWS November 29, 2017, 11:52 AM
Trump retweets British anti-Islam politician's videos


President Trump took to Twitter early Wednesday morning, retweeting violent images and videos that appeared to be anti-Islamic in nature.

The videos were tweeted out by the account held by Jayda Fransen, the deputy leader of fringe far-right U.K. political party "Britain First," which subscribes to an anti-Islam, anti-immigration and nationalist agenda. The group is estimated to have only about 1,000 active members, and its rallies around the U.K. draw supporters numbering only in the hundreds.

jayda-fransen-trump-tweets.jpg
A screengrab shows the Twitter page of anti-Islam party Britain First's deputy leader Jayda Fransen, who was retweeted by President Trump on Nov. 29, 2017. TWITTER

On Fransen's own Twitter account, a message appeared lauding Mr. Trump for sharing the Britain First message with his "around 44 million followers!"

View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

Jayda Fransen

@JaydaBF
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, DONALD TRUMP, HAS RETWEETED THREE OF DEPUTY LEADER JAYDA FRANSEN'S TWITTER VIDEOS! DONALD TRUMP HIMSELF HAS RETWEETED THESE VIDEOS AND HAS AROUND 44 MILLION FOLLOWERS! GOD BLESS YOU TRUMP! GOD BLESS AMERICA! OCS @JaydaBF @realDonaldTrump
7:05 AM - Nov 29, 2017
842 842 Replies 1,616 1,616 Retweets 3,058 3,058 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

The first video posted by Fransen Wednesday morning and subsequently retweeted by Mr. Trump is from around 2012, as political unrest roiled Egypt. The clip shows supporters of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood group chasing opponents in the city of Alexandria, and throwing at least one of them from a rooftop. The main suspect implicated in the incident was sentenced to death and executed a year later, reports CBS News' Khaled Wassef.

The second video Mr. Trump re-circulated is from 2013, in war-torn Syria's Idlib Province. It shows a Sharia law judge of the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front destroying a Virgin Mary statue and declaring that none other than Allah would be worshipped in the area. The militant group, which has since changed its name to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, still holds significant territory in Idlib Province.

The third video appears to have been first posted in May 2017, purportedly showing a Muslim migrant beating a Dutch boy on crutches. But a local prosecutor's office in the Netherlands disputes that description, saying it was actually an argument between two underage boys and the suspect was in fact born and raised in the country.

[https://www.halt.nl/en/ https://www.halt.nl/en/* -- SEE BELOW.]

OM Noord-Holland

@OMNoord_Holland
The suspect, who was born and raised in the Netherlands, received a HALT settlement (https://www.halt.nl/en/ ). This has been successfully completed. (2/2)
10:58 AM - Nov 29, 2017
Everything about Halt and the Halt punishment
halt.nl
2 2 Replies 16 16 Retweets 10 10 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

"The suspect, who was born and raised in the Netherlands, received a HALT settlement. This has been successfully completed," the office wrote on Twitter, referring to a juvenile crime prevention program.


Fransen was arrested earlier this month in London over a speech she gave in Belfast, Northern Ireland during the summer. According to CBS News partner network BBC News, Fransen has been charged with using "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior," and is due to appear in court on Dec. 14.

In 2016, Fransen was convicted for religiously aggravated harassment for shouting at a Muslim woman during one of her group's so-called "Christian patrols" through neighborhoods with high Muslim populations. Fransen admitted telling the Muslim woman that men of the faith force women to cover up to avoid rape, "because they cannot control their sexual urges," adding, "That's why they are coming into my country raping women across the continent."

The president's retweets of Fransen were raised as a point of order in the UK Parliament by Labour Party ministers Yvette Cooper and Stephen Doughty. Doughty told British lawmakers, "It appears that the president of the United States has, in recent moments, been retweeting comments from far-fight organization Britain First - highly inflammatory videos - including some posted by an individual who I believe has recently been arrested and charged, relating to certain serious offenses."

Cooper reminded Parliament that Fransen "has indeed already been convicted of hate crime" in the UK, and "given the significance and the seriousness of the president of the United States giving her such a huge platform," she called on ministers to condemn Mr. Trump's actions. Other ministers could be heard responding, "Disgraceful," as she talked about the tweets.

Here's the video tweeted by C-SPAN:

CSPAN

@cspan
Point of Order raised in British House of Commons regarding President Trump's tweets.
9:31 AM - Nov 29, 2017
225 225 Replies 2,009 2,009 Retweets 2,338 2,338 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Britain First made headlines in 2016 after Jo Cox, a member of parliament, was assassinated by a man who shouted out the fringe party's name during his attack. No ties to the actual organization were ever established.


Brendan Cox

@MrBrendanCox
Trump has legitimised the far right in his own country, now he’s trying to do it in ours. Spreading hatred has consequences & the President should be ashamed of himself.
7:06 AM - Nov 29, 2017
1,839 1,839 Replies 21,427 21,427 Retweets 47,794 47,794 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Brendan Cox, husband of the Labour party lawmaker who was killed, tweeted in response to Mr. Trump's retweets Wednesday morning, saying he has "legitimized the far right in his own country, now he's trying to do it in ours. Spreading hatred has consequences and the president should be ashamed of himself."

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders responded to the outcry over the retweets later Wednesday morning, telling reporters "regardless of the video, the threat is very real."

She added, "the president has talked about the need for strong borders and strong security since the campaign trail, that's not a secret that's something he'll continue talking about and continue highlighting in a lot of different venues and avenues."

Asked if the president's retweets were an endorsement of the "Britain First" movement, Sanders replied, "not that I'm aware of but he does endorse a strong national security and endorses strong borders."

"Whether it's a real video, the threat is real and that is what the president is talking about, that's what the president is focused on is dealing with those real threats and those are real no matter how you look at it," she added.

CBS News' Emily Tillett and Tucker Reals contributed to this report.


HALT* -- TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT THIS WEBSITE. IT’S A CREATIVE AND POSITIVE CORRECTIONS PROGRAM FOR YOUNG PEOPLE IN HOLLAND -- OUR PROGRAMS HERE IN THE US COULD TAKE A LESSON FROM THIS ONE. HTTPS://WWW.HALT.NL/EN/.


NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REACTIONS TO TRUMP’S RETWEETING THE HATE-FILLED MESSAGES FROM A BRITISH RADICAL RIGHTIST ARE ENTERTAINING AND SOMETIMES ENLIGHTENING. I WOULD THINK TRUMP WOULD GET TIRED OF THE BAD PUBLICITY AND STOP WHAT HE’S DOING. ON THE OTHER HAND, MAYBE HE’S LIKE THE TEENAGED BOYS WHO SEVERAL YEARS AGO WERE PARADING ALL OVER TOWNS ACROSS THE COUNTRY WITH THEIR PANTS HALFWAY OFF AND HALFWAY ON. I UNDERSTAND IT. IT’S A WAY OF EXHIBITING ONES’ SHEER DISDAIN FOR WHITE, AUTHORITATIVE, ADULT, RESPONSIBLE, RESPECTABLE SOCIETY WHILE SHOWING OFF THEIR ALWAYS COLORFUL BOXER STYLE UNDERSHORTS TO THE GIRLS. IN ONLY ONE CASE DID I SEE ANY SKIN. STILL, WATCHING THEM PAINSTAKINGLY HOLDING THEIR PANTS UP WITH ONE HAND WHILE WALKING OR EVEN RUNNING WAS SO FUNNY THAT I’M HALFWAY SORRY THAT THEY EITHER WISED UP OR DECIDED TO FIND SOME OTHER WAY TO OFFEND.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/reactions-pour-in-following-trumps-anti-islamic-retweets/
By EMILY TILLETT CBS NEWS November 29, 2017, 2:07 PM
Reactions pour in following Trump's anti-Islamic retweets


President Trump's online endorsement of videos posted by a leader of an extremist UK fringe group is prompting reaction both in the United States and abroad.

The videos were tweeted out by the account held by Jayda Fransen, the deputy leader of the far-right U.K. political party "Britain First," which is known for promoting an anti-Islam, anti-immigration and nationalist agenda. The group is estimated to have only about 1,000 active members, and its rallies around the U.K. draw supporters numbering only in the hundreds.

Following Mr. Trump's retweets of Fransen, numerous lawmakers in the United Kingdom raised their concerns over the president's subtle support of the group.

Prime Minister Theresa May's spokesperson said in a statement in response to the retweets, that it was "wrong for the president to have done this." The statement added:

"Britain First seeks to divide communities through their use of hateful narratives which peddle lies and stoke tensions. They cause anxiety to law-abiding people. British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudiced rhetoric of the far-right, which is the antithesis of the values that this country represents - decency, tolerance and respect."

Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labor party tweeted, "I hope our government will condemn far-right retweets by Donald Trump. They are abhorrent, dangerous and a threat to our society."


Jeremy Corbyn

@jeremycorbyn
I hope our Government will condemn far-right retweets by Donald Trump. They are abhorrent, dangerous and a threat to our society.
8:46 AM - Nov 29, 2017
2,167 2,167 Replies 17,561 17,561 Retweets 49,011 49,011 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

A member of Parliament, Yvette Cooper, took to the floor to condemn Fransen's remarks, tweeting that the UK government "can't stay silent" on Mr. Trump's tweets, calling it "disgraceful and dangerous."

Yvette Cooper

@YvetteCooperMP
UK Gov can't stay silent on Trump tweets. He is promoting woman convicted of hate crime from racist group here in UK. Disgraceful & dangerous
9:37 AM - Nov 29, 2017
82 82 Replies 535 535 Retweets 1,140 1,140 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Brendan Cox, husband of the Labour party lawmaker Jo Cox who was killed by a man who shouted the name of the group at the time of her slaying, tweeted in response to Mr. Trump's retweets Wednesday morning, saying he has "legitimized the far right in his own country, now he's trying to do it in ours. Spreading hatred has consequences and the president should be ashamed of himself."


Brendan Cox

@MrBrendanCox
Trump has legitimised the far right in his own country, now he’s trying to do it in ours. Spreading hatred has consequences & the President should be ashamed of himself.

7:06 AM - Nov 29, 2017
1,862 1,862 Replies 21,693 21,693 Retweets 48,527 48,527 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, of Colorado, called Mr. Trump's retweets "irresponsible and disgraceful."


Michael F. Bennet

@SenBennetCO
.@POTUS’ retweets of an extremist hate group are irresponsible and disgraceful. Hate groups should be condemned, not promoted.
12:48 PM - Nov 29, 2017
38 38 Replies 113 113 Retweets 475 475 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Rep. Don Beyer, D-Virginia, called on the White House to clarify the president's remarks, and "stop spreading bigotry."


Rep. Don Beyer

@RepDonBeyer
What "threat" does she mean? The discredited posts paint all Muslims as violent. The British government condemned Trump for sharing them.

The White House must clarify that it does not view all Muslims, including millions of Americans, as a "threat," and stop spreading bigotry. https://twitter.com/MajorCBS/status/935901299085926403 …
11:44 AM - Nov 29, 2017
8 8 Replies 76 76 Retweets 160 160 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Meanwhile, former KKK imperial wizard David Duke appeared to defend the president, saying Mr. Trump "brings to light what the lying, fake news media won't."


David Duke
@DrDavidDuke
This is why WE LOVE TRUMP and WHY the FAKE NEWS MEDIA HATES TRUMP. He brings to light what the lying, Fake News Media Won't. The truth is the media covers up horrific numbers of racist hate crimes against White people! https://twitter.com/JaydaBF/status/935609305574903812 …
10:49 AM - Nov 29, 2017
69 69 Replies 71 71 Retweets 188 188 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

And On Fransen's own Twitter account, a message appeared lauding Mr. Trump for sharing the Britain First message with his "around 44 million followers!"

View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

Jayda Fransen

@JaydaBF
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, DONALD TRUMP, HAS RETWEETED THREE OF DEPUTY LEADER JAYDA FRANSEN'S TWITTER VIDEOS! DONALD TRUMP HIMSELF HAS RETWEETED THESE VIDEOS AND HAS AROUND 44 MILLION FOLLOWERS! GOD BLESS YOU TRUMP! GOD BLESS AMERICA! OCS @JaydaBF @realDonaldTrump
7:05 AM - Nov 29, 2017
846 846 Replies 1,628 1,628 Retweets 3,077 3,077 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Fransen later tweeted that she was "facing prison time for criticizing Islam" in light of Mr. Trump's support, saying "Britain is now Sharia compliant."


Jayda Fransen

@JaydaBF
Thanks for the retweets @realDonaldTrump
I'm facing prison for criticising Islam
Britain is now Sharia compliant
I need your help! God bless
12:23 PM - Nov 29, 2017
829 829 Replies 3,587 3,587 Retweets 6,260 6,260 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders also responded to the outcry later Wednesday morning, telling reporters "regardless of the video, the threat is very real."

She added, "the president has talked about the need for strong borders and strong security since the campaign trail, that's not a secret that's something he'll continue talking about and continue highlighting in a lot of different venues and avenues."

Asked if the president's retweets were an endorsement of the "Britain First" movement, Sanders replied, "Not that I'm aware of but he does endorse a strong national security and endorses strong borders."

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



THIS WRITING BY LINDY WEST IS ONE OF THE BEST NEWS ESSAYS I’VE EVER READ. IT SAYS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE BEEN FEELING, STRONGLY AND ELOQUENTLY; AND WHICH ARE THE REASONS FOR MY "ANGER" AND FEAR SINCE TRUMP WAS ELECTED. SAYING THE ONE WORD, ANGER, WITHOUT THE OTHER JUST ISN’T FAIR TO ME, AND DOESN’T EXPLAIN THE HIGHLY EMOTIONAL STATE OF THOSE WHOM I CONSIDER TO BE “GOOD” HUMANS AND RESPONSIBLE US CITIZENS. I PRAY FOR A DRASTIC CHANGE FROM OUR SITUATION TODAY, BECAUSE WE SERIOUSLY NEED HELP.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/29/opinion/complicity-word-of-the-year.html?mabReward=ART_CB2&recid=0x49q9Gef7hIIEPqOELgzdVFicg&recp=0&module=WelcomeBackModal&contentCollection=Television®ion=FixedCenter&action=click&src=recg&pgtype=article
Opinion | CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER
Trump’s First Year in One Word
Lindy West NOV. 29, 2017


Photograph -- Credit Tom Brenner/The New York Times

It’s weird to think that one year ago today Barack Obama was still the president. Michelle Obama was decorating the White House with happy snowmen and gingerbread dogs instead of transforming the East Colonnade into a hell-bound gullet of witch fingers, apparently our new tradition, and the president of the United States somehow made it through the entire week without insulting a single 90-year-old Native American war hero.

Many of us were angry and terrified but still energized about things like vote audits and faithless electors. We hoped the system might have a fail-safe to protect us from our worst selves — a flash-frozen grown-up to defrost in case of emergencies. Now, a year wiser and few thousand older, in too many ways we are still waiting. It hasn’t clicked with the necessary urgency that we are the grown-ups. We are still frozen.

Every year, Dictionary.com chooses one word, “a symbol of the year’s most meaningful events and lookup trends,” to be the Word of the Year. The past few picks seem to follow a chilling but logical evolution. In 2015 the Word of the Year was broad and neutral — “identity” — issues of racial and gender injustice having finally come closer to becoming national priorities and weathered a ghastly but predictable (and still developing) backlash. Two thousand fifteen was a difficult year, but it was a year of progress.

By the end of 2016, as Trumpism seized the wheel, our national conversation on identity sharpened to a sinister specificity: that year’s word was “xenophobia.” Two thousand sixteen was a year of us versus them, of villains making their plans clear, of straight, white, Christian identity politics moving to supplant everyone else.

This year, the Word of the Year zooms out, implicating millions of us. The word is “complicit.” Two thousand seventeen is a year of reckoning.

Searches for the definition of “complicit” spiked in May, Dictionary.com tells us, when Ivanka Trump was asked to respond to accusations of complicity on “CBS This Morning.” This is one of my favorite Trump-family anecdotes, if one can be said to have a “favorite” venomous snake biting your child on the face: “If being complicit is wanting to be a force for good and to make a positive impact,” Ivanka said, “then I’m complicit.”

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.

I mean, sure, if complicit means that you are 7-foot-1 and love Gold Bond Medicated Foot Powder, then Shaq is complicit. If complicit means an 18th-century wooden shoe, then I have some Dutch klompen Robert Mueller should talk to.

Unfortunately for the first daughter, despite what her father has taught her, even the very rich do not have the right (yet) to redefine basic English words so they can weasel out of accountability for abetting the rise of Nazism in America. The actual definition of complicit is having “involvement with wrongdoing,” and Ivanka Trump is certainly complicit by that measure. (Shaq, as far as I know, is in the clear.) Unfortunately for the rest of us, the rise of Trumpism is a systemic issue — the conditions that made it possible were fostered by our system, not in spite of it — which means that we’re culpable, too.


>Complicity, obviously, is a spectrum. Ivanka Trump, for example, is more complicit than your neighbor who voted for Gary Johnson, who is more complicit than your cousin who supported Hillary Clinton but still laughs at sexist jokes. She’s presumably less complicit than her father, although one of the scariest things about Donald Trump is that he doesn’t even seem to be at the top of his own complicity food chain.

It is vital to catch the big fish here — those in power trying to dismantle net neutrality, affordable health care, abortion access, immigrants’ rights, religious freedom, anti-discrimination legislation, environmental regulation, any semblance of a reasonable tax code and our national sense of shared humanity but it’s just as important to remember that Trumpism didn’t spring out of nowhere. Social media companies let it happen. Politicians let it happen. White Americans let it happen.

We didn’t take to the streets when Republicans were rolling back voting rights in plain sight. We let labor unions dwindle. We ignored our racist uncles at Thanksgiving. We pretended that “apolitical” wasn’t a political stance. We didn’t bother to call our representatives. We turned activists into clowns. We left sexism and racism on the table as viable debate topics. We made sure to hear “both sides.” Millions of us voted for Trump on purpose.

>If we manage to get rid of Trump (or Harvey Weinstein or Leon Wieseltier or Louis C. K. or Matt Lauer) without profoundly addressing the culture and power structure that made his success possible, we’re just going to end up with a smarter, savvier, more effective Trump. And we’re barely surviving the incompetent version.

The opposite of complicity isn’t apology — it’s fixing what you broke.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.



HOW SURPRISED AND DELIGHTED I WAS WHEN I FIRST HEARD HIS HIGH-PITCHED GOMER PYLE VOICE CHANGE TO AN OPERATIC BARITONE. YET HE DIDN’T MAKE HIS MONEY THAT WAY. HE CHOSE COMEDY. LIKE ANDY GRIFFITH AND DON KNOTTS, HE WAS A NATURAL CLOWN. I LOVED THEM ALL. REST IN PEACE.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jim-nabors-dies-gomer-pyle-175458676.html?soc_trk=gcm&soc_src=b7ddaf4b-9395-34b6-9ddc-e32547089110&.tsrc=notification-brknews
Jim Nabors Dies: ‘Gomer Pyle’ Star Was 87
Greg Evans
November 30, 2017






BERNIE VS JOY
COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY WARNER
NOVEMBER 30, 2017


FIRST, I READ THIS ARTICLE AND THEN, CURIOUS, I SEARCHED FOR ARTICLES BY JOY-ANN REID TO SEE WHAT SHE HAD SAID ABOUT SANDERS. SHE HAS, IN FACT, BEEN INCREDIBLY HARSH IN HER COMMENTS ABOUT HIM. IN HIS WIFE’S WORDS, THAT TREATMENT FROM REID HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR SOME TWO YEARS, BEFORE BERNIE WAS EVEN IN THE RACE, MAYBE. APPARENTLY, JANE HAD JUST HAD ENOUGH. THIS IS HER RESPONSE.

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/362466-sanderss-wife-to-msnbc-reporter-dont-ever-use-me-to-demean-my-husband
Bernie Sanders's wife to MSNBC anchor: 'Don't ever use me to demean my husband'
BY MALLORY SHELBOURNE - 11/29/17 07:01 PM EST


Photograph -- Bernie Sanders's wife to MSNBC anchor: 'Don't ever use me to demean my husband' -- © Getty Images


Jane Sanders, the wife of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), blasted an MSNBC host on Wednesday after the anchor said Sanders is “an incredibly dubious prospect” as an authority figure amid the current sexual misconduct conversation.

“I didn't answer your biased reporting about Bernie during the last 2 years @JoyAnnReid. But don't ever use me to demean my husband,” Sanders wrote to “AM Joy” host Joy Reid.

Reid was engaged in a Twitter conversation earlier in the day about the credibility of men in authority positions starting to "crumble" amid a wave of sexual harassment allegations — and consequences — against men in high-profile positions.

One of Reid's followers suggested Bernie Sanders as an example of a credible male authority figure.

“Um... I get that he has a hardcore following, but his own attitudes toward women, from his weird early writings to his physical dismissal of women in his presence (including his own wife) make that an incredibly dubious prospect,” Reid responded.

“I am very happy & very proud to be Bernie's wife," Sanders' wife said in her response. "Your perception couldn't be more wrong. Have you ever talked with him? You've never spoken w/me.”

Reid's reference to early writings may have been to a 1972 essay Sanders wrote in a Vermont newspaper, which resurfaced in a Mother Jones article in 2015.

“A woman enjoys intercourse with her man -- as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously,” one line from the essay reads.

A spokesperson for Sanders’s presidential campaign dismissed the essay at the time, calling it a "dumb attempt at dark satire in an alternative publication.”

"It was intended to attack gender stereotypes of the '70s, but it looks as stupid today as it was then," Michael Briggs told CNN in 2015.



THE FOLLOWING IS A SAMPLE OF REID’S COMMENTS ABOUT HIM.

“THE DEMOCRAT PARTY” – HMMMM. SEEMS LIKE I’VE HEARD THAT PHRASEOLOGY BEFORE, THOUSANDS OF TIMES FROM ONE CROWD ONLY – THE FOX NEWS 100% REPUBLICAN-BACKED TRASH TALKING COMMENTATORS. THAT PUTS A CERTAIN SPIN ON THE PHRASEOLOGY AND OPINIONS HERE. I THINK ALL NEWS AND COMMENTARY SHOULD HAVE THE WRITER’S NAME ON IT. IT’S COWARDLY TO HIDE THEIR FACES AS THEY TAKE SIDES FOR A GROUP WHICH THEY WOULD NEVER ACTUALLY SUPPORT – THE “DEMOCRAT” PARTY. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT HUFF POST IS SOWING SOME DISSENT HERE TO HURT SANDERS. HEY, LEAVE THAT TO PUTIN AND TRUMP. THEY CAN DO A FINE JOB OF IT WITHOUT YOUR HELP. JUST TO PROVE MY POINT, I FOUND THIS LINK BETWEEN REID AND THE REPUBLICAN/FOX CAMP: HTTP://INSIDER.FOXNEWS.COM/TAG/JOY-ANN-REID.

AND SANDERS DID HIS OWN PUBLICATION AND MEMBERSHIP DRIVE THROUGH HIS SITE ON THE INTERNET WELL BEFORE THE CAMPAIGN. THAT’S WHEN I FIRST NOTICED HIM – HIS WORDS WERE SO INTELLIGENT, BENIGN AND ENTHUSIASTIC FOR THE CAUSE OF SPREADING THE WEALTH AROUND TO ALL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE; NOT JUST TO A RACIAL GROUP, BUT TO ALL WHO ARE NOT WEALTHY. BECAUSE THE BLACKS HAVE SUFFERED MIGHTILY, A SIZABLE CHUNK OF THEM SEEM TO THINK THAT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE. APPARENTLY BECAUSE HE HASN’T SINGLED THEM OUT FOR ATTENTION, THEY HAVE NO TRUST OR AFFECTION FOR HIM.

OR IS IT BECAUSE HE IS A JEW? I HOPE NOT. PS, I DON’T SEE MANY BLACKS GOING OUT TO SUPPORT ANY OTHER GROUP BESIDES THEMSELVES NO MATTER THE NEED, EXCEPT IN SOME CASES FOR WOMEN’S CAUSES. I ALSO HAVE NOTICED THE HOSTILITY AMONG A COUPLE OF BLM MARCHERS WHO, WHEN JOINED BY WHITES, WERE RUDE AND REJECTING. THAT HIT THE NEWS ABOUT THE TIME THAT THEY HARASSED SANDERS SO POINTLESSLY. PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH!

BERNIE DOES FOCUS ON ECONOMIC ISSUES MORE THAN IDENTITY POLITICS, BUT I AGREE WITH HIM THAT IF MANY MEMBERS OF A GROUP ARE GRINDINGLY POOR, THEY WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO BE ANTI-INTELLECTUAL, TEND TO DO DRUGS AND JOIN STREET GANGS, BE CHRONICALLY DEPRESSED, FEEL “DISSED,” ETC., ETC.; ON THE OTHER HAND, A DECENT INCOME AND MUCH EASIER ACCESS TO A GOOD EDUCATION WOULD IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE POOR SO THAT A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF THEM WOULD FEEL LESS REJECTED AND FIND IT EMOTIONALLY EASIER TO “FIT IN” WITH WHITES AND OTHER GROUPS. THE INTERPERSONAL WORK ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE DONE BY EVERYBODY IN THE GROUP. IF ONE MEMBER OF THAT GROUP HAPPENS TO BECOME PRESIDENT, AND IS TALL, ELEGANT, BEAUTIFULLY WELL-SPOKEN IN HARVARD ENGLISH, DON’T SAY HE IS “ACTING WHITE.”

THERE ARE NOW, OF COURSE, AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN SOME CULTURAL MINORITY MEMBERS OF SEVERAL KINDS WHO DO NOT LET THEIR FINANCIAL CLASS, RELIGION, SKIN COLOR MAKE THEM HOSTILE AND REJECTING OF WHITES WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO MEET, GREET, RESPECT, ATTEND EVENTS WITH THEM, AND BECOME GOOD FRIENDS. PULLING TOGETHER A SOCIETY FROM A CROWD TAKES COOPERATION, GOOD INTENTIONS, OPEN-MINDEDNESS, AND SELF-EDUCATION. I LIKE THE WAY THE BLM HAS GONE OUT FOR THE VICTIMS OF POLICE VIOLENCE, BUT THEY SHOULDN’T ACT SO HOSTILE TO ALL WHITES. GROUPTHINK GOES BOTH WAYS, YOU KNOW.

PARDON ME, BUT I HAVE REALLY WANTED TO SAY THAT FOR A LONG TIME, AND THIS SNEERING PIECE BY A HUFF POST WRITER WHO DIDN’T EVEN HAVE THE GUTS TO PUT HIS OR HER NAME ON IT JUST LIT A FUSE. I’M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE NO FRIENDLIER TO SOMEONE WHO IS RUDE TO ME THAN THEY ARE BEING TO ME. I HEARD A MAN SAY SOME YEARS AGO, “THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO TREAT A PERSON EXACTLY THE WAY THEY TREAT THEM.” I ALWAYS TREAT PEOPLE IN A FRIENDLY WAY, AND I MEAN IT, BUT IF I’M DISSED IN RESPONSE TO THAT I DON’T TRY WITH THEM MANY MORE TIMES. I ELIMINATE THEM FROM MY MIND. IF THAT’S WHAT PEOPLE WANT, THEN SO BE IT. MY WAY IS TO RELATE ONLY TO INDIVIDUALS RATHER THAN CLIQUES; AND I DON’T ELIMINATE ANYBODY BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR, ONLY FOR THEIR ATTITUDE.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/demexit-already-we-cant-miss-you-if-you-wont-go_us_5988d2b0e4b08a4c247f2501
Bernie Sanders Supporters Should Hurry And DemExit
We in the party can’t miss you if you won’t leave
08/07/2017 05:41 pm ET Updated Aug 08, 2017

Recently, MSNBC host Joy Reid came under fire from Bernie Sanders supporters for her tweets comparing them to bad college roommates. Despite the Berniebros objections, Joy’s tweets were spot on. Bernie used the resources of the DNC to get a following he never had in his decades in Congress. Reaching people that he was never able to reach as a congressman from Vermont. And now that he’s built his following, he doesn’t care one bit about the Democrats who allowed him in their party. And his supporters keep threatening to leave the party they haven’t joined if the Democrats don’t give them everything they want and only nominate candidates that pass their purity tests.


Joy Reid

@JoyAnnReid
Replying to @JoyAnnReid
Bernie and his followers are like that college friend who stays at your place for weeks, pays $0, eats your food & trashes your aesthetic.
2:13 PM - Jun 12, 2017
4,158 4,158 Replies 4,260 4,260 Retweets 12,710 12,710 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Joy Reid

@JoyAnnReid
Replying to @JoyAnnReid
Parties are like apartments. You chip in or you're a visitor. Feel free to bring wine when you drop by but don't tell me how to decorate.
2:10 PM - Jun 12, 2017
429 429 Replies 1,143 1,143 Retweets 3,966 3,966 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Even as we are in the beginning of the Trump administration with Republican majorities in congress, Bernie and his supporters want to bash the Democrat party which may be the last wall stopping republican policies. Republicans want to cut over 600 billion (that’s billion) from Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. This cut alone will affect millions. They propose additional cuts to food stamps, energy assistance, and social security disability. They even proposed cuts to Meals on Wheels. They propose cuts to almost every federal agency, which means cuts to middle class federal employees and government contractors. It’s scary times for the poor and middle class in this county.

But instead of uniting, we get the woulda/coulda/shouldas from Bernie and his supporters, and the threats ― again ― of DemExit from a party they repeatedly claimed they weren’t part of. If the Democrats wanted Bernie, they would have voted for him. But he lost African Americans voters 77 percent to 23 percent. He also ran poorly among Hispanic voters. The only demographic that Bernie won was the under-25 vote, and millennials don’t turn out in the numbers needed to win elections.

The DNC even tried a unity tour with Bernie Sanders. But it was obvious from day one that Sanders wasn’t trying to unite. Most of these events could be tea party rallies, not “unity” tours. Videos of Hillary Clinton were booed; Tom Perez was booed. Bernie gave his usual spiel about economic justice while avoiding social justice. He talked about not accepting money (Bernie became a millionaire after this latest presidential run), and how Democratic policies are failing voters (Democrats are the ones fighting to keep Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security). All those events did was create an even bigger divide between the democrats and the Sanders supporters. The only thing it made abundantly clear was that Bernie loves the spotlight as much as Trump.

Bernie and his supporters are now pushing for more caucuses instead of primaries. After all, that’s their claim: that the primaries were all rigged where Hillary won, while the caucuses where Bernie won reflected the wishes of the electorate. But caucuses are dominated by the loudest voices and the people who have the time to attend these all-day events. They leave out people who cannot take off from their jobs, people who cannot afford sitters, the elderly, and people with disabilities. Switching to caucuses is not the way to be more inclusive; it is a way to make the smaller, louder factions have more power.

Right now, African American women have the highest voting turnout in the Democrat party. We vote; we organize; we donate; we volunteer; we are in the middle of it all. We have leaders like Maxine Waters and Kamala Harris who are out there calling Trump on his nonsense, day in and day out. Kamala Harris is an early front runner for 2020, so it’s no surprise that Bernie supporters are already claiming they can’t support her.

I get that Bernie supporters take his loss personally, but blaming Democrats for voting for a Democrat is getting tiresome. And following Sanders and his supporters down the rabbit hole in search of the ever illusive white “working class” voter at the expense of the people who are the backbone of the DNC is offensive.

Rural voters are never going to support the Democrats. That shipped [sic] has sailed and it’s not coming back. It’s Lucy and Charlie Brown all over again. Poor whites are holding the voting football and promising if you just don’t talk about their racism, confederate monuments, Islamophobia, and homophobia they will vote for the Democrats. If Sanders, who loudly claims he isn’t a Democrat, wants to line up to kick the ball, the DNC needs to let him do it as an independent.

And if Bernie Sanders, Nina Turner, and the rest of the Berniebros are going to do a DemExit, they should do it already. Then Democrats can get back to working on the midterms. And the DNC can focus on voter turnout, voter suppression laws, and their loyal base of African American voters.

RELATED...
Bernie Who?
Why “Bernie Would Have Won” Matters



https://www.mediaite.com/online/heres-where-hillary-clinton-got-her-out-of-context-attack-on-bernie-over-trumps-abortion-comments/
Here’s Where Hillary Clinton Got Her ‘Out of Context’ Attack on Bernie Over Trump’s Abortion Comments
by Tommy Christopher | 1:41 pm, April 1st, 2016

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump caused a veritable outrage-gasm this week when he said, then un-said, that women seeking abortions under a legal ban should be punished, an issue that Hillary Clinton managed to also turn into an attack on her Democratic primary rival Bernie Sanders. Clinton has accused Sanders of minimizing the issue of access to abortion, an attack which Sanders says is taken out of context. In his lengthy interview with Rachel Maddow Wednesday night, Sanders spoke about the issue for a good five minutes, and here is the full context of what he said:

VIEW VIDEO

Now, I will leave it to the viewer to determine just what it was that Bernie Sanders was trying to convey, and how much this context helps him. I think his overall point is that there’s a pattern of the media failing to hold Trump accountable for his positions, in favor of narrowly covering the kerfuffle of the moment. When Maddow asks him directly if he thinks the media is overreacting, Sanders says “Of course it should be mentioned.” Since he’d just spent three or four minutes denouncing the Republicans on the issue, it’s pretty clear his meaning is that the media should also be paying attention to issues like climate change.

So where did Hillary Clinton get the idea that Bernie Sanders thinks this issue is no big deal? Well, in a weird quirk of timing, Maddow taped her interview with Hillary before Trump made his comments, then taped her interview with Sanders, then went back to Hillary to get her reaction to Trump’s remarks. As a result, a good hour before Bernie’s remarks aired in full, Maddow aired this clip asking Hillary to react to what Bernie said: [GO TO WEBSITE FOR HIS COMMENTS.]

I spoke with your Democratic opponent, Bernie Sanders, after this happened and he was critical of Mr. Trump’s remark, but then he also said that this is basically another Donald Trump stupid remark, that the media will cover ad nauseam as opposed to something like the minimum wage, taxes, climate change that might be more deserving of extended attention. Do you think this was another Donald Trump stupid comment, and the media might be making too much of this?

Now, Bernie ought to have known better than to deliver the “every stupid remark” sound bite, but he did not say what Maddow says he said. It’s an open question whether Hillary ever went back and watched Sanders’ full remarks, or if she did, maybe just found Maddow’s spin appealing, but this is self-evidently the first time she heard it. What Maddow did was what we in the biz call “shopping” a quote, but in this case, it was a bad shopping trip that everyone involved should learn a lesson from.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

Follow Mediaite
Follow @mediaite Like us on Facebook
filed under
Abortion, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Rachel Maddow

Tuesday, November 28, 2017




November 28, 2017


News and Views


ARE THERE GROUNDS FOR CONTINUING THIS AS A TEST CASE ON TOTAL CONTROL OVER AGENCIES BY THE PRESIDENT, VERSUS THE CFPB OPERATING INDEPENDENTLY, AS THE DEMS HAVE CONSTRUED THE SITUATION? I HAD HEARD THE NAME DODD-FRANK AND SEEN THE REPUBLICAN FURY, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAD LOOKED AT IT AND NOTICED HOW IT IS WORKING. I PROBABLY WON’T TRY TO LEARN MUCH MORE ABOUT IT, UNLESS IT DOES BECOME A TEST. I AM AMAZED OVER AND OVER AT THE DEGREE OF SHEER INTEREST VALUE THAT IS FOUND IN THE DAILY NEWS.

TRUMP’S PATTERN OF STUFFING THE REGULATORY BODIES WITH THE VERY BUSINESSES WHO SHOULD BE REGULATED IS TOTALLY WRONG, IN MY VIEW, THOUGH THEY SHOULD BE REPRESENTED. IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ME FOR EACH AGENCY TO HAVE A DECISION MAKING BOARD EMPOWERED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH THE LEGISLATURE WOULD RATIFY. IN THIS CASE, IF THE NEEDS OF THE BANKING COMMUNITY AND WALL STREET WERE EXAMINED ON A COEQUAL BASIS WITH THOSE OF THE CONSUMERS, THAT WOULD SEEM FAIR TO ME.

REGULATORY BODIES SHOULD BE IN THE SUPERIOR POSITION, CLEARLY, BUT THE PROCESS SHOULD BE FAIRLY APPROACHED OR IT IS MERELY A MEANS TO AN AUTOCRATIC RULE RATHER THAN A PRESIDENCY. THROUGH THE ACTIONS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, PARTY POLITICS IS RUINING HOW THE BANKING INDUSTRY SHOULD BE REGULATED. THE REASON REPUBLICANS HATE DODD-FRANK SO BADLY IS THAT IT IS SUCCESSFULLY DOING WHAT IT WAS SET UP TO DO. SEE YESTERDAY’S BLOG ON THE CFPB ISSUE, ALSO. I HAD SOME SUBSTANTIVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN A COUPLE OF THOSE.

IN THIS CASE WHERE THERE ARE TWO SETS OF LAW BEING APPLIED, THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE LAWS NEEDS TO BE CLEARED UP. COULD THERE BE A SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THIS? CLEARLY THE REPUBLICANS HOPE SO.

THIS IS ONE OF THE GREAT HUMAN ERRORS IF WE ARE TO HAVE A CLEAN RATHER THAN A CORRUPT SYSTEM. IT ISN’T ONLY MONEY THAT CAN BE DEGRADING TO GOOD LAW, BUT THE PURE POWER STRUGGLE ON ALL LEVELS AS WELL. THE DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS AND OTHER PLAYERS AS WELL, ARE IN SUCH A COMPETITION ON EACH ISSUE SMALL OR LARGE THAT IT WARPS THE HONESTY ON ALL SIDES. WE HAVE ABANDONED PRINCIPLES. IT CAUSES GRIDLOCK AND EVEN DENIAL OF HUMAN NEEDS, ESPECIALLY THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS NATION ENTANGLED IN A HEAVY MESH OF DEBT AND POVERTY. LIKE MOST LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES, THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE TO ME, AND IT CERTAINLY ISN’T NECESSARY.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-rules-in-favor-of-trump-over-fate-of-consumer-watchdog/
CBS/AP November 28, 2017, 5:36 PM
Judge rules in favor of Trump over fate of consumer watchdog

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has ruled in favor of President Trump in his effort to appoint the acting head of nation's top financial watchdog agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

In a ruling from the bench Tuesday afternoon, Judge Timothy Kelly declined to stop on an emergency basis the president from putting in place Mick Mulvaney, currently the White House's budget director. In doing so, Kelly ruled against Leandra English, the CFPB's deputy director. English had requested an emergency restraining order to stop Mulvaney from becoming the acting director of the bureau.

"The Administration applauds the Court's decision, which provides further support for the President's rightful authority to designate Director Mulvaney as Acting Director of the CFPB," White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah said of the District Court's ruling. "It's time for the Democrats to stop enabling this brazen political stunt by a rogue employee and allow Acting Director Mulvaney to continue the Bureau's smooth transition into an agency that truly serves to help consumers."

The leadership of the bureau had been thrown into chaos over the weekend after its permanent director, Richard Cordray, resigned and appointed English as his successor. Both Mulvaney and English claimed to be the rightful acting director.

Kelly was nominated by President Trump and was confirmed by the Senate just a couple months ago in September.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.



SEE “DODD-FRANK ...” GO TO THE WIKIPEDIA WEBSITE BELOW, AND WORK THROUGH THE LAW TO GET AN OVERVIEW; BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE CORDRAY/TRUMP CONFLICT IS REALLY ABOUT, IT SEEMS TO ME. THE REPUBLICANS ARE MAKING A MOVE TO OVERTURN DODD-FRANK OVER THIS CASE. THAT’S WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE GIST. I HAVEN’T WATCHED RACHEL MADDOW, WHO WILL UNDOUBTEDLY GO INTO IT IN A MUCH BETTER WAY.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodd%E2%80%93Frank_Wall_Street_Reform_and_Consumer_Protection_Act
Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub.L. 111–203, H.R. 4173, commonly referred to as Dodd–Frank) was signed into federal law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010.[1] Passed as a response to the financial crisis of 2007–2008, it brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in the United States since the regulatory reform that followed the Great Depression.[2][3][4][5] It made changes in the American financial regulatory environment that affected all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation's financial services industry.[6][7]

. . . . Due to Dodd and Frank's involvement with the bill, the conference committee that reported on June 25, 2010,[1] voted to name the bill after them.[8]

Studies have found Dodd–Frank has improved financial stability and consumer protection,[9] although there is evidence it may have had a negative impact on small banks.[10]

On June 8, 2017, the Republican-led House passed the Financial CHOICE Act which, if enacted, would roll back many of the provisions of Dodd–Frank. In June 2017, the Senate was crafting its own reform bill.[11][12]

. . . .


NO, THANKS, MR. PRESIDENT. I’VE OTHER FISH TO FRY.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/key-democrats-back-out-of-white-house-meeting/
CBS/AP November 28, 2017, 11:59 AM
Key Democrats back out of White House meeting

Top congressional Democrats abruptly pulled out of a White House meeting on Tuesday after President Trump attacked them on Twitter.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said in a joint statement they would not be attending after the president tweeted, "I don't see a deal!" hours before their scheduled meeting on ways to avoid a government shutdown. Instead, they say they've asked to meet with top Republicans in Congress.

"Given that the president doesn't see a deal between Democrats and the White House, we believe the best path forward is to continue negotiating with our Republican counterparts in Congress instead," their statement reads. "Rather than going to the White House for a show meeting that won't result in an agreement, we've asked Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan to meet this afternoon. We don't have any time to waste in addressing the issues that confront us, so we're going to continue to negotiate with Republican leaders who may be interested in reaching a bipartisan agreement."

"If the president, who already said earlier this year that 'our country needs a good shutdown,' isn't interested in addressing the difficult year end agenda, we'll work with those Republicans who are, as we did in April," the statement continued. "We look forward to continuing to work in good faith, as we have been for the last month, with our Republican colleagues in Congress to do just that."

Mr. Trump took to Twitter on Tuesday to bad-mouth Capitol Hill's top Democrats in advance of the afternoon meeting at the White House, casting doubt on the prospects for a quick agreement to avert a government shutdown at the end of next week.


Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
Meeting with “Chuck and Nancy” today about keeping government open and working. Problem is they want illegal immigrants flooding into our Country unchecked, are weak on Crime and want to substantially RAISE Taxes. I don’t see a deal!
9:17 AM - Nov 28, 2017
22,742 22,742 Replies 12,254 12,254 Retweets 47,152 47,152 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Mr. Trump said that "Chuck and Nancy" favor "illegal immigrants flooding into our Country" and are weak on crime.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said the president's invitation "still stands."

"It's disappointing that Senator Schumer and Leader Pelosi are refusing to come to the table and discuss urgent issues," Sanders said in a statement. "The president's invitation to the Democrat leaders still stands and he encourages them to put aside their pettiness, stop the political grandstanding, show up and get to work. These issues are too important. The meeting will proceed as scheduled with Speaker Ryan, Leader McConnell and administration officials who are committed to getting things done. If the Democrats believe the American people deserve action on these critical year-end issues as we do, they should attend."

McConnell and Ryan issued this joint statement after the Democrats' announcement that they would not attend the White House meeting:

"We have important work to do, and Democratic leaders have continually found new excuses not to meet with the administration to discuss these issues. Democrats are putting government operations, particularly resources for our men and women on the battlefield, at great risk by pulling these antics. There is a meeting at the White House this afternoon, and if Democrats want to reach an agreement, they will be there."

Washington faces a Dec. 8 deadline to pass a temporary spending bill to stave off a shutdown. It was hoped Tuesday afternoon's meeting might lay a foundation to keep the government running and set a path for a year-end spending package to give both the Pentagon and domestic agencies relief from a budget freeze.

Mr. Trump is still seeking his first big legislative win in Congress, and his attack on Democrats came as his marquee tax bill faced turbulence as well. The White House and top GOP leaders have work to do to get their tax bill in shape before a hoped-for vote later this week. Party deficit hawks pressed for a "backstop" mechanism to limit the risk of a spiral in the deficit, even as defenders of small business pressed for more generous treatment.

On a separate track from taxes is a multi-layered negotiation over several issues. Hoped-for increases for the Pentagon and domestic agencies are at the center, but a host of other issues are in the mix as well.

Republicans have "no excuse" for shutdown, Pelosi says

A temporary spending bill expires Dec. 8 and another is needed to prevent a government shutdown. Hurricane aid weighs in the balance and Democrats are pressing for legislative protections for immigrants known as "Dreamers," even as conservative Republicans object to including the issue in the crush of year-end business.

There's also increased urgency to find money for the children's health program that serves more than 8 million low-income children. The program expired on Oct. 1, and states are continuing to use unspent funds. Arizona, California, Minnesota, Ohio, Oregon and the District of Columbia are among those expected to deplete that money by late December or in January.

Democrats carry leverage into the talks, which have GOP conservatives on edge. GOP leaders appear wary of early-stage concessions that might disturb the mood of rank-and-file Republicans while the tax bill is in the balance.

Trump's visit to the Capitol is his third in little more than a month. This time, he'll try to make the sale to Senate Republicans on his signature tax bill. Among the holdouts are GOP Trump critics, including Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona and Bob Corker of Tennessee — though GOP leaders are seeking to rope in straggling Republicans with a flurry of deal-cutting.

"There's still some loose ends. We're not quite there yet," said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio. "But I think we're going to get there, I really do."

Mr. Trump's sessions with big groups of Republicans tend to take the form of pep rallies, and when visiting a Senate GOP lunch last month Mr. Trump spent much of the time recalling the accomplishments of his administration.

Besides Pelosi and Schumer, the White House meeting later in the days includes Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis. and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

Mr. Trump hasn't engaged much with Pelosi and Schumer since a September meeting that produced an agreement on a short-term increase in the government's debt limit and a temporary spending bill that is keeping the government's doors open through Dec. 8.

Mr. Trump reveled in the bipartisan deal for a time and generated excitement among Democrats when he told then he would sign legislation to protect from deportation immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children.

Mr. Trump in September reversed an executive order by former President Barack Obama that gave protections to these immigrants, many of whom have little or no connection to their home country. Shortly afterward, he told Pelosi and Schumer he would sign legislation protecting those immigrants, provided Democrats made concessions of their own on border security.

Since the president is such a wild card, neither Democrats nor Republicans were speculating much about what Tuesday's meeting might produce.

"Hopefully, we can make progress on an agreement that covers those time-sensitive issues and keeps the government running and working for the American people," Schumer said.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.



TRUMP AND GEORGE W BUSH HAVE A SIMILAR PROBLEM, WHICH THE LATE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR RICHARDSON OF TEXAS CALLED “BORN WITH A SILVER FOOT IN HIS MOUTH.” IT IS CLEAR, THOUGH, THAT HE SOMETIMES DOES BORDERLINE ACTIONS THAT COULD BE PURPOSEFULLY INSULTING, OR COULD BE A TRUE ERROR. I BELIEVE THAT IN SOME OF THOSE CASES HE CAN’T SPEAK VERY WELL, BUT GOADING IS ALSO ONE OF HIS FAVORITE WAYS OF INTERACTING, AND IT IS NOT A MISTAKE. MALICIOUS OR NOT, IT ISN’T A GOOD CHARACTERISTIC FOR A PRESIDENT OF THE US.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/families-of-navajo-code-talkers-decry-trumps-pocahontas-jab/
CBS/AP November 28, 2017, 9:23 AM
Families of Navajo Code Talkers decry Trump's "Pocahontas" jab

Families of Navajo war veterans who were honored Monday at the White House say they were dumbfounded that President Donald Trump used the event to take a political jab at a Massachusetts senator, demeaning their work with an unbreakable code that helped the U.S. win World War II.

Trump turned to a nickname he often deployed for Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren during the 2016 presidential campaign: Pocahontas. He then told the three Navajo Code Talkers on stage that he had affection for them that he doesn't have for Warren.

"It was uncalled for," said Marty Thompson, whose great uncle was a Navajo Code Talker. "He can say what he wants when he's out doing his presidential business among his people, but when it comes to honoring veterans or any kind of people, he needs to grow up and quit saying things like that."

Lupita Holiday, daughter of a code talker from St. Geroge, Utah told CBS News' Jacqueline Alemany on Monday that it appeared that the president "doesn't know the history" of the Native peoples.

"Maybe he doesn't know we're different tribes and he might have been here a long time ago but I don't know," said Holiday. She added, saying the name was "a little offensive" to her, "Look at the history of Pocahontas and maybe find out what she did and then find out what the code talkers did. It's two different things. Two different tribes."

Pocahontas is a well-known historical figure who bridged her own Pamunkey Tribe in present-day Virginia with the British in the 1600s. But the National Congress of American Indians says Trump wrongly has flipped the name into a derogatory term, and the comment drew swift criticism from American Indians and politicians.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders, asked about criticism of Trump's remarks, said a racial slur "was certainly not the president's intent."

President Donald Trump used an event honoring Native American veterans Monday to take a shot at Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, whom he has long derided as "Pocahontas."

Trump made the comment as he stood near a portrait of President Andrew Jackson, which he hung in the Oval Office in January. Trump admires Jackson's populism. But Jackson is an unpopular figure in Indian Country because his policies led to the forced removal of American Indians out of their southern homelands.

The Navajo Nation suggested Trump's remark Monday was an example of "cultural insensitivity" and resolved to stay out of the "ongoing feud between the senator and President Trump."

"All tribal nations still battle insensitive references to our people. The prejudice that Native American people face is an unfortunate historical legacy," Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye said in a statement.

Still, Begaye and relatives of Navajo Code Talkers said they're honored the story of the men recruited from the vast Southwest reservation to become Marines could be told on a national stage. Peter MacDonald, a former Navajo chairman and trained Code Talker who stood beside Trump, also took the opportunity to ask for support for a Navajo Code Talker museum. Trump obliged.

MacDonald didn't immediately return messages left Monday by The Associated Press. He didn't visibly react to Trump's "Pocahontas" comment and later told the president he was certain he would succeed, crediting military generals.

Michael Smith, a Marine whose father was a Code Talker, said most of the Code Talkers would be skeptical about going to the White House because it could be construed to mean they support a political cause.

"So, why did they go? Why were they there? He's putting them in the Oval Office to say 'You did a good job, and say hi to Pocahontas?'" Smith said. "They should be taken care of as heroes, not as pawns."

Michael Nez, whose father helped develop the code based on the Navajo language, said his father would have been upset to hear Trump's Pocahontas comment. But, as other Code Talker relatives said, his father was taught to respect the president as the commander in chief.

"It's too bad he does put his foot in his mouth," Nez said. "Why he does it? I don't know."

Helena Begaii said her 94-year-old Navajo Code Talker father, Samuel T. Holiday, declined an invitation to the White House on Monday. She said he would have a better feel for what happened once he reads the newspaper.

"I feel really sad that they didn't get treated with respect," she said.

Trump's Pocahontas comment is the latest in a long list of remarks Trump has made about people from specific ethnic and racial groups. In announcing a run for the presidency in 2015, Trump said many Mexican immigrants are rapists. He's sought to ban immigrants from certain Muslim majority nations. He's come under fire for what some said was a too-slow federal response to hurricane damage in Puerto Rico.

The president has long feuded with Warren, an outspoken Wall Street critic who leveled blistering attacks on Trump during the campaign. Trump seized on questions about Warren's heritage, which surfaced during her 2012 Senate race challenging incumbent Republican Sen. Scott Brown.

Warren said in an interview on MSNBC that, unfortunately, Trump cannot make it through a ceremony honoring heroes "without having to throw out a racial slur."

She since has released a fundraising email citing the president's own words, telling supporters that Mr. Trump has stooped to a "disgusting low."

New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall, vice chairman of the Indian Affairs committee, added: "Donald Trump's latest racist joke — during Native American Heritage Month no less — demeaned the contributions that the Code Talkers and countless other Native American patriots and citizens have made to our great country."

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.


MORE ON THE CFPB ISSUES

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/whats-going-on-at-the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/
CBS NEWS November 28, 2017, 5:14 AM
What's going on at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?


So what's going on with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?

On Friday, Richard Cordray resigned as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) following a November 15 announcement that he would leave by the end of the month. Cordray, who is expected to run for governor of Ohio next year as a Democrat, said that he was entitled to appoint his successor, and picked his deputy Leandra English to lead the agency.

President Trump argues that Cordray doesn't have the authority to select his own successor, and has appointed Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney as the agency's interim chief. But English filed suit in federal court on Sunday, insisting that she is the legitimate director of the agency.

So now we have a situation where an exceptionally powerful federal bureaucracy has two different people claiming that they run it. It all sounds pretty absurd on the surface, but it's a fight with high stakes.

What does the CFPB do again?

It was created in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis to protect consumers from predatory banks, lenders, and other financial bodies that could defraud people. The brainchild of now-Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who was then an Obama White House aide, the CFPB is a product of the Dodd-Frank Act, which was passed by Congress in the wake of the crisis.

The bureau overhauled the mortgage practices that were a factor in the financial crisis. It wrote simpler mortgage rules aiming to help consumers navigate the mortgage process, from selecting a loan through paying it back, created mortgage servicing rules geared toward helping protect home buyers, and it put in place more protections for those who get behind in their mortgage payments.

Republicans, broadly speaking, have never been fans of the CFPB, which they see as too powerful, largely unaccountable, and perhaps unconstitutional. An independent agency, the CFPB gets its funding from the Federal Reserve, not through Congressional appropriations. And while the president can fire the agency's director, the Dodd-Frank Act stipulates that a dismissal can only be done for cause, meaning that Mr. Trump would have had a fight on his hands if he had just fired Cordray outright.

Democrats argue that the agency has done a good job of protecting consumers and note that the agency has paid out some $12 billion in relief to defrauded consumers. They also say that Mulvaney, who once called the CFPB "a joke…in a sick, sad kind of way" is not the person who should be running it.

Can Mr. Trump ignore them and appoint Mulvaney anyway?

That's what the White House is betting on, and the CFPB's own general counsel says that President Trump is entitled to appoint a vacancy due to powers granted to him by the Vacancies Act of 1988. Democrats like Warren counter that Dodd-Frank Act says that "the Deputy Director . . . shall serve as acting Director in the absence or unavailability of the Director." In theory, that would mean that English is in charge, which is what the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, argued on Monday.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Elizabeth Warren

@SenWarren
The Dodd-Frank Act is clear: if there is a @CFPB Director vacancy, the Deputy Director becomes Acting Director. @realDonaldTrump can’t override that.
9:56 PM - Nov 24, 2017
1,234 1,234 Replies 10,164 10,164 Retweets 23,884 23,884 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

So who's in charge over there?

Mulvaney showed up to the agency Monday morning and said he was now acting director of the bureau. English then sent an email to the CFPB staff identifying herself as acting director.

"[I]t has come to my attention that Ms. English has reached out to many of you this morning via email in an attempt to exercise certain duties of the Acting Director," Mulvaney wrote to agency officials in response to English's claim. "This is unfortunate but, in the atmosphere of the day, probably not unexpected.

"Please disregard any instructions you receive from Ms. English in her presumed capacity as Acting Director," Mulvaney's memo continues. It then goes on to apologize to the agency's staff for the nature of Mulvaney's introduction, and invites them to come "grab a donut" in his office.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

john czwartacki

@CZ
@MickMulvaneyOMB sitting in director's office. Already hard at work as acting director at cfpb.
8:04 AM - Nov 27, 2017
174 174 Replies 154 154 Retweets 247 247 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Later on Monday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said that Mulvaney had the "full cooperation" of the agency's staff.

If all this sounds a bit farcical to you, well, that's because it is. Meanwhile, the agency appears to be largely paralyzed due to the leadership dispute and may soon be subjected to legal action from the business it regulates. A court decision on who is rightfully in charge of the agency might take several months, meaning that Democrats and Republicans could be fighting about this all the way up to next year's midterms.

What's at stake here?

Mulvaney, and for that matter whoever Mr. Trump's final appointee to the position is, will probably take a much narrower and more circumscribed approach to regulating than Cordray or English. Cordray, who was appointed to lead the agency despite a Republican filibuster, has won plaudits from progressives and consumer advocates, while at the same time drawing the ire of business interests.

Since Mr. Trump took office, Cordray has been busy issuing new and sweeping rules, such as one that prevents financial business from using arbitration clauses to sidestep class-action lawsuits. That rule was killed by Congress using a once-obscure law called the Congressional Review Act.*

In October, Cordray took aim at payday lenders, which progressive groups have long argued are inherently predatory, with a rule that might drive many of them out of business. This muscular approach to oversight and regulation would likely be continued under English, his handpicked successor.

But if Mr. Trump gets his way, it's safe to expect that the CFPB will have a much smaller regulatory footprint in the future. At a press conference Monday afternoon, Mulvaney announced a hiring freeze at the agency as well as a 30-day pause in any new rules or regulations coming down the pipeline. Saying that "elections have consequences for every agency," he also promised to run the bureau much differently than Cordray did.

Mulvaney also called the bureau an "awful example" of a "bureaucracy gone wrong," and said that he had not yet met English because she did not show up for work on Monday.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT, SIGNED BY BILL CLINTON*.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Review_Act
Congressional Review Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Congressional Review Act (CRA)[1] is a law that was enacted by the United States Congress under House Speaker Newt Gingrich as Section 251 of the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104–121) and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on March 29, 1996.[2][3] The law empowers Congress to review, by means of an expedited legislative process, new federal regulations issued by government agencies and, by passage of a joint resolution, to overrule a regulation.[4] Once a rule is thus repealed, the CRA also prohibits the reissuing of the rule in substantially the same form or the issuing of a new rule that is substantially the same "unless the reissued or new rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the joint resolution disapproving the original rule" (5 U.S. Code § 801(b)(2)). Congress has a window of time lasting 60 legislative days (i.e., days that Congress is actually in session, rather than simple calendar days) to disapprove of any given rule by simple majority vote; otherwise, the rule will go into effect at the end of this period.[5][6]
Prior to 2017, the CRA had only been successfully invoked once to overturn a rule (in 2001; see below).[7] In January 2017, however, with a new Republican president, the Republican-controlled 115th Congress began passing a series of disapproval resolutions to overturn a variety of rules issued under the Obama administration. Ultimately, fourteen of these resolutions were passed and signed into law; a fifteenth resolution was passed by the House but failed in the Senate. Because of the shortness of legislative sessions during the 114th Congress, the 115th Congress was able to target rules passed by the Obama administration as far back as May 2016.[8]

On May 16, 2017, Senators Cory Booker and Tom Udall introduced S. 1140, a bill to repeal the Congressional Review Act.[9]



THE INVISIBLE HAND, NOT OF THE MARKET BUT OF RUSSIA MAY VERY WELL BE THE ANSWER TO THE CUBA SONIC ATTACKS. THEY DEFINITELY HAVE BECOME MORE AGGRESSIVE, JUST LIKE THE HOODLUMS BEHIND THOSE “ALT-RIGHT” APPEARANCES, SINCE TRUMP WAS ELECTED IN 2016. WE WHO BELIEVE IN TRYING TO PROMOTE PEACE AND LOVE HERE MUST KEEP UP THE PRESSURE TO CONFRONT THE CONCEIT AND UNKINDNESS IN POLITICS AND SOCIETY TODAY, WHILE MANAGING TO HOLD BACK OUR OWN ANGRY REACTIONS AT THIS FRIGHTENING TIME IN OUR HISTORY. IT TAKES TWO TO FIGHT AS WELL AS TO TANGO.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uzbekistan-incident-raises-suspicions-of-russian-involvement-in-cuba-attacks/
By STEVE DORSEY CBS NEWS November 28, 2017, 12:07 PM
Uzbekistan incident raises suspicions of Russian involvement in Cuba attacks

Photograph -- FILE: U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan STATE DEPARTMENT

A newly revealed incident reported by a USAID officer who is based at the American embassy in Uzbekistan is raising suspicions Russia may have been involved and could have had a hand in bizarre attacks targeting U.S. diplomats in Cuba, according to American sources.

In September, the officer and his wife reported, according to one source familiar with the incident, what may have been at least one acoustic attack similar to those experienced by the diplomats in Havana.

Investigation into mysterious Cuba attacks "back to square one"

The first Cuba attacks began in November 2016, and the last report of an attack was in August 2017. Victims of the attacks in Cuba describe hearing a loud, high-pitched sound often described like a hiss of cicadas or crickets in unusual places—often in their homes.

The State Department declined to describe in detail the incident in Tashkent.


"We aren't going to discuss ‎every case individually," a spokesperson said.

Victims of the attacks in Cuba were diagnosed with hearing loss, brain injuries, cognitive issues and other conditions.

The source says the two suffered similar effects and were flown out of Tashkent by the State Department to be evaluated. It is unclear what further diagnosis or care they have had following their departure from Uzbekistan.

U.S. is pulling out about 60 percent of staff from Cuba

"We take seriously the health concerns of USG personnel anywhere in the world," the State Department spokesperson told CBS News. "We ensure our personnel are examined and receive appropriate treatment."

However, the State Department said no one on the U.S. staff in Tashkent has suffered similar health issues to those experienced by victims of the Cuba attacks.

"We can confirm that no personnel at the U.S. Embassy in Uzbekistan have been diagnosed with the conditions that have been observed in Cuba," the spokesperson said.

USAID, a U.S. government agency that provides foreign assistance in more than 100 countries, maintains its Uzbekistan headquarters office at the American embassy in Tashkent. Its work focuses mainly on agriculture and trade. It referred CBS News inquiries on the incident to the State Department. Although USAID is an independent agency, it works closely with the State Department.

USAID's Country Director in Tashkent Gary Robbins, referred CBS News to an embassy spokesman who offered no more details. Messages to USAID's Deputy Country Director were not returned.

The Central Asian country was once part of the USSR. It declared independence in 1991 during the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, it maintains strong ties with Russia. The two countries held joint military drills in October, their first together in 12 years. Uzbekistan is also considering re-joining the Russian-led military bloc Collective Security Treaty Organization, from which it withdrew in 2012 under long-time President Islom Karimov who died in 2016.

Russia has sought to capitalize on relations with Karimov's successor, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, at the expense of the U.S.

Now, two U.S. security sources say the September incident in Tashkent raises concerns Russia may be involved, and could have had a hand in the attacks targeting U.S. government personnel in Cuba-another country where Russia has also exerted growing influence.

"The Russians have been rebuilding their relationship—it deteriorated dramatically after the end of the Cold War," according to William Leogrande, a foreign policy professor at American University who focuses on Cuba. Now, "They have a strong presence in Cuba and an historic relationship with Cuban intelligence that might give them the kind of freedom to operate that would provide an opportunity."

Russia has denied any role in the attacks.

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova called suggestions about Russia's involvement "absurd" at a press briefing in Moscow August 31, and said "this does not help the normalization of the bilateral relations" between the U.S. and Russia.

"We are ready to help the Cuban side investigate the matter and determine the facts," she said.

The State Department refused to publicly comment on whether it would welcome Russia's involvement in the investigation into the Cuba attacks.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



THERE IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS AROUND AGE TWO, AGE EIGHT, AND THE TEEN YEARS THAT IS DISRUPTIVE OF PATTERNS THAT HAD BEEN STABLE AND LOGICAL UP TO THAT TIME. I HAVE ALWAYS ASSUMED IT WAS THE GREAT HORMONAL ONSLAUGHT, NOT ENOUGH PARENTAL CARE, NOT ENOUGH GENTLE TALKING RATHER THAN DEMANDS, BEATINGS, SHAMING AND THREATS. IN COMPUTERTHINK, NO LOVE IN, NO LOVE OUT. THAT’S A VERY DANGEROUS PATTERN.

I HAVE NO DOUBT, THOUGH, THAT THE BRAIN IS PROBABLY MAKING ITS’ FINAL GROWTH SPURT AND REORGANIZATION OF NEURONS (WHICH ALL IS TRIGGERED BY THE BARRAGE OF HORMONES), PRODUCES A PERIOD OF CHAOS. THEY ARE DEFINITELY MORE PRONE TO GETTING THEMSELVES INTO MORE SERIOUS AND MORE RIDICULOUS KINDS OF TROUBLE AT THAT AGE.

I’M PRETTY SURE THAT WHATEVER ACADEMIC EDUCATION, SIMPLE GOOD SENSE, KINDNESS, SOCIAL SKILLS, THAT WE STUFF INTO THOSE HEADS SHOULD BE SOLIDLY IN PLACE BY ABOUT 15. THEY SEEM, I THINK, TO QUESTION NOT ONLY THE POWER STRUCTURE BUT THE NATURE OF TRUTH AS TAUGHT EARLIER, ESPECIALLY IF THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARENT IS NOT A STRONG AND LOVING BOND. IF THEY HAVE FIGURED OUT BY THAT TIME THAT THEY GOT A RAW DEAL IN LIFE, THEY MAY SEEK LOVE WITH A STREET GANG AND FRY THEIR BRAINS WITH DRUGS.

I FEAR THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING IS THAT THEY ARE EMOTIONALLY READY TO MATE AND PROCREATE, AND WILL DO SO VERY SHORTLY WHETHER THE FAMILY IS READY OR NOT; BUT THEY HAVEN’T BEEN TAUGHT THE SKILLS TO REAR THE CHILD, AREN’T EMOTIONALLY AND MENTALLY HEALTHY, AND ARE UNREADY TO PROVIDE AN INCOME TO CARE FOR IT. THE RESULT IS PANIC AND DEPRESSION.

THAT’S WHY I’M SO UNHAPPY WITH THE HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM THESE DAYS. I HAVE SEEN ONE OTHER ARTICLE THE BRAIN FUNCTION AS BEING KEY TO THE CHAOS OF THAT TIME OF LIFE, AND I DON’T DOUBT IT, BUT I THINK HOW WELL PREPARED FOR LIFE THE KID IS BEFORE THE TEMPORARY IMPLOSION PERIOD WILL MAKE A DRASTIC DIFFERENCE IN THE FINAL OUTCOME. MOST OF WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IS NOT LEARNED IN COLLEGE.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2154884-teenage-brains-cant-tell-whats-important-and-what-isnt/?cmpid=ILC|NSNS|2017_webpush&utm_medium=ILC&utm_source=NSNS&utm_campaign=webpush-teen-brains
DAILY NEWS 28 November 2017
Teenage brains can’t tell what’s important and what isn’t
By Jessica Hamzelou

Teenagers may know full well how important final exams are – but that won’t stop some putting in minimal effort. This may be because their brains aren’t developed enough to properly assess how high the stakes are, and adapt their behaviour accordingly.

Adults are generally pretty good at being able to tell when a situation is worthy of extra time or concentration. Research has found that, when potential rewards or losses are higher, for example, adults will perform better on tasks. But this doesn’t seem to be the case for adolescents.

Catherine Insel, at Harvard University, and her team asked adolescents between the ages of 13 and 20 to play a game while lying in an fMRI brain scanner. In some rounds of the game, participants could earn 20 cents for a correct response, while an incorrect one would cost them 10 cents. But in rounds with higher stakes, correct responses were worth a dollar, and wrong answers lost the participants 50 cents.

Less-developed brains

The team found that while the older volunteers performed better in the high stakes rounds, the younger ones didn’t – their performance didn’t change in line with whether the stakes were low or high. And the older the volunteers were, the more improved their performance was. “Interestingly, the ability to adjust performance according to the stakes at play emerged gradually across adolescence,” says Insel.

When the team looked at the brain activity of the volunteers, they found that their ability to improve their performance was linked to how developed their brains were. A region called the corticostriatal network seemed to be particularly important. This is known to connect areas involved in reward to those that control behaviour, and continues to develop until we are at least 25 years old.

The more developed their corticostriatal network was, the better volunteers were able to boost their performance on high stakes tasks, says Insel.

Risky behaviour

The findings explain why some adolescents are so nonchalant when it comes to risky behaviours, says Kathrin Cohen Kadosh, at the University of Surrey, UK. Teenagers are much more likely to drive dangerously, for instance, especially when one of their friends is nearby.

Stefano Palminteri, at the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris, France, thinks schools should reconsider the way they test performance in adolescents. “This study suggests it’s not a good idea to evaluate school performance in a single final exam,” he says. A better idea would be to use a variety of smaller tests, conducted throughout the year.

It’s not all bad news for teens, adds Palminteri. “We could look at this the other way around,” he says. “Adolescents put the same amount of effort into tasks that aren’t ‘important’, and start to prefer hobbies to school.”

“It could be a good thing, allowing teenagers to learn complex social skills, for example,” he says.

Journal reference: Nature Communications, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01369-8

Read more: Revealed: The teenage brain upgrades that occur before adulthood; Why teenagers really do need an extra hour in bed