MANY GOOD WORDS ON THE COASTAL “ELITE” LIBERALS

THESE ARE ALL GREAT ANSWERS IN MY VIEW ON THE TWO PARTIES, THOUGH THE VERY LAST ONE IS BEST. PS: WE NEED AT LEAST ONE OTHER PARTY FOR PROGRESSIVE INDEPENDENTS.
LUCY WARNER
JUNE 1, 2018


https://www.quora.com/What-would-Coastal-Liberals-like-to-hear-from-the-Republican-Party-that-would-earn-their-vote
What would "Coastal Liberals" like to hear from the Republican Party that would earn their vote?

41 Answers

Blake Wondrasch
Blake Wondrasch, Worked as a Political Organizer, avid student of history.

Updated Dec 31, 2017 · Author has 148 answers and 269.7k answer views

Actions speak louder than words. There is very little the Republican Party could SAY that would ever earn many liberal's votes because, through their actions, Republican politicians have proven their commitment to:

Racism. A large fraction of Republican policies since the “Great Flip” under LBJ (where Democrats became the party of Civil Rights and lost the South, while Republicans became the party of Racism— effectively abandoning Lincoln's legacy- and lost the North) have been specifically targeted at slowing the progress of African Americans towards true political and economic equality. Republican politicians such as Nixon and Reagan have also engaged in “dogwhistle politics”— where they use commonly understood codewords and euphemisms to covertly rile up racist sentiments…

Sexism. The Republican policies of the past 50 years have been designed to hold women back just as much as they have African Americans. Nobody who truly cares about gender equality is going to want to vote for the party that demonized the Equal Rights Amendment under Phylis Schlafly's disgustingly hypocritical leadership (as, ironically, her involvement in politics went against everything she claimed to stand for about women belonging in the home and not in politics or the workforce) or nominated Barry Goldwater (who wanted to keep women in the home). Further, the Republican Party CONTINUES to battle against Women's Rights with its attempts to control access to birth control (through health insurance laws) and abortion. The hypocrisy of a party that fights to keep women down even as it gleefully exploits the popularity or influence of women like Sarah Palin and Kellyanne Conway is disgusting.

Tribalism. One name: Donald Trump. Enough said. The Republican Party has proven its willingness to line up behind ANYONE so long as they can deliver the party an electoral victory. And they don't play fair either. Speaking of which…

Cheating. You read that right- cheating. The Republican Party has proven its willingness to outright cheat in elections wherever possible: whether through spreading dirty, underhanded lies about John Kerry's war heroism and then PAYING a group of military veterans (most of whom, ironically, never even met Kerry in Vietnam) to lie to back up those falsehoods, or through Voter Suppression- essentially a form of blatant cheating where you make opposing voters play by a different set of rules than your own supporters by changing the polling station hours where they live and ensuring they have to travel much further to vote, under-staffing and under-equipping their polling places so there are frequent delays and opposing voters have to wait in LONG lines to vote (when you have to take time off from work to vote, or you have a small child at home, this stops many people from voting at all), and racist voter ID laws- which are often disproportionately enforced on voters in districts supporting opposing candidates (especially minorities) and are combined with cutting back government office hours near where opposing voters live so they have a very difficult time obtaining a voter ID in the first place… (I still remember when I lived in a town in rural Illinois which was mostly liberal and had many minorities, but was controlled by a corrupt Republican County Clerk, the RMV was only open once a month and you had to travel more than 30 minutes by car just to get to the monthly office location- which was actually in a different town some distance away. Meanwhile more conservative, mostly white towns in the area had RMV's open normal business hours, 5 days a week for their residents…) Finally, Gerrymandering also deserves a (dis)honorable mention- though used by both parties, and providing some benefit through the “packed” districts- allowing, for instance, Black congressmen from the South, Gerrymandering is a dishonest tactic that is primarily used by the Republican Party to prevent liberals from winning as many seats in red states and to steal national majorities… A party that steals citizens’ right to equal access to the ballot based on the color of their skin or socioeconomic status (poor and minority areas are the main targets of Republican voter suppression and Gerrymandering efforts) is a despicable party of cheaters- and deserves to be ejected from office (and preferably, thrown in jail for what SHOULD be illegal acts of Voter Suppression) at the first opportunity. I say all this as a white, college-educated male from a Middle Class town (though I grew up house-poor), by the way: but I've SEEN the injustice in poor/minority communities firsthand.

Excessive Militarism. I was raised in a family with a long tradition of military service, and I was part of Army ROTC in college myself- and wanted to serve as an Army Officer for 4 years (in a medical or intel field). So I take the need to defend this country seriously. But when you go about sending our men and women in the armed forces to countless shitholes around the globe just to protect our “precious” access to foreign oil supplies, you gamble with the lives of our most selfless citizens simply for personal profit. That is NOT acceptable in my book- or that of many other liberals. Military force should ALWAYS be the option of last resort, and it's disgusting to see war-hawk conservatives biting at the bit to send US troops to every conflict zone around the world where there are natural resources to be gained. Instead, politicians should be leading us towards sustainability and reducing waste like liberal politicians aim to do. Electric Cars, not wars, are the answer to our addiction to oil (and electricity is produced mainly from burning coal instead of oil…) Recycling and innovation are the answer to our demand for foreign minerals and timber- not sending Special Forces all over Africa…

The Republican Party has a decades-long tradition of disgusting policy positions at this point, and actions to back those positions up.

There is nothing they can SAY that will win over liberal voters- there would have to be a complete turnover of their leadership (INCLUDING the removal from office of Donald Trump— for whom there are already more than sufficient grounds for Impeachment) and a complete 180 on many policy positions by the new leadership for most liberals to seriously consider voting for Republicans.

Republicans may be able to peel off a few Working Class moderates in Swing States who feel abandoned by the foolhardy Democratic leadership that can't seem to understand that policies that help and protect the Working Class on an economic level are their only real path to electoral victory (I stand with groups like The Justice Democrats and Bernie Sanders’ Our Revolution here- what the Democratic Party needs are real PROGRESSIVE politics- not more token diversity and bowing to special interests), but Republicans will NEVER seriously chip away at the liberal Democratic base so long as they continue with their disgusting politics- and they will CONTINUE to lose the Popular Vote in elections even if they pick up seats in Congress and win the Electoral College thanks to Gerrymandering, Voter Suppression, and efforts to convince liberal voters in “red” states that their votes don't matter… (they do- and *should* matter even more. What we BADLY need in this country is a National Popular Vote for the presidency and a switch to a parliamentary system for Congress that gives seats to the minority parties based on their proportion of the popular vote in a state…)

748 Views · View Upvoters

Kelly Kinkade
Kelly Kinkade, voted in every election since 1988, except the one I missed because my son was in the hospital

Answered Dec 15, 2017 · Author has 7.7k answers and 38.3m answer views
I’m a “third coast” liberal, and the things that I need to hear from a Republican before I will consider voting for him or her are:

Full support for equality under law in every respect for religious minorities, LGBT persons, persons of color, and women. This includes, without limitation, a solidly pro-choice position on abortion.

Acceptance that human activity impacts the global ecology and the need for humans to take action to mitigate the damage human activity causes to the global ecology.

A recognition that any solution to the undocumented immigrant problem is going to require allowing the vast bulk of undocumented immigrants to normalize their status in a manner that affords most them a reasonable path to citizenship and which does not require them to depart the United States.

An agreement to continue to support family reunification as a principal purpose of immigration policy (which means a rejection of the widespread call for an end to so-called “chain migration”).

A clear rejection of taxation policies that shift any significant portion of the tax burden any further onto the working poor or the middle class.

A clear absence of jingoistic or tribalistic behavior.

A balanced attitude toward law enforcement, including a recognition that law enforcement needs to be constantly held accountable for their behavior as well as their effectiveness, while at the same time not trying to use law enforcement or the criminal justice system to solve problems that are more readily solved through community support programs such as health care, education, or social services. Any hint of a “tough on crime” mentality is a dealbreaker for me.

An absolute rejection of privatization of intrinsically governmental functions, especially law enforcement, fire protection, and correctional facilities.

There must be no whiff whatsoever of any interest, desire, or plan to use ballot access as a means to manipulate election outcomes. Must not support voter ID in any shape, form, or measure, or any other scheme intended to make it more difficult for citizens to vote.

Must not support any change to the long-established doctrine of unlimited birthright citizenship.

Must not support laws intended to “bust” unions. Must support the right of workers to bargain collectively. Must not support laws that force unions to accept freeloaders.

I don’t expect to get many takers. I haven’t voted for a Republican in a long time.

9.1k Views · View Upvoters
Promoted by Spokeo
Find a person by phone number. It's quick and easy.
Get instant results on the person's name, address, online profile, and other public information.
Start now at spokeo.com

Bruce Epstein
Bruce Epstein, Born in the US, lived 20 years in another country
Answered Nov 16, 2017 · Author has 389 answers and 585.6k answer views

I am an Independent progressive (meaning that I don’t align with either of the two main political parties — and wondering why everyone assumes that political positions equal political party allegiance). When I was younger, I found myself 50% in agreement with each party’s positions; today it’s 50% for one and 0% for the other.

What has changed? Well, back then we all agreed on the basic issues: how to make the economy strong; providing for everyone’s well-being, education, and security; and ensuring that everyone had equal opportunity to do so. The two parties agreed on the questions, but had different solutions: government or private sector. (Neither one alone can do the entire job.)

Today, we have one party literally questioning whether we are still entitled to equal opportunity, based on superficial criteria that I thought had been settled long ago.

So, my answer to the question, which may echo several others already in this thread, is when the GOP drops the dog-whistle messages to white Christian cis straight men and embraces the other 75% of the country as well, then maybe I’ll listen again.

518 Views · View Upvoters
+9

Jerry Cupat
Jerry Cupat, voted in US elections since 2016

Updated Dec 12, 2017 · Author has 217 answers and 78.5k answer views
Original question: What would "Coastal Liberals" like to hear from the Republican Party that would earn their vote?

I can’t speak for the East Coast, so I’ll leave that to other Quorans. However, the West Coast Republicans should be following what I’m calling the “Faulconer Plan”, named after the Mayor of San Diego, Kevin Faulconer, who is the nation’s only big-city Republican mayor.

Here are some points that Faulconer suggested for the California Republican Party:

Embrace ethnic and religious minorities and the LGBTQ community
Encourage legal immigration
Build stronger ties with Mexico
Combat climate change

Let’s be real. Trumpists will never win us over, ever. Faulconer is not a Trumpist and has occasionally criticized Trump’s policies from the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement to the travel ban. The distance that he maintains from the national Republican Party and the Trumpists earns him a small nod from me.

My problem with the Republican Party is that there are these so-called purity tests. You have to be loyal to Donald Trump. As I said, if you’re a Trump loyalist, you’re not going to win elections in San Diego or Seattle. If you are a liberal Republican and not a Trumpist, there is a decent chance of victory for you.

Faulconer lays out vision for 'New California Republicans'

California Republicans ‘shouldn’t be a carbon copy’ of national GOP, San Diego mayor says

714 Views · View Upvoters
Michael Feely
Michael Feely, Lived in the United States most of my life, know some of its history.

Answered Oct 31, 2017 · Author has 3.2k answers and 1.8m answer views

Acknowledgement of things which are true, and repudiation of things that are false.

Trickle-down economics has had little or no beneficial effect in the post-Cold War economy. Tax cuts do not axiomatically create job growth.

Manufacturing jobs are being lost for many reasons, including offshoring, improved efficiency and automation. China and Mexico did not “steal” any jobs, though.

Throwing more money at the Pentagon doesn’t inherently make the military better, more efficient or more effective, any more than throwing more money at the schools makes kids inherently become better educated.

Anthropogenic global warming is real. Pizzagate is not real.

Obama is not a Kenyan Muslim anti-colonialst socialist. Trump is not a successful, charitable Christian businessman.

Bernard Baruch, in 1950, said, "Every man has a right to his own opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts." The Republican Party has been trying to prove that isn’t so ever since, and Kellyanne Conway’s “alternative facts” only became such a meme because it so perfectly encapsulated this particular aversion to inconvenient truths.

I might agree or disagree with Republican Party policies grounded in an understanding of facts. But I repudiate entirely a Republican Party that considers facts things to be ignored, suppressed, circumvented, or weaponized, in the service of ideological narrative.

Original question:

What would "Coastal Liberals" like to hear from the Republican party that would earn their vote?

809 Views · View Upvoters
Liam Quinn II
Liam Quinn II, studies Cognitive Science & Biology at University of Georgia (2021)
Answered Nov 15, 2017 · Author has 220 answers and 757.4k answer views
The Republican party could win the votes of a decent amount of liberals if they centered their party around Libertarian Values.

The socially liberal aspect would bring in a variety of liberals that are more focused on social equality than fiscal policy.

This could potentially be a change we see in the near future being that atheism and doubting the existence of god are becoming more prevalent in our society.


It’s hard to find specific graphs that illustrate the trend, but the reality is that the republican party does significantly well with white, married, christians.

All three being categories that are decreasing over time.

Based on this trend the Republican party will be forced to accept more socially liberal positions in the future that will ultimately lead to a complete change in the political landscape.

There are Liberals that support more fiscal conservatism but that simply cannot support the Republican parties outlook on social issues such as marriage equality, abortion rights, and gender equality,

Stage a Republican party that truly supports the freedom and liberty of all people, that moves away from the religious dogmatism, and you’ve got a republican party that can win over Liberal voters.

Now I’m not saying this is the majority of liberals, not at all, but this is the Republican parties best chance of winning over Liberals. Aside from that there isn’t a chance in hell that Liberals would ever come to support socially conservative and fiscally conservative politicians. It just goes entirely against their world view.

As time goes on more and more Americans are identifying as socially Liberal. The Republican party could potentially catch on to this and win over new voters.

868 Views · View Upvoters
Sandra Sidney
Sandra Sidney, 30 years as an engaged citizen of the US.

Answered Dec 11, 2017 · Author has 122 answers and 57.1k answer views
I’m an east coaster and a liberal.

Most of my life I was “unenrolled” (independent). Finally I had to acknowledge that Republicans were not headed in any direction I wanted. However there were good things there a long time ago. So if Republicans wanted people like me back, they would have to:

Reverse policy on issues of global climate change, commit to re-joining the Paris accords at least, and propose/implement a serious, well-rounded, and long term plan to create sustainable and non-polluting energy sources. I think we would all like people to continue to live well on this planet and in this country.

Reverse policy on approving exploitation of public lands and on reducing or selling off federal lands held in trust for the public.

Go ahead and review or streamline environmental regulations, but with a huge emphasis on health and environmental aspects. Do not abrogate our public laws and protections!

Downsize from our out of control global military engagement; focus our military spending on domestic defense. Not saying don’t spend money, I am saying 3x every other country should be enough.

Fully embrace separation of church and state.

Return to Republican fundamentals on good government and public fiscal responsibility.

“Do it” or move aside on areas where we needed a new legislative framework decades ago: Immigration, SS/Medicare/Medicaid, Deficit reduction

Support sensible gun-control

Stop overloading business with things that should be a public responsibility (medical insurance and coverage, retirement savings) and support single payer. Let business do what business does better!

Fully fund for the long term a basic economic “safety net” AND fully fund public education/college/voc ed.

If they did all that I’d be all in.

3.1k Views · View Upvoters
Marc Ross
Marc Ross, former Finance Manager at WestRock

Answered Dec 29, 2017 · Author has 621 answers and 310.2k answer views
First, my answer is independent of Trump. I have problems with some of Trumps words that are independent of the GOP. Of course, I have several issues with the GOP, but the first thing that I would need is that every issue isn’t a discrete binary outcome.

When you speak to republicans, they love to call Obama a socialist. Ask the details and they point out that Obama wanted to raise taxes. In actuality, Obama wanted to let tax cuts on people making over $250K expire as scheduled. That would have raised the top tax rate from 35% to 39.6%. I personally think the difference between capitalism and communism is more than a 4.5% difference in taxes. On the issue of abortion, there are those on the right who often like to paint their opponents as pro-abortion. There are no people in favor of compulsory abortion anytime during the entire pregnancy. The Democrats are trying to raise the national minimum wage to $15. Most rural places in the country can’t support a minimum wage that high. However, the loudest voices on the right aren’t arguing against a raise or for a smaller raise. The loudest voices are arguing for abolishing the minimum wage. If I want a minimum wage of $9 per hour, I’m closer to $15 than I am to $0. I am not a big fan of the individual mandate in healthcare. The GOP has been promising a better replacement for the last 6 years.

I know that on most issues, most Republicans don’t take those hard line positions on every issue. However, it seems like in many ways Republicanism is about who is the furthest to the right on most issues. John McCain is now considered a moderate because he wanted Obamacare to be both repealed and replaced. It’s better to be tough with a nuclear armed Iran today than to have Iran without the bomb at least until the 2030’s. The GOP is supposedly color blind, but will stand by a senate candidate wistful for slavery rather than risk tax cuts for the president. It’s that fight at all costs attitude that needs to go to win my support.

737 Views · View Upvoters
Simon Kinahan
Simon Kinahan, Product Engineering Group Director at Cadence Design Systems (2011-present)
Answered Dec 16, 2017 · Author has 2.5k answers and 3m answer views

The Republican Party as as tone-deaf when it comes to people who live in big cities on the coast as the Democrats are to people who live in rural Appalachia. If Republicans actually want Pacific and North Eastern (and Upper Mid-Western, for the most part) voters to take an interest in them, they need to have policies for those people.

Lots of the answers here are unrealistic because they want the nativist and religious fundamentalist parts of the Republican Party to shut up and go away. While that would be nice, that’s about as realistic as expecting the public sector unions and black nationalists to do the same. Lets lower our sights, the Republicans could try actually having policies for the urban population. For example:

Healthcare reform. Republican healthcare policy right now is limited to “lets just screw with that because our voters don’t actually care”. Healthcare reform is for mid-income people in expensive areas. There’s lots of things the Republican Party could do that would make ideological sense for them - they don’t have to endorse Obamacare, let alone universal healthcare. But right now, they have a key constituency (relatively rich people in cheap areas) who just hate Obamacare and another (racists and other assholes) who just hate anything Obama did.

Taxes. Big cities need high taxes, because they need lots of services. Heavily urbanized states often collect those taxes at a state level. Right now those heavily urbanized states also contribute more in federal taxes and that gets transferred to rural areas. And what is Republican tax policy? Cut taxes and make up most of the shortfall by removing deductions that apply mostly in high income areas.

Gun control. Yes, okay, we get it. Some of us anyway. Lots of people like guns. People like hunting. Hell, I would probably like hunting. The outdoors and meat - what’s not to like? Some people genuinely need guns for self defense. But in cities guns are a problem. The possibility of getting shot doesn’t help anyone with anything, least of all help reduce crime. The idea that, for example, public schools should not be gun free, just sounds insane. So can we let cities set their own gun policy, please?

289 Views · View Upvoters
Alan Lapp
Alan Lapp, 20+ years in political advertising

Answered Nov 14, 2017 · Author has 727 answers and 316.6k answer views
I was raised by midwestern conservatives that grew up during the Great Depression & went to university during WWII. I think it’s fair to call them Eisenhower Republicans.

Basically, I was raised to be financially conservative and socially progressive, as was the case with the Republican party in the mid-20th century. The funny thing is that my beliefs now are further left than the current position of the Democrats!

The Republican party machine has many moving parts. There are official organizations such as the RNC; there is functionally one centralized media outlet, Fox News; and there is a constellation of social media outlets.

There are aspects of the political system which, IMHO, Republicans exploit to a greater degree than Dems: there are corporate-funded think-tanks who produce research which is biased to the right, then used to support right-wing legislation; there are PACs which act as monetary hubs which concentrate individual donations into large parcels of money, which they use to promote their specific agenda to , and there are big-money donors, both corporate and private.

And of course… the base.

So, just limiting the change to the party is kind of unrealistic. All of the above would need to be examined.

First, I’d need a public acknowledgement that the GOP has been lying about tax and economic policy for decades, and a sincere pledge to quit lying to the base.

I’d need to actually witness at least 2 presidential campaigns of changed behavior before I’d fully trust the GOP.

Second, the racism HAS to go. Non-negotiable. Since the Southern Strategy, the GOP has made racism its stock in trade.

Third, the GOP would absolutely have to commit to substantial, non-partisan, patriotic (meaning putting the well-being of the country first) campaign finance reform. That entails: overturning Citizens United; making PACs unable to aggregate campaign donations; and capping donation amounts (as a good start).

Fourth, quit appealing to the basest, lowest, most vulgar aspects of the base. Quit fear-mongering. Quit telling the base what to think. Encourage the base to broaden it’s media consumption with neutral sources. Encourage the base to fact-check it’s politicians. Encourage the base to question authority.

Fifth, bring all the policies in line with the values. I am utterly sick and tired of the cognitive dissonance and hypocritical bullshit coming out of the GOP.

There are SO many examples: being pro-life while cutting school funding. Being “christian” while bombing brown people. Transgender bathroom laws while defending pedo Roy Moore — apparently, it’s worse for kids to see a penis in a dress than it is for kids to be statutory rape victims.

195 Views · View Upvoters
Sean Miner
Sean Miner, From conservative to leftist without much changing opinions

Answered Nov 16, 2017 · Author has 417 answers and 87.7k answer views
I imagine the GOP could win over quite a few if it:

returned to the party’s mid-20th-century ideal of keeping a balanced budget — by means of spending cuts where necessary, and tax increases when necessary — rather than its current twin values of obsessively cutting taxes/removing regulations on the wealthiest individuals and businesses, and increasing military spending;

stopped pushing policies that most negatively impact already-disadvantaged people, such as mass incarceration and privatized prisons (though, note, this has big Democrat support as well), and their current tax plan;
stopped promoting the fallacy that “Christian values” (which hardly ever line up with the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth anyway) should be enshrined in law; and

return to spending money on (secular) public education and public infrastructure works as the country did in the early to mid 20th century.

I don’t see how these can happen, however, given that the Democrats have largely taken up these positions as they’ve become the nation’s centrist party.

125 Views · View Upvoters
Lauren Goddard
Lauren Goddard, Entrepreneur

Answered Nov 14, 2017
Right now the most popular Governor in the USA is a Republican from the East Coast liberal state of Massachusetts, Charlie Baker. Massachusetts has had five Republican Governors out of the last six, although the State House always retains a Democratic majority. The voters are for the most part highly educated and involved and they realize that a pocketbook check on the State House is in our best interest.

Governor Baker is not a defender of Donald Trump. He is, to his credit, opposed to most of Trump's actions and views. He has no problem stating so. He is pro-choice and pro human rights. He is ethical and fair and reacts quickly in getting issues fixed after the facts are vetted.

Meanwhile in Massachusetts, the economy is thriving, there is very low unemployment, healthcare access isn't an issue, construction is booming statewide. Many retailers must pay a starting rate above the State minimum wage ($11) to attract workers. Higher education continues to thrive and the public schools are rated best in the nation. US News & World Report voted Massachusetts the best state to live in the USA.

If a Republican is trying to win over Democrats then Charlie is the man they should emulate, not merely in words but in honest actions.

5.8k Views · View Upvoters
Manuel Lombardero
Manuel Lombardero, M.S. Statistics (1990)

Answered Nov 21, 2017
At first, this seems impossible considering that traditionally the Republican Party has represented everything I’m against: protecting the rich, oppressing the poor and immigrants, etc.

And I want to stay realistic as I attempt a serious answer to this question. I.e., it is not like suddenly the Republican Party is going to reverse it’s platform 100%.

So, within the confines of what a Republican Party might be willing to do, even if it is a ‘just maybe’, perhaps follow-up on the fake populism that Trump has brought with his presidency, but this time make it less fake and more real, and still keep it consistent with Republican values…so maybe:

“America First”: solidify the repudiation of the trade treaties designed to benefit the big corporate players (NAFTA, WTO, etc). This would benefit workers at large, regardless of race.

Abolish minimum wage and most social programs, and replace them with UBI, short of Unconditional Basic Income, which pays every human being a stipend just for being a human being in a modern developed society. The Republican appeal would be in the reduction of the size of government bureaucracy that runs these programs. The stipend would have to be in the order of 15K to 20K a year, depending on the state, city, etc.

Another “America First”: help small and medium-sized business by enacting single-payer health care system. This would also play on another Republican theme, that of “freedom”, whereby workers would be free to change jobs without fear of losing their coverage.

These ideas are bold, extremely helpful to most voters, and best of all, it is not likely that the Democrats will champion them as the Democratic Party is totally corporate controlled these days, and corporate America would not benefit from any of the above.

90 Views · View Upvoters
Joshua Eric Turcotte
Joshua Eric Turcotte, studied Computer Science at University of Maine
Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 815 answers and 243k answer views

To win over a social liberal (not to be confused with classical or neo liberals who are their opposites) today, you’d have to do a lot of things:

Fight/advocate for wiser consumerism that is less wasteful, doesn’t rely on slave/abused labor, isn’t produced in toxic ways, is well tested to be safe for consumers, et cetera.

Fight/advocate for equal pay and equal opportunity and equal respect for all genders, all ethnicities, all religions, all wage levels, and all languages. People are people are people are people and all deserve the same chances and the same forgivenesses that white people take for granted.

Fight/advocate for life in general, understanding that the paper-thin ecosystem that made us is being unmade by us, and that we probably can’t survive without it… that it’s our responsibility to not wreck the place.

Be willing to make mistakes AND own up to them and forgive others their mistakes in return

Be willing to speak your mind AND then listen to someone else speak theirs

Be willing to study complex situations long enough to understand how they play out…

Oh god, there’s so many things… but I think you might find a trend in there that’s fairly easy to understand. Liberals want people to treat each other well and adopt equal parts liberties AND responsibilities. Libs, like any flawed human being, will shut you out if you attack them… but if you actually open up and talk TO them, you’ll find they’re good listeners and aim to please. They may be frustrated as all hell with you, if you’re a conservative, but they still want you to have all the best things… they just also want you to realize… you can’t expect any more for yourself than you would deny to others.

303 Views · View Upvoters
Clifton Brown
Clifton Brown, Registered Nurse - ICU and Emergency

Answered Dec 15, 2017
Political parties are merely entities that exist to build consensus and get candidates elected. They really don’t stand for much of anything. The major positions of both parties have evolved considerably over the years.

It is impossible to imagine the Republican Party producing a man such as Teddy Roosevelt nowadays. Likewise, the Democratic Party, which today prides itself on standing for civil rights, was the home of a large number of avowed racists through the first half of the twentieth century.

The last 40–50 years has seen a rightward pull on all of American politics to the point where there really isn’t a true “left” anymore. Many American Democrats would be considered center or even center-right if they were in Europe.

As it stands today, we currently have the choice between a centrist party and an off-the-rails extreme right wing party. I had been a lifelong Republican until 2010. Nowadays, it would be difficult for me to imagine voting for a Republican under any circumstances.

So to answer your question, for me to vote Republican would require a nearly complete transformation of the GOP. That is certainly possible if we are talking about a time frame of 20+ years. Under the current circumstances however, the GOP is miles away from where I stand on a great many issues and it is impossible to see myself voting Republican again anytime soon.

A good start would be to disavow the bullshitters on FOX, Breitbart, Drudge, etc. It would be nice to hear them forcefully denounce the racists and religious fundamentalists that currently make up a good chunk of their base. But honestly, until they start losing elections regularly and they are forced to reconstruct the party, that’s not going to happen.

541 Views · View Upvoters
Anne Agard
Anne Agard, community college teacher

Updated Dec 3, 2017 · Author has 3.6k answers and 1.4m answer views
It’s hard to imagine what could accomplish this.

For most of my lifetime, the Republican party has existed solely for the enrichment of the rich. They have persuaded the working poor of middle America that they represent their interests through a truly impressive feat of political propaganda that I really can’t quite fathom. Phony hayseed accents, a hypocritical alliance with evangelical Christianity—apparently that is all it took.

They would have to resume their 19th century reform party role. They would have to uphold Roe vs. Wade and work to reverse Citizens United. They would have to support a single payer health care system. They would have to protect unions. They would have to admit that nearly everything they have done since Eisenhower left office was a big mistake.

And they would have to admit that they obstructed Obama at every turn because he is black, deliberately cashed in on Russian rumor mill garbage about Hillary Clinton, and stole the last election through that tactic, through gerrymandering, and by obstructing the voting rights of poor and minorities.

290 Views · View Upvoters
Al Nelson
Al Nelson, Voting since the '70's

Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 4.6k answers and 6.8m answer views
12 or 15 years of really good and reasonable, fact-based policy suggestions (to undo 20 years of craziness and lies). Long term, conservative conservation of environment, economy, infrastructure, education. Surprising good, new ideas, instead of the same old retreads for the last century. A break from Tea Party idiots, hateful fascists, gender craziness and religion. A willingness to return to a tax table that pays our bills.

Not going to happen, is it?

3.4k Views · View Upvoters
David W. Budd
David W. Budd, Member, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Answered Nov 14, 2017 · Author has 1.6k answers and 1.1m answer views
Let’s be perfectly honest - the answer is the obverse of “what would rural conservatives like to hear from the Democratic Party that would earn their vote?”

It’s essentially to abandon their core policies and views and adopt those that are held by the Democrats.

If we set to the side ad hominem (that the GOP are racist or hate women or want to get rid of immigrants), and look at the answers others give, a pattern emerges.

They want the GOP to embrace:

more open borders - that is, to bring in even more than the million or so immigrants to the US that are already allowed in (the US has now historically high levels of its population that were born outside its borders, even after the country has allegedly “moved to the extreme right.”) A large, large number of the newcomers have limited skills, low levels of education, and are arriving just as automation is really starting to eliminate the low-skill jobs that they are seeking.

Why? Because the newcomers overwhelmingly vote Democrat. It is a simple matter of fact that without the virtual transformation of America since 1965, the Democrats would not have anywhere near the level of political power that they do now. Demographic shifts all by themselves have made California perhaps the most reliably Democratic state in the country.

Why on earth would the Republicans accelerate Democratic control of the country?

Oh, because the donor class love the downward pressure that this situation puts on wages. So, despite the rhetoric of the GOP (and it is ugly - the only native-born American in my household is my son, so I get it), they are very much not “anti-immigrant.” This is theatre.

A larger social welfare state. I agree that tax cuts are not a panacea, and that right now, it’s nothing short of idiotic that the Republicans and Donald Trump - following the own-goal debacle of health care “reform,” have turned to tax cuts as their next item. Something no one really thinks is important now, aside from the corporations.

But do we really need more spending? On schools? We spend more on education than almost any OECD nation, with very poor results. I am with the liberals that it’s ridiculous that we spend so much on health care with such poor results - the same principle applies to our schools. We need to find out what is really wrong and fix that, not just pour more money into the trash.

Reduced military spending and aggression? Amen, but the one idea that Trump floated that made sense, to stop wasting money on NATO, was met with immediate opposition from the Democrats. The Democrats want us to cut back on the military, but at the same time maintain our commitments in Europe and Asia.

It doesn’t work that way. I’m a right-winger, living in California, and I would *love* to hear that the US is going to close its huge bases in Germany, Japan, and Korea, bring the soldiers home and discharge many of them. I don’t see that happening. We are not going to hear any more stories about soldiers being killed in Niger, because they are not going to be there.

Given that the coastal liberals already have a party that pushes their ideas, why would we want two parties that are more or less carbon copies?

I am assuredly not a Republican, mainly because (as others point out) they are largely confused and obtuse (at best) or dishonest and hypocritical (at worst). But I am not about to vote for the Democrats, and I would not want the Democrats to become Republicans.

What we really need is two parties offering opposing, honest views. Right now, we’ve got zero.

418 Views · View Upvoters
George Alvarez
George Alvarez, works at PricewaterhouseCoopers
Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 1.1k answers and 219.4k answer views
Earn.

Boy, you said that perfectly. See, that’s the thing. So many liberals feel that taxes should be high, but not on them. For example, today’s per capita Federal spending is about $14,500 per person. For a family of 4, it means they should be paying Federal taxes of about $58,000 per year, and on average, maybe state taxes of about another $20,000 or so, conservatively. So that’s $78,000 per year that they should be paying today.

Consider that these people want even more government services, not less. So, for the sake of argument, let’s call that 20% more government spending. That’s about $96,000 of annual government spending for each liberal family of four. Let’s round that up to $100K to make the math easy.

I don’t know how many of our liberal Quoran friends already pay that kind of money, or are prepared to pay that kind of money for what they want, but I’m willing to bet the number is very few. I’m willing to bet that most can’t afford to come near paying that kind of money. I’d be willing to bet that most liberal Democrats don’t even earn that kind of money.

What’s the alternative? To spend other people’s money, of course.

So, how does the Republican party EARN their votes? By giving them more free public services than the Democrats will, and by making other people pay for it.

That’s the only way to get it done, and that’s why it will never happen. There’s already a party that will pander to these people without making them face the truth. If it was up to me, the amount of money that people are short, this year and lifetime, would be an item on their tax returns that they would have to initial every year when they file. Why? Because as smart as most liberals claim to be, I’m also willing to bet that they have no idea about this statistic.

51 Views · View Upvoters
Adam Boyd
Adam Boyd
Answered Dec 10, 2017

Nothing. The voices of the last few remaining Republicans that put bipartisan politics over their own self interest (who might have a chance at my vote) are being washed out by an extreme, Neoconservative movement that has been weaponized by Bannon, Trump, Conway and all of their corrupt cronies. They are systematically dismantling any credibility our country might have regained after the failures and miscalculations of the previous Republican Administration. Hell, I can even somewhat reconcile the Counter-Terrorism rabbit hole that the Bush Administration threw us into. What I can’t reconcile is publicly standing behind an ACCUSED CHILD MOLESTER. And the fact that the Republican party, as a whole, doesn’t have the backbone to fight this abhorrent position means that they have crossed a line that they can never return from.

994 Views · View Upvoters
Rebecca Romano
Rebecca Romano, a casual follower of politics

Answered Nov 13, 2017 · Author has 1k answers and 725.8k answer views
If the party had changed enough that Bernie Sanders might decide to run as a republican than I might decide to vote republican. I find most republican polices to be terrible, being mostly they just care about using the government to control you all the while saying they don’t want the government to control anyone, like they want to ban abortion, refuse to legalize drugs, want to punish women for having sex, want to keep poor people poor and so on and so on. The only time they want government out of things is when some business can profit off it. So as you can see I’m not a fan of the republican party or their policies. So get new polices and I might vote for them.

330 Views · View Upvoters
Douglas Dea
Douglas Dea
Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 5.1k answers and 4.4m answer views
Original question: “What would "Coastal Liberals" like to hear from the Republican party that would earn their vote?”

Nothing.

The Republican party is now an extremist party. They’ve moved so far rightward they are in libertarian/alt-right territory. There’s virtually no way they will earn my vote in my lifetime. If they work really hard they might be able to move back toward being a center-right party, like Eisenhower in the 50s. If they did they might earn my grudging respect (but not my vote.) But I very much doubt they will even be able to do that in the next 30 years.

Die-hard conservatives of the recent past such as William F. Buckley Jr. and Ronald Reagan would be ashamed of what the current Republican party has become.

2.6k Views · View Upvoters
David Savage
David Savage, unapologetic coastal progressive

Answered Nov 9, 2017
“We understand and appreciate that you are the engines of economic growth and subsidize most of the rest of the country with your tax dollars.”

“We recognize that you are patriots, in some ways more patriotic than those who simply wrap themselves in the flag”

“You’ve been right on this whole climate change thing for years, and we’ll work to address the threat”

And lastly, most importantly, a sincere “We’re sorry” would do a lot to generate goodwill.

146 Views · View Upvoters
Gregory Walz-Chojnacki
Gregory Walz-Chojnacki, former Former Alderman (2012-2016)
Answered Oct 30, 2017
I’m a “mid-coaster” and I’d say the three most important things I’d need to hear are:

The market doesn’t solve all problems, not everything — including government — should be run like a business

government is more responsive to the public than corporations, and has a responsibility to check the worst impulses of capitalism; too big to fail is too big to be left unregulated.

We don’t have all the answers. We won’t operate in the same scorched earth way that Mitch McConnell (for example) has operated but will listen to and cooperate with the elected officials who represent the other roughly half of the citizenry.

Of course, I’d have to to more than hear this. I’d have to see it, too.

110 Views · View Upvoters
Robert Taylor
Robert Taylor, I am only "progressive" if your Overton window is way too far to the right.
Answered Dec 18, 2017 · Author has 1.2k answers and 267.7k answer views
Policies that are based on math, history, science, fact, logic, and reason.

Policies designed for the long-term benefit of everyone rather than the short-term benefit of a few.

A repudiation of hate, racism, sexism, and bigotry.

Empathy for the poor that yields action, not just lip service.

31 Views · View Upvoters
Bruce Killingsworth
Bruce Killingsworth

Answered Dec 17, 2017 · Author has 347 answers and 31.3k answer views
In general, I’d like to hear that genuine compromise is acceptable (and I don’t mean compromise between moderate Republicans and Tea Party Republicans, but compromise with actual liberal philosophy) and that disagreement with conservative policies and politicians is not unpatriotic. In specific, I’d like to hear that universal healthcare is worth a try since so many other nations and governments have had some degree of success with it, I’d like to hear that a plan for education involves free tuition at college levels - for the same reason as healthcare. And I think what Republicans need to address more seriously for me to take them seriously is the on-going and impending consequences of climate change; and that these three things - healthcare, education, and the environment, when balanced on a scale against capitalist profits and property rights, are most important to leaving a sound living space for future generations.

59 Views
Jerry Mc Kenna
Jerry Mc Kenna, I have voted in the US since 1972
Answered Nov 14, 2017 · Author has 5.8k answers and 1.7m answer views
As long as the Republicans consider themselves as ‘conservatives’ first, they will not get the vote of coastal liberals, or any liberals for that matter.

When I first voted, I voted for East Coast Republicans like William Cahill. When Reagan ran the center of gravity of the party moved South and West. There used to be a phrase ‘Rockefeller Republican’, that was mostly used to others to criticize moderate Republicans. The idea that there must be a single conservative ideology in the GOP has created a winning alliance but it is not an idea that creates good government.

The conservative movement has destroyed the Republican party that existed when I started voting. So, I vote Democratic, if the GOP could move back to the center it would get my vote.

1 View
Jack Noel
Jack Noel, Retired executive
Answered Oct 31, 2017 · Author has 6.8k answers and 4.3m answer views
The question is, What would "Coastal Liberals" like to hear from the Republican party that would earn their vote?

It appears there are still many people who don’t understand what the current “conservative / liberal” divide is actually about.

The situation: is one where both sides are absolutely committed to their respective beliefs. Furthermore, there are two distinctly different personality types opposing each other.

No one declared that should be so, it’s a natural division in every society but in the United States both parties have “helped” because both parties work hard to attract “their type” of supporter and of course the two personality types self-sort from there.

There is nothing either party can say to any supporter of the other party that will “make things all better” except for one thing. That is: a thorough and relentless return to joining together as human beings and as Americans. That will have to be done over the heads of both parties. In fact, both parties should be disbanded. Something new, human and American must take their place.

181 Views
Harry Hache
Harry Hache, studied Mathematics & Music at San Diego State University

Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 1.6k answers and 1.3m answer views
Now I’m a “Coastal Liberal” - I thought I was a progressive neo-fascist liberal. It’s a new day, I guess!

What would *I* like to hear from the GOP to change my mind about them?

Stop being the party only of the rich and ignorant
Start being the party of science and reason
Stop celebrating greed and military violence like they are virtues
Start including people who aren’t Caucasian, Christian or Jewish.
Stop encouraging Fox to lie to the American people.
And the day THOSE things happen…

498 Views · View Upvoters
Michael Coburn
Michael Coburn, I've made significant contributions to wikipedia articles on representation
Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 1.2k answers and 247.2k answer views

The Republican Party encompasses a lot of people. Among that many people, surely there are some who are intelligent while not being social Darwinists and pathological liars. The party as a whole, however, is incapable of truthfulness. So it matters not what they might say, and there is virtually nothing that I would hear from them that would earn my vote.

93 Views · View Upvoters
Don Daniels
Don Daniels, former independent writer

Answered Nov 29, 2017 · Author has 1.7k answers and 512.9k answer views
I would like to hear that they are becoming pragmatic and abandoning themes that are proved to not work, such as trickle down and supply side economics.

I would like to hear that they are acknowledging that conservative principles don’t always work. For some things, liberal and progressive policies are better, and for others such as building and maintaining public infrastructure, socialism is the only thing that works.

I would like to see them acknowledge that health care has evolved from a privilege into a right. If life is indisputably acknowledged to be a right, and depriving people of access to healthcare jeopardizes that right, then access to health care must also be deemed a right,

32 Views
Herb Santos
Herb Santos
Updated Nov 9, 2017 · Author has 488 answers and 578.7k answer views

You’d be surprised how many Republicans have served public office in these “coastal liberal” States. Mitt Romney was Governor of MA. We’ve had Pataki in NY and Guiliani as mayor in NYC. Schwarzenegger was elected governor of CA in a recall election.

It’s not the “R” or the “D” that the people in those States look at, it’s the record. We don’t go for those social conservatives who care only about abortion and gay marriage. We want people who we know can do the job.

111 Views · View Upvoters
Alan Browning
Alan Browning
Answered Nov 22, 2017 · Author has 144 answers and 31.3k answer views

All politicians lie, so hearing something would be meaningless. But if they would show some spine and impeach Trump that would win me over. A few Republicans have mentioned Trump’s unfitness for office, but most of them are afraid to say anything about him. Absolute cowards.

So if they could demonstrate a shred of independence and integrity they would win me over. The Democrats aren't great paragons of virtue in that area, so this is a real opportunity for Republicans to show what they're made of and grab some Democrat voters.

57 Views · View Upvoters
Matt Baney
Matt Baney, Lifelong republican until the 2nd Bush Administration, moving left ever since.

Answered Nov 11, 2017 · Author has 1.5k answers and 818.8k answer views
Admittance that Climate Change is happening and that we must make changes to address Climate Change, including ending subsidies for the coal and oil industries.

Recognition of the Black Lives Matter movement and admitting that there are racial and discrimination problems in this country.

Recognize that women deserve to be paid as much as men for the same work, and that women have the right to decide for themselves what is best for their body and their family.

Recognition that gun violence and gun accidents are a problem in this country and we need to do serious research into real ways to reduce that violence.

Recognition that the ultra wealthy and giant corporations are out of control, and must be reined in and controlled and regulated to protect the citizens of this country because uncontrolled growth for the top 0.5% at the expense of the bottom 90% is unsustainable.

68 Views
Linda Cason
Linda Cason, former Retired nurse 37 years work experiencied (1969-2008)

Answered Nov 15, 2017 · Author has 921 answers and 220k answer views
Nothing at all. Here’s the thing— I voted republican for years. Every campaign they talked about a lot of great things they were going to do. After the election they did the opposite of everything they promised and passed laws that took away the rights of average people. They passed laws according to the wishes of big businesses and billionaires and started wars. When Bush II sent the country into severe recession and I lost nearly all of my 401 k I decided to vote according to what they did, and not what they said. I won’t vote Republican again unless they start passing legislation that does not take from poor people and does not send rich people laughing all the way to their offshore banks.

26 Views
Brian Donovan
Brian Donovan, Chief Scientist at McVan Aerospace. (2004-present)

Answered Dec 16, 2017 · Author has 3.1k answers and 644k answer views
What would "Coastal Liberals" like to hear from the Republican party that would earn their vote?

Nothing they could say would make me vote for them. They have lied then destroyed the USA when they got elected. They would have to DO something.

31 Views · View Upvoters
Marcus Lester
Marcus Lester, Carpenter in Oregon, experience starts when you begin.

Answered Dec 29, 2017 · Author has 2.8k answers and 196.4k answer views
As a “Costal Liberal,” I would like to hear from the Republicans a reasoned argument whether there is some point at which the accumulation of wealth and power in a few hands becomes so great that the wealthy and powerful destabilize the democratic processes and democratic institutions of our Republic.

Matter of fact — I’d like to hear that conversation from any politician.

34 Views · View Upvoters
Fred Cox
Fred Cox, Electrical project director , P.E., LEED AP

Answered Oct 30, 2017
Phoenix is distant from the west coast and I’m not all that liberal, but I’ll presume to answer anyway. I would happily engage with any politician who committed to fair and honest practices and personal openness to scrutiny. If a Republican, so much the better.

55 Views

Ted Bush
Ted Bush
Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 1k answers and 443.9k answer views

“We were just kidding about cutting taxes without paying for them, and we’re seriously looking at reducing some of our defense spending to go along with closing loopholes in various corporate tax laws.”

“We are so totally small government that we really don’t care what sex you choose to love, and whatever you want to do with your body is totally your own business, not ours.”

“We also decided that as part of our new commitment to fiscal conservatism we’re ending the tax break for religious entities.”

44 Views · View Upvoters

Ashwin Dollar
Ashwin Dollar, Supported candidates in both parties, voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016
Answered Nov 14, 2017 · Author has 4.8k answers and 1.4m answer views

I don’t identify particularly strongly as a “liberal” but by 2017 Republican Party standards I definitely am. I voted for many down ballot Republicans in 2016 and voted straight Democrat in 2016. Depending on the level of government we’re talking about I have very different answers. I don’t particularly care what a mayor or County sheriff thinks about national issues that aren’t relevant to their job.

I’d want to know how a mayor will approach new development in my town and how my sheriff approaches policing issues. I would want to know how my governor would balance my state’s budget, improve education, and improve the economy. I care a bit more about what a governor thinks about national issues, as governors provide valuable endorsements in primaries. I would not have voted for Chris Christie if I’d known he would endorse Donald Trump for example. Governors can also decide how to implement federal policies like Medicaid or how infrastructure spending is allocated within the state so I do want to known their opinions on those types of policies.

68 Views

Jim Odden
Jim Odden, B.A. Philosophy & Spanish, University of Minnesota, Morris (2008)
Answered Oct 30, 2017 · Author has 113 answers and 8.7k answer views

What would they like to hear that might earn a vote? Possibly something like this:

“You were right, we’ve been self-absorbed asses. We’re making a 180 on most of our positions because we’ve found them to be baseless. We will now be answering questions.”

That might do it..,

145 Views · View Upvoters
Related Questions

MAY 29, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


BIDEN MAY BE THE FRONT RUNNER, BUT BERNIE IS THE MAN, OR SO CNN SAYS. I PERSONALLY DON’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING POLLS INDICATE, BUT I DO KEEP AN EYE ON THEM. BERNIE SANDERS’ GREATEST ADVANTAGE IS THAT HE IS THE ONLY DEMOCRAT WHO STILL SOUNDS LIKE ONE – LIKE A “REAL” ONE, ANYWAY. I LOOK FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 6, 2018 WHEN HE RUNS FOR A THIRD SENATE TERM; IF HE WERE TO LOSE THAT IT WOULD BE A SETBACK. HE PROBABLY WON’T BECAUSE WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN A RECENT ARTICLE OF THE PEOPLE IN VERMONT, THEY LOVE HIM STILL. THEN, LET’S MOVE ON FORWARD TO 2020.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/29/politics/bernie-sanders-2020-analysis/index.html
Bernie Sanders is the most important 2020 candidate
By Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large
Updated 7:40 PM ET, Tue May 29, 2018

Washington (CNN)On Tuesday morning, Jeff Weaver, who managed Bernie Sanders' 2016 presidential campaign, said this to C-SPAN's John McArdle about the possibility of a rerun by the Vermont socialist in 2020:

"He is considering another run for the presidency and when the time comes I think we'll have an answer for that. But right now he's still considering it."

That's both a) not terribly surprising and b) extremely important.

Not surprising in that Sanders has never really stopped running a national campaign since his primary loss to Hillary Clinton in 2016. Extremely important in that Sanders is -- and is likely to remain -- the prime mover in the Democratic presidential field.

That's not to say Sanders is the current frontrunner for the nomination. He's not. Former Vice President Joe Biden is -- as CNN's Harry Enten argues convincingly here.

What Sanders' status as the prime mover in the race means is that he will set the terms on which the race is likely to be fought. He will set the margins -- in terms of policy -- for what Democrats are willing to say and do. He will be the person who the race revolves around -- either in agreement with or reaction to.

CNN's Chris Cillizza cuts through the political spin and tells you what you need to know. By subscribing, you agree to our privacy policy.

It's already been happening. Earlier this month in a speech at the Brookings Institute, Biden used Sanders as a foil -- promising an alternate vision for both the problem and the solution to what ails the country. Here's the key bit from Biden: "I love Bernie, but I'm not Bernie Sanders. I don't think 500 billionaires are the reason we're in trouble. The folks at the top aren't bad guys. But this gap is yawning, and it's having the effect of pulling us apart. You see the politics of it."

And, following the 2016 election, a parade of would-be 2020 aspirants -- Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand -- signed onto Sanders' "Medicare For All" single-payer health care proposal. It's a role he played in 2016, albeit a somewhat unlikely one. Clinton, once she realized that Sanders posed a real threat to her chances, moved hard left on virtually every issue -- ensuring there was no space between her and the Vermont senator.

The Point: Watch where Sanders chooses to make moves -- on both policy and politics -- in the coming months. And, as importantly, who follows and who chooses not to.

Read Tuesday's full edition of The Point newsletter here; and sign up to get future editions to your inbox.


IF I WANTED TO LEARN A NEW WAY OF WORKING ON THE COMPUTER AND ANOTHER SET OF PASSWORDS (NOT TO MENTION PUTTING MY PERSONAL INFORMATION ON YET ANOTHER WEBSITE) I WOULD JOIN TWITTER, AND TWEET THIS IN ANSWER TO TRUMP’S BROADSIDE SWIPES AT ALL THINGS LIBERAL, GENEROUS AND TRUTHFUL. “LYIN’ AND CHEATIN’ REPUBLICANS.” I HASTEN TO ADD THAT THERE ARE GOOD, HONEST REPUBLICANS TOO.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/29/missouri-gov-eric-greitens-expected-resign/653430002/
Reports: Embattled Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens expected to resign
Will Schmitt, WSCHMITT@NEWS-LEADER.COM Published 5:14 p.m. ET May 29, 2018 | Updated 5:17 p.m. ET May 29, 2018

KANSAS CITY — Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens is expected to resign Tuesday afternoon, leaving behind him a brief and tumultuous legacy and moving on from his first public office with the continued prospect of criminal prosecution related to his 2016 campaign.

Citing unnamed sources, Politico and Fox News say Greitens will step down. A press conference is scheduled for 4:15 p.m. local time.

The News-Leader has not yet confirmed the governor's intentions.

The state constitution lays out an order of succession in which Lt. Gov. Mike Parson, who was elected separately, will take over for his fellow Republican.

State lawmakers had convened in a special session to hear evidence about Greitens in a process that could have led to his impeachment.

A Cole County judge ruled against Greitens on Tuesday by allowing subpoenas issued by lawmakers investigating the governor to go forward. The legislative investigation had requested numerous documents from Greitens political campaign and from A New Missouri, Inc., the secretive nonprofit formed by his campaign aides to advocate for his agenda.

Greitens was charged with a invasion of privacy felony in February, but that charge temporarily has been dropped. A second felony charge of computer tampering is still pending.

Greitens ran as a political outsider with promises to clean up corruption, prevent tax hikes and enact a ban on mandatory union dues.

After the second felony charge was announced in April, leading GOP officials including Attorney General Josh Hawley, Senate President Pro Tem Ron Richard and House Speaker Todd Richardson called for Greitens to step down.

Greitens had refused to leave even facing the prospect of becoming the first governor in Missouri’s history to be impeached.

A New Missouri, Inc., the secretive nonprofit formed by his campaign aides to advocate for his agenda.


CNN AND WASHINGTON PRESS ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE PROBE IN HIS PRESSURIZING SESSIONS – TWO ARTICLES

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/29/politics/trump-sessions-russia-recusal/index.html
NYT: Mueller probing Trump's request that Sessions rescind his recusal from Russia investigation
Aileen Graef
By Aileen Graef, CNN
Updated 9:49 PM ET, Tue May 29, 2018

CNN NEWS VIDEO –BREAKING NEWS – NY TIMES – PRES. TRUMP ASKING SESSIONS TO RESCIND HIS RECUSAL IS NOW BEING PROBED BY MUELLER

(CNN)President Trump pressured Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his decision to recuse himself from oversight of the Russia investigation and special counsel Robert Mueller is now probing that exchange, according to a report from the New York Times.

The newspaper reported Tuesday that when Sessions flew down to Florida to have dinner with the President at his Mar-a-Lago resort in March 2017, Trump berated Sessions about his decision and asked him to rescind it, a request Sessions declined.

This exchange, as well as the repeated attacks on Sessions by Trump in the media and on Twitter, are part of Mueller's investigation, the paper reported.

Mueller has been reported to be focused on obstruction of justice in his inquiry. In addition to the conversation with Sessions, he has also looked into the firing of former FBI Director James Comey.

Sessions recused himself in March 2017 from any investigation related to Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

CNN reported in January that former chief of staff Reince Priebus and former press secretary Sean Spicer joined the effort of White House counsel Don McGahn to persuade Sessions to not recuse himself from the investigation.

The two were involved in calls between the White House and Justice Department in early 2018.

"I think it's fair to call it pressure," a senior administration official said about White House conversations with Sessions and his top aides about the matter.

CNN's Jim Acosta, Stephen Collinson and Laura Smith-Spark contributed to this report.


THE PATH HAS FINALLY BEEN DECIDED AND TAKEN, OR NOT. I CAN ONLY FIND THIS SPECIFIC STORY IN WASHINGTON PRESS .... I DID FIND A CNN STORY ALONG THE SAME LINES WHICH IS ABOVE. IT DOESN’T USE THAT PARTICULAR WORDING, THOUGH. PROBABLE TRUTH IS THAT MUELLER IS LOOKING INTO THE MATTER, BUT MAY NOT HAVE MADE AN “OFFICIAL” PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT.

https://washingtonpress.com/author/benlocke/
POLITICS
Special Counsel Mueller just launched an official obstruction of justice investigation into Trump
The NY Times dropped a bombshell that should get America’s attention off of Roseanne.
By Benjamin Locke
May 29, 2018 9:47 PM

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into whether President Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice goes beyond his firing of FBI Director and now includes the pressure Trump has put on Attorney General Jeff Sessions since he recused himself from the investigation into the Trump campaign’s involvement in Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, reports The New York Times.

The special counsel’s interest,” announced the Times, “demonstrates Mr. Sessions’s overlooked role as a key witness in the investigation into whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct the inquiry itself.”

Facebook's new algorithm changes have decimated the reach and the ad revenue of independent news sources like ours. Please become a patron of our news website and help us pay our writers by making a small contribution:
View our Patreon page >

In interviews with current and former White House officials, Mueller’s investigators have pushed hard for information on Trump’s treatment of Sessions and, says the newspaper, “whether they believe the president was trying to impede the Russia investigation by pressuring him.”

Mueller’s team also interviewed Sessions at length this past January.

High on the list of the four dozen or so questions, Mueller wants to ask Trump is how the president tried to get Sessions to reverse his recusal from the Russia investigation.


Tea Pain
@TeaPainUSA
Trump's "Sophie's Choice." He can't fire Sessions cause he's a primary witness, but he needs to fire Sessions to shut down the Mueller probe.https://twitter.com/nytmike/status/1001610947109228545 …

8:01 PM - May 29, 2018
1,442
648 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Sessions is a Trump loyalist but he has resisted frequent efforts to get him to reverse his recusal because it was done on the advice of Justice Department lawyers after his false statements during his confirmation hearing before the Senate were discovered about his contacts with various Russians before and after the election.

Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who since April has taken on a lead role in defending the president, insists Trump must not be forced to discuss his private conversations with Sessions, because talking about his private deliberations with senior White House officials would set a terrible precedent for future presidents.

Trump has obsessed on Session’s recusal and believes if he had not done it, the Special Counsel would never have been appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

It has even impacted their once close friendship.

“Before the recusal,” writes the NY Times, “the president and his attorney general were friends, often sharing meals and talking on the phone. Today, they rarely speak outside of cabinet meetings.”

Trump at various times has tried to get rid of Sessions by making him resign, even as he gleefully embraces and enforces Trump’s white supremacist agenda.

The Justice Department has guidelines on recusal that say if the circumstances which warranted it in the first place remain, there is no way to reverse it – which is the case with Sessions.

The guidelines are there to stop political meddling of exactly the sort Trump wants.

“It’s yet more behavior that tramples on the line between law and politics,” Samuel W. Buell, a professor of law at Duke University and former federal prosecutor, told the NY Times.

Trump has repeatedly told intimates that he would never have appointed Sessions as Attorney General if he knew he would recuse himself and he continues to be frustrated by that decision and the resulting appointment of Mueller.

Renato Mariotti
✔
@renato_mariotti
As I told @KateBolduan on @OutFrontCNN, Trump's request to Sessions to take back control of the Russia investigation after his recusal in order to show "loyalty," combined with other evidence, suggests that Mueller will conclude Trump obstructed justice.

8:30 PM - May 29, 2018
616
270 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

This has eaten at Trump since the beginning of his administration and just gets him even hotter under the collar as the Special Counsel gets closer and closer to finding out the truth about Trump, his campaign, and the Russians.

Sessions is loyal to Trump but if put under oath the attorney and Attorney General may have to tell the truth that Trump does not want to get out.

That is what Trump fears and what Americans who want the truth pray will happen when this is all over.

Add your name to millions demanding Congress take action on the President’s crimes. IMPEACH TRUMP & PENCE!

BENJAMIN LOCKE
BENJAMIN LOCKE IS A RETIRED COLLEGE PROFESSOR WITH AN UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE IN INDUSTRIAL LABOR AND RELATIONS FROM CORNELL UNIVERSITY AND AN MBA FROM THE EUROPEAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT.


WHO IS GLOBAL NEWS?

https://globalnews.ca
Global News - breaking news & current latest Canadian news headlines; national weather forecasts & predictions, local news videos, money and financial news…
Calgary
Global News Calgary ; Global TV …

GLOBAL NEWS, CANADIAN, FACT-CHECKED AND BIAS RATED:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-news/

*Voting Polls do not affect MBFC bias ratings

Share:
FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestEmailTumblrRedditLinkedInFlipboardGoogle BookmarksYahoo BookmarksShare60
Global News - Left Center BiasLEFT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.

Factual Reporting: HIGH

Notes: Global News is the news and current affairs division of Global Television Network in Canada, overseeing all local and national news programming on the network’s twelve owned-and-operated stations. Global News provides evidence based sourced news. They do have a left-center leaning when it comes to story selection that slightly favors liberals and occasional emotional words that convey mild bias. (D. Van Zandt 2/21/2017)

Review #2: Global News (GN) is a Canadian based news site owned by Shaw Communications (SC) (J. R. Shaw, and family). While SC is primarily a conservative organization, GN appears to be very fair, balanced, well sourced, and factual in their reporting. The articles I reviewed were either direct reprints or heavily sourced from Least Biased sources such as Reuters and Associated Press. Those articles that are not direct carry overs do contain a slight Left Bias, although the reporting is, again, well sourced and factual. Note: This review is only based on GN’s political reporting, and while this reviewer is no expert on Canadian politics, the articles I read on those subjects appeared to have a slight Left Bias as well. Despite its’ parent companies conservative stance, GN itself nearly scored a Least Biased rating, earning a Left-Center Bias rating overall. (D. Kelley 12/1/2017)



THANK YOU, JUDGE JACKSON, FOR ADDING AN HONEST OPINION IN THIS ARGUMENT.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2018-05-29/the-latest-court-filing-may-show-russia-probe-nearing-close
The Latest: Judge Sides With Mueller Team in Manafort Case
A judge says special counsel Robert Mueller is correct to withhold certain information being demanded by lawyers for former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
2018-05-29

PHOTOGRAPH -- President Donald Trump applauds during a Memorial Day ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery, Monday, May 28, 2018, in Arlington, Va. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — THE Latest on President Donald Trump and the special counsel's Russia investigation (all times local):

5:45 p.m.

A judge says special counsel Robert Mueller is correct to withhold certain information being demanded by lawyers for former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Mueller's lawyers had redacted information from two affidavits used to get search warrants in the Manafort investigation.

They said the information was withheld because it fell into two categories: names of confidential sources and details about ongoing investigations unrelated to the cases pending against Manafort, who is awaiting trial in Virginia and Washington.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson said in an order Tuesday that she had privately reviewed the two affidavits in question and agreed with Mueller's team that they didn't have to reveal the un-redacted information to Manafort's lawyers.

____

3:10 p.m.

The case of a California man who pleaded guilty in special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation is moving closer to sentencing.

It's a sign that that aspect of the Mueller investigation may be drawing to a close. Prosecutors filed a similar motion last week in the case of George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign aide who pleaded guilty last year to lying to investigators.

In a court filing Tuesday, prosecutors and defense lawyers say they're ready to start the process of sentencing Richard Pinedo, who pleaded guilty in February to selling bank accounts to Russians.

The filing asks a judge to refer the case for the preparation of a pre-sentence report, a critical step in the sentencing process.

__

7:28 a.m.

President Donald Trump is accusing special counsel Robert Mueller's investigative team of "MEDDLING" in the upcoming midterm elections and blames Democrats for "Collusion."

Mueller is leading the probe into whether Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the help from Trump campaign aides. So far, four Trump associates have been charged in Mueller's investigation; three have pleaded guilty to lying to the authorities.

Trump has repeatedly referred to Mueller's team as "13 angry Democrats," although Mueller is a Republican.

On Tuesday, Trump tweeted: "The 13 Angry Democrats (plus people who worked 8 years for Obama) working on the rigged Russia Witch Hunt, will be MEDDLING with the mid-term elections, especially now that Republicans (stay tough!) are taking the lead in Polls. There was no Collusion, except by the Democrats."

Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP IS AT HIS ELOQUENT BEST HERE. “WITCH HUNT! WITCH HUNT, WITCH HUNT! WITCH HUNT WITCH HUNT WITCH HUNT WITCH HUNT!!! WITCH HUNT. NO COLLUSION. WITCH HUNT.”

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/29/politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-demonize/index.html
Trump is winning his effort to demonize Mueller
Zach Wolf
Analysis by Z. Byron Wolf, CNN
Updated 5:05 PM ET, Tue May 29, 2018

Washington (CNN)Witch hunt! Witch hunt, witch hunt! Witch hunt witch hunt witch hunt WITCH HUNT!!! Witch hunt. No collusion. Witch hunt.

It's Donald Trump's mantra about the Russia investigation, and it's working, for now.

He's mentioned the special counsel investigation led by Robert Mueller into Russian election meddling and possible collusion by the Trump campaign more and more frequently -- Chris Cillizza has documented the President's obsession with the issue.

I'm not one who can often identify defined or coherent strategy in the President's shoot-from-the-hip gut reaction policy and political choices. But in terms of the Russia investigation, he's embarked pretty clearly on an effort to make everything Mueller does out to be about politics rather than justice, and in doing so, he's winning the argument.

Track the publicly known developments of the sprawling investigations into Trump and Russia.

In large part, he's winning it because he's the only one arguing right now. Robert Mueller, presumably hard at work on his investigation, is not out in public defending himself or his staffers -- Trump likes to point out that a number of them have contributed to Democrats in the past.

Particularly among Republicans, approval of the Mueller investigation has followed. It is when Mueller is viewed as a partisan -- and that's what Trump has tried to hammer into people's minds for months -- that the President can try try to inoculate himself whatever action Mueller might someday take.

It's not just Mueller. During his year and a half as President, Trump has waged a campaign to erode public trust in some of the country's most important institutions -- the Department of Justice and the FBI -- as a self-defense mechanism.

Tuesday, he went a step further, suggesting without proof that the "rigged Russia witch hunt" will be "meddling" in the midterms.

Calling elections in which he's not expected to do well "rigged" is nothing new for Trump; in 2016, when polls suggested he would lose, he pre-emptively questioned the results and said, without proof, it was "rigged" against him.

After he won the election, but lost the popular vote, he called the results into question again by saying, repeatedly and without evidence, that there were millions of illegal votes.

The thing is, if the Mueller investigation is viewed as a partisan witch hunt -- and there's no evidence that's what it is -- then Trump has won the the political argument.

Play Video
Giuliani: 'Public opinion' will decide impeachment 02:57

He's done a lot to keep the investigation in the news by tweeting about it so much. And each time he's mentioned it, he's called it a witch hunt or impugned the staffers as part of the deep state cabal he imagines is out to get him.

Republicans, Trump's base, have responded. As CNN's director of polling Jennifer Agiesta wrote this month, Republicans are souring on the investigation.

Here's how she wrote about the shift in approval for the Mueller investigation after that CNN poll:

Overall, 44% approve of the way Mueller is handling the investigation and 38% disapprove. That's a slight negative shift overall since March, when 48% approved of Mueller's work. Just about all of that change has come from Republicans, who now give Mueller a 17% approval rating, down from 29% in March. Among Democrats and independents, approval ratings for Mueller have not changed significantly.

Trump arguably doesn't even need to affect the opinions of Democrats and independents. As long as he can convince Republicans the Mueller probe is tainted, it becomes political.

Now, all of that could change depending on what, if anything, Mueller ultimately uncovers or alleges. But no matter what it is, because of Trump's "witch hunt" bombardment, he'll be doing it from a place of less public trust. There are two tracks to this -- the public one that Trump is pursuing, and the criminal one that Mueller is pursuing against former Trump campaign aides. They're related but distinct.

We know the type of demonizing strategy Trump is pursuing in public can be effective because it's worked when Bill Clinton was being investigated by Ken Starr and Hillary Clinton was complaining about a "vast right-wing conspiracy."

One year of Mueller's special counsel investigation, by the numbers

Clinton's strategist at the time, Dick Morris, told Politico last year about the importance of turning a prosecutor into a political enemy.

"I think the idea of having an enemy when you're the object of a special prosecutor is a very important one," he said. "Clinton only survived a special prosecutor because he made Ken Starr the enemy."

And that's also probably why Democratic leaders offer such tortured responses to the idea of impeaching Trump and why they'd rather talk about policy ideas than the Mueller probe. They saw Republicans lose a very political, public trial against Clinton in the '90s. Trump's been mounting his defense in the same way, in advance of whatever Mueller may ultimately come up with.


WHEN DID THESE MUELLER TEAM "SAUSAS" GAIN THAT SPECIAL STATUS? WHAT THE ANSWER IS CAN WEAKEN MUELLER’S LEGAL STAFF OR NOT. MAY 29.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2018/05/21/mueller-virginia-case-special-assistant-us-attorneys-600777
Mueller team's special status could save Virginia Manafort case
By JOSH GERSTEIN 05/21/2018 06:10 AM EDT

PHOTOGRAPH -- In the Virginia case, Paul Manafort is facing charges of bank fraud, tax evasion and failing to report foreign bank accounts. | Mark Wilson/Getty Images

An obscure special status obtained by several of special counsel Robert Mueller's attorneys could prevent a judge from ousting Mueller's lawyers from their role in the prosecution of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in federal court in Virginia.

Several court filings indicate that when lawyers from Mueller's office appeared in federal court in Alexandria earlier this year, they did so not only as representatives of Mueller's office but as special assistant United States attorneys (SAUSAs) attached to the United States attorney's office there.

That designation gives the Mueller prosecutors a kind of dual status that could complicate any attempt by U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III to try to shift the case to federal prosecutors based in Alexandria — a possibility the judge mentioned on a couple of occasions during a contentious hearing earlier this month.

A spokesman for Mueller's office, Peter Carr, confirmed to POLITICO that some of the attorneys on the special counsel's team have the SAUSA status. Carr pointed to a local federal court rule that allows federal prosecutors to handle cases there when "appearing pursuant to the authority of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia."

One lawyer who has studied the use of SAUSAs said the granting of that status to lawyers on Mueller's team theoretically gives them the authority to pursue matters that aren't within the special counsel's mandate.

"As special assistant U.S. attorneys, they are not confined to the scope the special counsel is acting under," said Haley White, a North Carolina attorney who wrote a 2015 law review article on the SAUSA phenomenon. "They can potentially have the ability to go outside that scope. ... They have all the powers and abilities that just a regular U.S. attorney would have."

At least four of Mueller's prosecutors have submitted court pleadings indicating they have SAUSA status: Andrew Weissmann, Greg Andres, Kyle Freeny and Scott Meisler.

It's unclear at precisely what point Mueller's lawyers acquired their SAUSA status. If it was before the first indictment against Manafort in Virginia was obtained on Feb. 13, 2018, Manafort's defense could lose much of its argument that the indictment is tainted because it was sought by prosecutors who lacked proper authorization. However, if prosecutors didn't have that status when obtaining search warrants in Virginia and Washington last year, there could still be legal questions about evidence obtained through those searches.

Mueller's response to Manafort's motion to dismiss the Virginia case does mention some court decisions related to SAUSAs, but doesn't explicitly argue that the SAUSA status negates much of Manafort's argument about Mueller's team being unauthorized or exceeding its mandate.

With Mueller pursuing separate criminal cases against Manafort in Washington and Alexandria, it could be that Mueller's team wanted to keep their arguments in the two cases parallel as Manafort attacked the special counsel's authority in both courts. The SAUSA argument would not have been open to Mueller's team in Washington, because they don't have that status in D.C., where Justice Department attorneys routinely appear in federal court without any special appointment. (In any event, Mueller's team didn't need the argument in Washington, since the judge there rejected Manafort's challenge last week.)

Robert Mueller is pictured. | Getty Images
LAW AND ORDER

3 Predictions for What Mueller Will Do Next
By NELSON W. CUNNINGHAM

In the Virginia case, Manafort is facing charges of bank fraud, tax evasion and failing to report foreign bank accounts. The Washington indictment charges Manafort with money laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent for his work related to Ukraine.

The use of SAUSAs has provoked some controversy, particularly when U.S. attorneys rely on the mechanism to appoint state or local prosecutors to pursue cases in federal court that ran aground in state courts. U.S. attorneys' offices have also used the SAUSA status to augment their prosecution staff with unpaid volunteers who are often buffing their résumés with federal court prosecution experience.

However, some scholars have warned of dangers in the SAUSA phenomenon, with U.S. attorneys' offices blurring lines of responsibility with other entities and sometimes giving local prosecutors an option to avoid the urban jury pools of their local courts. U.S. attorneys seem to make uneven use of the SAUSA arrangement, with some offices rarely, if ever, relying on it and one office reporting more than 50 SAUSAs on its rolls.

Josh Gerstein is a senior White House reporter for POLITICO.


MUSIC -- http://www.diogenesmiddlefinger.com/2018/05/middle-finger-symphony-theater_26.html
HONEST MAN -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes


THIS IS NOT NEWS, NO, BUT IT IS INTERESTING NATIONAL CULTURAL INFORMATION.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/memorial-day-surprisingly-partisan-history/
CBS NEWS May 28, 2018, 1:01 PM
The surprisingly partisan history of Memorial Day

This week marks the 150th anniversary of Memorial Day, but even those who stopped to remember the fallen may be surprised by the fascinating history of the occasion.

"It was partisan. It was divisive. It was a long time before the country celebrated as one and that really took until 100 years ago – and World War I," historian and bestselling author Kenneth C. Davis said on "CBS This Morning" Monday.

Arlington women's memorial highlights the struggles and sacrifices of female veterans
Memorial Day, which was first called Decoration Day for the flowers placed on the graves of fallen soldiers, began in 1868. But even that date is disputed.

"Some towns say they were doing it earlier than 1868. But this year, 1868, was important because a former Union general, a very prominent man named John Logan, said we should do this on May 30, 1868," Davis explained.

An important point to remember, according to Davis, is that Logan was strictly referring to Union soldiers when he made the proclamation.

"He was talking about Union soldiers, those fighting the rebellion of tyranny as he called it and also to free those in chains. So it's clearly related to the emancipation of slaves and Civil War, but that's why the Confederate states set up their own decoration days," he said.

But the "deep enmity" between the North and the South was part of the holiday even before then as Arlington National Cemetery was taken out of property owned by Confederate General Robert E. Lee.

A Memorial Day worth remembering
"It did take World War I when Americans came together and fought together 100 years ago in 1918 to make the holiday more of an inclusive national holiday and, of course, that was when it was decided to build the Tomb of the Unknown," Davis said.

Partisanship continued to be a part of Memorial Day even when it became an official federal holiday in 1971 -- a time when the country was deeply divided over the Vietnam War.

"Memorial Day lost some of its appeal perhaps as the country couldn't separate out their feelings about an unpopular war and the feelings of the military," Davis said. "We've done a better job of that I think nowadays. Even though we don't always agree with the war, we know that the men and women who are fighting are doing that. They chose to do that. They're fighting for the country. And they are not the ones who chose the war."

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



MADDOW NEWS
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 5/28/18
GOP departures a potentially ominous portent for Trump in 2018
Rachel Maddow talks with Steve Kornacki about history's lessons for what to expect from midterm elections and whether 2018 is likely to follow a familiar pattern that Donald Trump won't like. Duration: 15:35


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 5/28/18
Elections since Trump suggest Democratic base energized for 2018
Rachel Maddow talks with Steve Kornacki about Democratic special election victories since the 2016 election, as well as significant shifts toward Democrats where Republicans managed to hold onto office, suggesting Democrats are energized for the midterm elections. Duration: 8:09

MAY 26 TO 28, 2018

NEWS AND VIEWS

THIS NEWS ARTICLE WILL APPLY TO MANY USA “NEWS SITES.” THOUGH I AM NOT EXACTLY A “NEWS SITE,” BUT A BLOG, I GOT A NOTICE ON MY BLOGGER PROGRAM THAT I HAVE TO MAKE A CHANGE. IF YOU HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO GET TO MY SCRAPS OF INFORMATION AND OPINION, WAIT A WEEK OR SO. I’M WORKING ON IT.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44248448
GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users under new rules
25 May 2018

Some high-profile US news websites are temporarily unavailable in Europe after new EU data protection rules came into effect.

The Chicago Tribune and LA Times were among those saying they were currently unavailable in most European countries.

Meanwhile complaints were filed against US tech giants within hours of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) taking effect.

GDPR gives EU citizens more rights over how their information is used.

It is an effort by EU lawmakers to limit tech firms' powers.

Under the rules, companies working in the EU - or any association or club in the bloc - must show they have a lawful basis for processing personal data, or face hefty fines.

There are six legal bases for using personal data, including getting express consent from consumers. However, in most cases firms must also show that they need the personal data for a specific purpose.

What is the legal case about?

Facebook, Google, Instagram and WhatsApp are accused of forcing users to consent to targeted advertising to use the services.

Privacy group noyb.eu, led by activist Max Schrems, said people were not being given a "free choice".

If the complaints are upheld, the websites may be forced to change how they operate and they could be fined.

Google and Facebook face GDPR complaints
Tech firms struggle with GDPR privacy rules
Which sites are unavailable?
News sites within the Tronc and Lee Enterprises media publishing groups were affected.

Tronc's high-profile sites include the New York Daily News, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, Orlando Sentinel and Baltimore Sun.

Its message read: "Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market."

GDPR quiz: How will privacy law affect you?
Are you swamped with privacy updates?

Lee Enterprises publishes 46 daily newspapers across 21 states.

Its statement read: "We're sorry. This site is temporarily unavailable. We recognise you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore cannot grant you access at this time."


THIS IS MY COMPLIANCE NOTICE, WHICH I HAVE NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO DO. I DON'T EVEN KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT I'M SUPPOSED TO DO, AND AM RESPONSIBLE FOR. MY KIND COMPUTER REPAIR COMPANY WILL HOPEFULLY GUIDE ME THROUGH THIS, OR BETTER STILL, JUST DO IT FOR ME. I HOPE FOR ALL OF THIS TO BE IN ORDER WITHIN SEVERAL DAYS.

“European Union laws require you to give European Union visitors information about cookies used and data collected on your blog. In many cases, these laws also require you to obtain consent.

As a courtesy, we have added a notice on your blog to explain Google's use of certain Blogger and Google cookies, including use of Google Analytics and AdSense cookies, and other data collected by Google.

You are responsible for confirming this notice actually works for your blog, and that it displays. If you employ other cookies, for example by adding third party features, this notice may not work for you. If you include functionality from other providers there may be extra information collected from your users.

Learn more about this notice and your responsibilities.”


WHAT IS GDPR?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
General Data Protection Regulation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"GDPR" redirects here.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU) 2016/679 is a regulation in EU law on data protection and privacy for all individuals within the European Union and the European Economic Area. It also addresses the export of personal data outside the EU and EEA. The GDPR aims primarily to give control to citizens and residents over their personal data and to simplify the regulatory environment for international business by unifying the regulation within the EU.[1]

Superseding the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC, the regulation contains provisions and requirements pertaining to the processing of personally identifiable information of data subjects inside the European Union, and applies to all enterprises, regardless of location, that are doing business with the European Economic Area. Business processes that handle personal data must be built with data protection by design and by default, meaning that personal data must be stored using pseudonymisation or full anonymisation, and use the highest-possible privacy settings by default, so that the data is not available publicly without explicit consent, and cannot be used to identify a subject without additional information stored separately. No personal data may be processed unless it is done under a lawful basis specified by the regulation, or if the data controller or processor has received explicit, opt-in consent from the data's owner. The data owner has the right to revoke this permission at any time.

A processor of personal data must clearly disclose any data collection, declare the lawful basis and purpose for data processing, how long data is being retained, and if it is being shared with any third-parties or outside of the EU. Users have the right to request a portable copy of the data collected by a processor in a common format, and the right to have their data erased under certain circumstances. Public authorities, and businesses whose core activities centre around regular or systematic processing of personal data, are required to employ a data protection officer (DPO), who is responsible for managing compliance with the GDPR. Businesses must report any data breaches within 72 hours if they have an adverse effect on user privacy.

It was adopted on 14 April 2016,[2] and after a two-year transition period, became enforceable on 25 May 2018.[3] Because the GDPR is a regulation, not a directive, it does not require national governments to pass any enabling legislation and is directly binding and applicable.[4] As the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union in 2019, it granted royal assent to the Data Protection Act 2018 on 23 May 2018, which contains equivalent regulations and protections.[5][6]



NEGATIVE PEOPLE ALWAYS LIKE TO SAY “THAT WON’T WORK.” THE TRUTH IS THAT, FROM MY KNOWLEDGE OF PEOPLE, SOME ARE ALMOST TOTALLY IMPERVIOUS TO BEING WILLING TO EXPERIENCE SOMETHING NEW, OR WHICH IS NOT “POPULAR” AMONG THEIR CROWD. SOME ARE ACTUALLY FULLY BIASED AND HARD-CORE WHITE SUPREMACISTS, BUT MOST ARE JUST FOLLOWERS RATHER THAN LEADERS OR INDEPENDENTS. THAT’S HOW USUALLY NICE PEOPLE BECOME A LYNCH MOB. LEARNING TAKES TIME FOR JUST ONE INDIVIDUAL, MUCH LESS TO PERCOLATE THROUGH TO ALL, AND FOR A FULL SOCIETAL CHANGE THAT HAS TO HAPPEN.

I DO BELIEVE IN INTRODUCING GOOD IDEAS IN UNPOPULAR PLACES, BECAUSE GOOD REPLICATES JUST AS EVIL DOES. I THINK WHAT SAVES MANKIND IS THAT EVERY TIME A NEW PERSON IS BORN AND INTRODUCED TO THE WORLD, IT’S A CHANCE FOR AN INBORN GOOD HUMAN INSTINCT TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON OTHERS. IF HE OR SHE IS LOVED OPENLY AND SHOWN DAILY HOW TO THINK THINGS THROUGH, THEY CAN MATURE INTO LOVE FOR OTHERS. IT IS MY PERSONAL BELIEF, FROM LONG YEARS OF OBSERVATION IN GROUPS SUCH AS MY OWN FAMILY FIRST, MY HOME TOWN SECOND, AND MOVING ON OUTWARDLY AROUND ME, THAT HUMANS DEFINITELY AREN’T REALLY “NICE” BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT. BUT, IN A GREAT DEMOCRATICALLY ORIENTED SOCIETY LIKE AMERICA AND MOST OF EUROPE, WE NEED TO EMBODY THAT IDEA OF GREATNESS. BY EMBODY, I MEAN PERSONALLY DO IT OURSELVES TO THE DEGREE THAT WE CAN. TRAINING IN THESE SPECIFIC ISSUES WILL BE VERY GOOD FOR SOME, AND FOR THE OTHERS, IF THEY CONTINUE TO BE RUDE TO PEOPLE OF ANY KIND WHEN THEY ARE “REPRESENTING THE COMPANY,” IT’S GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starbucks-closing-for-anti-bias-training-will-it-make-a-difference/
CBS/AP May 28, 2018, 4:39 PM
Starbucks closing for anti-bias training: Will it make a difference?

Starbucks, trying to put to rest an outcry over the arrest of two black men at one of its stores, is closing more than 8,000 stores for an afternoon of anti-bias training, a strategy some believe can keep racism at bay.

After the arrests in Philadelphia last month, the coffee chain's leaders apologized and met with the two men, but also reached out to activists and experts in bias training to put together a curriculum for its 175,000 workers.

That has put a spotlight on the little-known world of "unconscious bias training," which is used by many corporations, police departments and other organizations to help address racism in the workplace. The training is typically designed to get people to open up about implicit biases and stereotypes in encountering people of color, gender or other identities.

The Perception Institute, a consortium of researchers consulting with Starbucks, defines implicit bias as attitudes — positive or negative — or stereotypes someone has toward a person or group without being conscious of it. A common example, according to some of its studies, is a tendency for white people to unknowingly associate black people with criminal behavior.

Many retailers including Walmart and Target said they already offer some racial bias training. Target says it plans to expand that training. Nordstrom has said it plans to enhance its training after issuing an apology to three black teenagers in Missouri who employees falsely accused of shoplifting.


Anti-bias sessions can incorporate personal reflections, explorations of feelings and mental exercises. But one expert says training of this kind can have the opposite effect if people feel judged.

According to a video previewing the Starbucks training, there will be recorded remarks from Starbucks executives and rapper/activist Common. From there, employees will "move into a real and honest exploration of bias" where, in small groups, they can share how the issue comes up in their daily work life.

Starbucks has described it as a "collaborative and engaging experience for store partners to learn together." "

Developed with feedback from the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Perception Institute and other social advocacy groups, the four-hour session will give workers a primer on the history of civil rights from the 1960s to present day. Workers will also view a short documentary film.

Alexis McGill Johnson, Perception's co-founder and executive director, says anti-bias training is about awareness.

"The work that we want to do is not say you're a bad person because you have a stereotype about a group, but say this is why your brain may have these stereotypes," she said.

Johnson declined to elaborate on the details of the Starbucks training. But she said Perception's workshops typically include mental exercises to show participants how bias creeps into situations. A session can include personal reflections, she said, such as, "'I was socialized to think about a group this way.'"


Johnson said the real work is for employees to apply what they learn in their everyday lives. She likened it to exercising a muscle. Some ways to practice counter-stereotyping, she said, are to look for something unique about a person that is beyond their social identity.

"It could be having a question that elicits something more interesting than, say, the weather or the traffic," Johnson said, stressing the need to "go well beyond the superficial."

In the Philadelphia incident, Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson were asked to leave after one was denied access to the bathroom. They were arrested by police minutes after they sat down to await a business meeting. The incident was recorded by cellphones and went viral.

Nelson and Robinson settled with Starbucks this month for an undisclosed sum and an offer of a free education. They also reached a deal with the city of Philadelphia for a symbolic $1 each and a promise from officials to establish a $200,000 program for young entrepreneurs.

Starbucks has since announced anyone can use its restrooms even if they are not buying anything. According to documents Starbucks sent to store workers, employees should also think carefully when dealing with disruptive customers. A guide advises staff to consider whether the actions they take would apply to any customer in the same situation. They should dial 911 only if the situation seems unsafe.

Starbucks said the arrests never should have occurred and announced the mass closures of its stores for the afternoon of training.

Calvin Lai, an assistant professor of psychological and brain sciences at Washington University in St. Louis, said people should not place high expectations on this one day.

"We find that oftentimes diversity training has mixed effects, and in some cases it can even backfire and lead people who are kind of already reactive to these issues to become even more polarized," Lai said.

One afternoon wouldn't really be "moving the needle on the biases," especially when it's a company with as many employees as Starbucks, he said. "A lot of those employees won't be here next year or two years or three years down the line."

Starbucks has said Tuesday's sessions serve as "a step in a long-term journey to make Starbucks even more welcoming and safe for all." It is working with volunteer advisers including Heather McGhee, president of social advocacy organization Demos, and Sherrilyn Ifill, president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

"One of the things Starbucks has to wrestle with is how to incorporate this kind of training into the onboarding of every employee," Ifill said.

That takes a sustained effort, McGhee added.

"We have really made it clear that one training is not enough, and this needs to be part of an ongoing review of their policies," McGhee said. "They really need to commit."

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

_____________


THE CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE WALL STREET JOURNAL SPEAKS HERE. I DISAGREE WITH THE PRO-TRUMP VIEW ON THIS, BUT IT IS WELL WRITTEN AND STIRS MY INTEREST. I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT SOME VALID LAW BLOG TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT CONGRESS OVERSEES THE DOJ, UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS AND HOW. WHAT WSJ’S KIMBERLEY STASSEL* IS SHOWN IN A DISCUSSION: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZp5rmOV5Ga]

WHAT WOULD REALLY BE USEFUL IN ACHIEVING JUSTICE WHEN THREE MORE OR LESS AUTONOMOUS AND EQUALLY IMPORTANT BODIES WOULD BE THE FORMATION OF DECISION MAKING PANELS WHEN ONE OF THESE THREE COEQUAL PARTS OF THE GOVERNMENT COME INTO CONFLICT. THIS STRUCTURE WAS SET UP SO THAT IT WOULD NOT BE “EASY” FOR ONE TO OVERRIDE THE OTHER, AND THAT DEEP DISCUSSION WOULD ENSUE. ANNOYING AS THAT IS TO THOSE AMERICANS WHO WANT A STRONG AND EVEN DOMINANT PRESIDENT, IT DOES HAVE A FUNCTION, SIMILAR PERHAPS TO THE “GANG OF EIGHT” GROUPS EMPLOYED IN SOME SITUATIONS BY THE LEGISLATURE, ONLY THIS GROUP WOULD INCLUDE KEY MEMBERS FROM ALL THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. A POWER GRAB, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT TRUMP HAS DONE, IS NOT THE WAY TO GO FOR A PEACEFUL AND FAIR RESULT. THAT IS THE REASON WHY THIS INTERACTION THAT IS UNDERWAY OVER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION REALLY RESEMBLES A FOOD FIGHT.

IT’S NOT ONLY PRODUCING INJUSTICE, BUT IT’S CHAOTIC AND TO ME, EMBARRASSING FOR OUR COUNTRY. WHILE WE’RE REWRITING THE CONSTITUTION – IF YOU ARE A FOLLOWER YOU WILL KNOW THAT WE ARE DOING THAT HERE IN “WARNERLAND” -- THIS IS AN IMPORTANT AREA OF CONCERN. I BELIEVE WE MUST NOT HAVE A SITUATION IN WHICH THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OVERRIDES THE PROCESS OF AN INVESTIGATION OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN THE EVIDENCE WE ALREADY HAVE SHOWS TRUMP’S INVOLVEMENT IN A SHOCKING ATTEMPT TO TAKE OVER THE USA BY COUP. THEORETICALLY IT HAS SUCCEEDED, BUT “THE PEOPLE”, THE REAL PEOPLE, HAVE NOT FINISHED SPEAKING YET.

WORSE STILL, THIS IS BEING DONE BY A MAN WHO SPECIFICALLY WANTS TO REMOVE THE DEMOCRATIC PART OF OUR “DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC,” AND BRING IN THE FULL AND TOTAL RULE BY OLIGARCHS. THE FACT THAT TRUMP, IN ADDITION TO SEVERAL OTHER REPUBLICANS TODAY, IS DEEPLY LINKED WITH OUR LONG TERM INTERNATIONAL RIVAL AND ENEMY RUSSIA, WHOSE LEADER VLADIMIR PUTIN IS ANOTHER OLIGARCH AND POSSIBLE MURDERER, WHICH SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR “PATRIOTIC” AMERICANS SUCH AS THE AMERICAN RIGHT TO TOLERATE. I CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT THEY ARE BRAINWASHED, OR SO GREEDY THAT THEY WILL DO ANYTHING FOR MORE MONEY.

WE HUMANISTICALLY INCLINED CITIZENS REALLY MUST GET INTO AN IMPROVED POSITION AGAIN, TO KEEP US A FREE PEOPLE. THIS PARTICULAR SET OF RACISTS AND FASCISTS ARE OF A MIND TO TAKE OVER TOTALLY. DON’T LET THEM! AT ANY RATE, CHECK THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE OUT. CONSIDER THIS AS MY ATTEMPT TO BE TRULY “FAIR AND BALANCED.” BY THE WAY, THIS ARTICLE IS LOCK STEP WITH THE TRUMP CAMP, WITH THE GOAL OF KILLING THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, WHICH DESPITE LOTS OF UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE, APPEARS TO ME TO BE A SIGN OF GUILT ON THEIR PARTS. WHY SO FEARFUL?

TO GET THE LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE SIDE OF THE ISSUES, I SUGGEST THAT YOU REGULARLY WATCH MSNBC’S THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW AND HER WELL-PLACED GUESTS, SUCH AS ADAM SCHIFF, BERNIE SANDERS, ANDREW CLAPPER, ETC. READ THE SANDERS LINKED SITE CALLED COMMON DREAMS AND READ CBS OR SOME OTHER DEPENDABLY ACCURATE GENERAL NEWS SOURCE. ALSO, FACT CHECK THE OVERLY EMOTION-PACKED NUGGETS OF INFORMATION (DOG WHISTLES) OR THOSE SIMPLY STRANGE THINGS FROM THE RUSSIAN TROLL FARMS. THERE IS A GOOD DEAL OF LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE EXPERTISE AVAILABLE, TOO.

WHO OVERSEES THE FBI? IT’S A MIXTURE. CONGRESS IS ONE PART, THE SENATE IS ONE, AND THE DOJ, WHICH IS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. YES, THE PRESIDENT LEGALLY CAN FIRE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WHO IS INVESTIGATING HIM, BUT HE WOULD STEP INTO A TRAP OF BEING (VERY LOGICALLY) SEEN AS OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE IN THIS CASE WHICH IS AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE AND A CRIME. THAT WAS RICHARD NIXON’S MISTAKE.

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/who-monitors-or-oversees-the-fbi
Who monitors or oversees the FBI?

The FBI’s activities are closely and regularly scrutinized by a variety of entities. Congress—through several oversight committees in the Senate and House—reviews the FBI’s budget appropriations, programs, and selected investigations. The results of FBI investigations are often reviewed by the judicial system during court proceedings. Within the U.S. Department of Justice, the FBI is responsible to the attorney general, and it reports its findings to U.S. Attorneys across the country. The FBI’s intelligence activities are overseen by the Director of National Intelligence.


“EVADING OVERSIGHT?” THAT MEANS THAT MUELLER IS NOT CAVING IN TO TRUMP CAMP’S DEMANDS. SHAMEFUL! HERE IS THE “FAKE” WSJ STORY ON WHAT THE “REAL” CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS IS. I THINK THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS IS THAT NEO-NAZIS HAVE ENTERED OUR GOVERNMENT BECAUSE AS A SUPPOSEDLY INTELLIGENT PEOPLE, WE WERE SO COMPLACENT DESPITE THE KKK/JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY CONNECTIONS, THAT WE WERE ASLEEP, AND WE LET ENEMIES SNEAK THROUGH THE BACK DOOR.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-constitutional-crisis-1527201552?mod=djcm_OBV1_092216
The Real Constitutional Crisis
The FBI and Justice Department continue evading congressional oversight.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein speaks at the Bloomberg Law Leadership Forum, New York City, May 23
By Kimberley A. Strassel
May 24, 2018 6:39 p.m. ET

PHOTO: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein speaks at the Bloomberg Law Leadership Forum, New York City, May 23. PHOTO: VICTOR J. BLUE/BLOOMBERG NEWS VICTOR J. BLUE/BLOOMBERG NEWS

Democrats and their media allies are again shouting “constitutional crisis,” this time claiming President Trump has waded too far into the Russia investigation. The howls are a diversion from the actual crisis: the Justice Department’s unprecedented contempt for duly elected representatives, and the lasting harm it is doing to law enforcement and to the department’s relationship with Congress.

The conceit of those claiming Mr. Trump has crossed some line in ordering the Justice Department to comply with oversight is that “investigators” are beyond question. We are meant to take them at their word that they did everything appropriately. Never mind that the revelations of warrants and spies and dirty dossiers and biased text messages already show otherwise.

We are told that Mr. Trump cannot be allowed to have any say over the Justice Department’s actions, since this might make him privy to sensitive details about an investigation into himself. We are also told that Congress—a separate branch of government, a primary duty of which is oversight—cannot be allowed to access Justice Department material. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes can’t be trusted to view classified information—something every intelligence chairman has done—since he might blow a source or method, or tip off the president.

That’s a political judgment, but it holds no authority. The Constitution set up Congress to act as a check on the executive branch—and it’s got more than enough cause to do some checking here. Yet the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation have spent a year disrespecting Congress—flouting subpoenas, ignoring requests, hiding witnesses, blacking out information, and leaking accusations.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has not been allowed to question a single current or former Justice or FBI official involved in this affair. Not one. He’s also more than a year into his demand for the transcript of former national security adviser Mike Flynn’s infamous call with the Russian ambassador, as well as reports from the FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn. And still nothing.

Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, is being stonewalled on at least three inquiries. The House Judiciary and Oversight committee chairmen required a full-blown summit in April with Justice Department officials to get movement on their own subpoena. The FBI continues to block a fuller release of the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia report.

Not that the documents that Justice sends over are of much use. Mr. Grassley this week excoriated the department for its routine practice of redacting key information, and for similarly refusing to provide a “privilege log” that details the legal basis for withholding information. His team recently discovered that one of the items Justice had scrubbed from the Peter Strzok-Lisa Page texts was the duo’s concern that former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe had a $70,000 conference table. (Was it lacquered with unicorn tears?) A separate text refers to an investigation that the White House is “running,” but conveniently blacks out which one. The FBI won’t answer Mr. Johnson’s questions about who is doing the redacting.

This intransigence is creating an unprecedented toxicity between law enforcement and Congress, undermining what has long been a cooperative and vital relationship. It is also pushing lawmakers ever closer to holding Justice Department officials in contempt or impeaching them. Congress hasn’t impeached a member of the executive branch (presidents excepted) since the 19th century. Let’s agree such a step would amount to a real crisis. And the pressure to use these tools to get disclosure is growing, as congressional Republicans worry about losing their oversight authority in the midterms, and suspect the Justice Department is stringing them along for that very reason.

Which is why Mr. Trump was right to order that Justice comply with Mr. Nunes’s demands for documents about the alleged FBI spy Stefan Halper* and other information related to the catalyst of this investigation. As president, he has a duty to protect the reputation and integrity of the Justice Department—even from its own leaders. Forcing officials to comply with legitimate congressional oversight is far better than sitting back to watch those same officials singe the institution and its relationship with Congress in a flame of impeachment resolutions.

Mr. Trump has an even quicker way to bring the hostility to an end. He can—and should—declassify everything possible, letting Congress and the public see the truth. That would put an end to the daily spin and conspiracy theories. It would puncture Democratic arguments that the administration is seeking to gain this information only for itself, to “undermine” an investigation. And it would end the Justice Department’s campaign of secrecy, which has done such harm to its reputation with the public and with Congress.

Write to kim@wsj.com.
Appeared in the May 25, 2018, print edition.

Biography
@KimStrassel
Kim.Strassel@wsj.com


STEFAN HALPER – THIS STORY IS LONG IN WORDS AND SHORT ON INFORMATION CONCERNING TRUMP, TO ME. HOWEVER, IT DOES INTRODUCE HALPER IN THIS DRAMA. HE IS A SORT OF PROFESSIONAL SPY, WHO WORKS FOR THE MONEY, I THINK.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/05/stefan-halper/
Stefan Halper: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
By Jessica McBride
May 20, 2018 at 9:34pm

Stefan Halper the University of Cambridge professor identified in multiple media outlets as the alleged FBI informant who made contact with Donald Trump campaign aides during the 2016 presidential election, has long-standing ties to both the CIA and former Presidents George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan.

Halper has been paid over $1 million by the U.S. government from 2012 through 2017, this official government database shows. He praised Hillary Clinton in a Russian news source during the presidential election, saying she would be a better choice for the UK and European Union than Trump. Halper’s father-in-law was a long-time CIA man.

Halper was once caught up in a scandal over allegations that he led an operation within the Reagan campaign to dig up information on Jimmy Carter. In 1983, The New York Times reported that Halper was in charge of “an operation to collect inside information on Carter Administration foreign policy” that was “run in Ronald Reagan’s campaign headquarters in the 1980 presidential campaign.”

Some news outlets did not name Halper, such as The New York Times, but gave details about his background that were so specific that other media sources have named Halper as the alleged informant, whom Trump supporters are referring to as a “plant” or “mole” within the campaign. Heavy is naming Halper because his name has already been widely reported. He has not confirmed that he was an alleged informant, nor have authorities.

Trump has highlighted the informant in tweets without naming him. “I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes – and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!” the president wrote.

On May 19, 2018, Trump also wrote, “If the FBI or DOJ was infiltrating a campaign for the benefit of another campaign, that is a really big deal. Only the release or review of documents that the House Intelligence Committee (also, Senate Judiciary) is asking for can give the conclusive answers. Drain the Swamp!”

The DOJ’s Rod Rosenstein then ordered the Inspector General to look into those claims, saying, that if “anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take appropriate action.”

Who is Stefan Halper?

Here’s what you need to know:

1. Halper, a Professor, Made Contact With Three Trump Campaign Officials During the Election & Has Provided Information to the CIA & FBI for Years, Reports Say

The New York Times described the academic, but didn’t name him, as “an American academic who teaches in Britain” and who “made contact” in summer 2016 with Trump campaign aides Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. Halper is an University of Cambridge Professor with “ties to American and British intelligence,” according to The Washington Times.

“Halper’s sit-downs with Page reportedly started in early July 2016, undermining fired FBI Director James Comey’s previous claim that the bureau’s investigation into the Trump campaign began at the end of that month,” The New York Post reported.

People close to Papadopoulos told NBC that “he has described being summoned to England in September 2016 by Halper, who was offering to pay him to discuss energy issues involving Turkey, Israel and Cyprus, which was his area of expertise.”

PHOTOGRAPH -- carter page, Getty
Carter Page arrives at the courthouse on the same day as a hearing regarding Michael Cohen, longtime personal lawyer and confidante for President Donald Trump, at the United States District Court Southern District of New York, April 16, 2018 in New York City.

Papadopoulos told these sources, according to NBC, “that Halper attended the meetings with his assistant, a young Turkish woman. Papadopoulos said he found Halper’s demeanor odd, and in retrospect believes Halper was working on behalf of an intelligence or law enforcement agency.”

Page told NBC he met Halper several times on his farm but didn’t find it suspicious at the time. He wrote the same on Twitter, saying, “Reporters keep asking me about my interactions with Prof. Halper. I found all our interactions to be cordial. Like this email I received about a year after I first met him. He never seemed suspicious. Just a few scholars exchanging ideas. He had interests in policy, and politics.”

. . . .

THE LEGALIZATION OF ABORTION COMES TO IRELAND

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/25/ireland-abortion-referendum-voters-head-polls-leo-varadkar-backs/
Ireland abortion referendum: exit polls predict landslide pro-choice victory
James Rothwell, dublin Chris Graham
26 MAY 2018 • 9:02AM

Ireland has voted by a landslide to reform its tough abortion laws, referendum exit polls indicate.

According to the Irish Times projection, 68 per cent voted Yes to scrapping the country's de facto ban on abortion, while RTE television projected support would reach nearly 70 per cent.

Voters were asked whether to scrap the eighth amendment of the Irish constitution, which puts the life of a mother and her baby on equal footing. The amendment was introduced via a referendum in 1983.

The current regime forces thousand of women to travel to England for terminations, which the pro-choice Yes campaign says is inhumane and causes needless suffering in an already traumatic situation.

"It's looking like we will make history tomorrow," Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, who was in favour of change, said on Twitter.


Leo Varadkar
✔
@campaignforleo
Thank you to everyone who voted today. Democracy in action. It’s looking like we will make history tomorrow.... #Together4Yes

6:35 PM - May 25, 2018
9,876
1,631 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Polls previously suggested that the Yes camp had a comfortable majority, but in the wake of the Brexit vote and the surprise victory of Donald Trump, the result seemed close to call.

The Irish Times exit poll suggested that women voted by 70 per cent in favour of the proposal and 30 per cent against. Support among men was 65 per cent pro-choice and 35 per cent anti-abortion.

People over 65, however, voted mostly against change.

Among the youngest voters, 18-24 year-olds, the poll found 87 per cent had voted to allow abortion, according to the poll.

Nearly 3.5 million voters were asked whether they wanted to overturn the ban after an emotional and divisive campaign.

Yes campaign: It's time for more compassionate law
Ireland has some of the toughest abortion laws in Europe, banning the procedure in cases of rape, incest or fatal foetal abnormalities. Those who choose to have an illegal abortion in Ireland risk up to 14 years in prison.

But the pro-life No campaign says the alternative proposed by the government goes too far, as it would allow unrestricted access to abortion for up to 12 weeks.

Photographs on Twitter showed campaigners hugging and in tears at the Together4yes umbrella group's headquarters shortly after the first exit poll was published.

Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan called it "another big step out of our dark past." Minister for Children Katherine Zappone, an early advocate for holding the referendum, said an "emotional, historic day" lay ahead.

Yes campaigners rejoice in Dublin as exit polls indicate a vote to repeal Ireland's 8th amendment
Yes campaigners rejoice in Dublin as exit polls indicate a vote to repeal Ireland's 8th amendment CREDIT: HARLES MCQUILLAN/GETTY IMAGES
Mr Varadkar said repealing the eighth amendment would pave the way for more compassionate abortion laws.

"I hope that a Yes vote will help to lift that stigma and help to take away that legacy of shame that exists in our society," Mr Varadkar said.

Simon Coveney, the deputy prime minister, wrote on Twitter: "Thank you to everybody who voted today - democracy can be so powerful on days like today - looks like a stunning result that will bring about a fundamental change for the better. Proud to be Irish tonight."


Marian Keyes, the author, was among the first Irish celebrities to react to the exit polls.


Marian KeYES
✔
@MarianKeyes
Oh my god Lads! Exit poll shows 68% voted YES! Can exit polls be trusted? If so, THIS IS GREAT
THANK YOU, EVERYONE!!! https://twitter.com/julie_cooling/status/1000123155577438213 …

5:18 PM - May 25, 2018
2,365
224 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Graham Lineham, creator of Father Ted, tweeted a meme of his sitcom as he celebrated.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Graham YES Linehan
✔
@Glinner
5:51 PM - May 25, 2018
23.9K
7,763 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Stephen McGann, star of Call The Midwife, revealed he was brought to tears by the exit poll.


Stephen McGann
✔
@StephenMcGann
Tearing up in work at reports of the exit poll. Those silent legions of poor, scared, lonely women. All of that coldness and shame. Please let it end now with a single, strong, healing heart. x

5:29 PM - May 25, 2018
1,131
140 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

No campaign: Proposed replacement is too extreme
Meanwhile, Cora Sherlock, a prominent No campaigner, expressed disappointment at the polls.

"Exit polls, if accurate, paint a very sad state of affairs tonight," she tweeted late on Friday.

"But those who voted No should take heart. Abortion on demand would deal Ireland a tragic blow but the pro-life movement will rise to any challenge it faces. Let's go into tomorrow with this in mind. #8thref"

Speaking to the Telegraph, No campaign chief John McGuirk said it was essential that Ireland protected the eighth amendment or it would put the lives of countless unborn children at risk.

“If you believe a child has rights before it is born then this referendum would take away those rights," Mr McGuirk said.

It came as GPs supporting the No side claimed that asking doctors to carry out abortions without a reason being offered cannot be described as healthcare.

General practitioners opposed to the repeal of the eighth amendment said the proposals to liberalise Ireland's termination laws would amount to "abortion on demand".

More than 120 GPs put their names to the open letter, expressing "serious concerns" about health minister Simon Harris's plan.

Dr Brendan Crowley, one of the signatories, said the doctors were "not expressing a position on abortion one way or the other".

"However, we are united in the view that the Government's proposals would open the door to abortion on demand in a similar manner to that prevailing in Britain," he said.

"In circumstances where the draft abortion law specifies that the role of the GP will be 'carrying out the termination of pregnancy' at the request of the patient, without the need for any reason to be given by the patient, there is no way such a proposal could be described as 'healthcare'."

'Hope' for Northern Ireland
The exit poll results also spurred hope for Northern Ireland, which could soon become the only part of Britain and Ireland where terminations are all but outlawed.

The UK Government's International Development Secretary Penny Mordaunt was among those referencing the situation in Belfast as she pointed to the historic events in Dublin.


Penny Mordaunt MP
✔
@PennyMordaunt
Based on the exit poll, a historic & great day for Ireland, & a hopeful one for Northern Ireland. That hope must be met. #HomeToVote stories are a powerful and moving testimony as to why this had to happen and that understanding & empathy exists between generations. #trustwomen

7:06 PM - May 25, 2018
764
259 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Reacting to the polls, former shadow Northern Ireland secretary, Labour's Owen Smith, tweeted: "Wonderful news, if true. And a powerful message to Northern Ireland. We need change across the whole island of Ireland."


Leader of Northern Ireland's Alliance Party Naomi Long said: "Eyes will now turn to us: yet again a place apart. Behind GB. Behind Ireland."

Thousands return home to vote
Thousands of Irish voters have flown home from as far away as America, Vietnam and Kenya to have their say in the referendum.

Ciaran Gaffney, based in Buenos Aires, Argentina, spotted four of his countrymen on a plane home to vote.


He tweeted: "Was actually so humbled and relieved to meet four other Irish people on the flight from Buenos Aires to London, all of them flying onwards to Dublin today or tomorrow to #voteyes."

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

the cute hoor
@HoorayForNiamh
So I forgot my repeal jumper when I first started my travels in January and now my mam and dad are after showing up at Dublin airport with the jumper in hand and I just 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 #HomeToVote #Together4Yes #repealthe8th #VietnamToIreland

8:56 AM - May 23, 2018
11.5K
1,169 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Mary Galvin, 73, from Wexford, cut her holiday to Italy short by a day to be home for the referendum to vote No.

She said: "I've been a nurse all my life - the hard cases, there are many hard cases, like a lady who had been raped, and you help deal with that and the aftermath of that, with support."



“TAOISEACH LEO VARADKAR DESCRIBED THE REFERENDUM RESULT AS A “QUIET REVOLUTION” THAT CAME 100 YEARS AFTER WOMEN WERE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO VOTE. ... FOR THOSE WHO VOTED NO, HE SAID: "I WOULD LIKE TO REASSURE YOU THAT IRELAND IS STILL BE [SIC] THE SAME COUNTRY TODAY AS IT WAS BEFORE, JUST A LITTLE MORE TOLERANT, OPEN AND RESPECTFUL.” CAN THIS BE A BAD THING?

VARADKAR IS CLEARLY INTELLIGENT AND RESPECTS WOMEN. THERE ARE MANY THINGS I LIKE ABOUT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, OR AT ANY RATE ABOUT THE CATHOLIC PEOPLE I’VE KNOWN, BUT THE ANTI-ABORTION PREJUDICE IS NOT ONE OF THEM. RELIGIOUS BOOKS AND KNOWLEDGE ARE NOT THE ONLY SOURCE OF INFORMATION.

I’M JUST GLAD TO SEE THAT OUR CURRENT POPE IS CONCERNED ABOUT SO MANY LONG-TERM CHURCH PROBLEMS. HE HAS ALSO SPOKEN OUT ON THE ANTI-SCIENTIFIC BIAS ON ISSUES LIKE PRESERVING A WORLD WHERE LIFE CAN CONTINUE TO FLOURISH, THE OCEAN WON’T BE BARREN, THE AIR WILL BE BREATHABLE, AND IT WON’T BE FLOODED DUE TO MELTED ICE.

BECAUSE I KNOW YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW THE PRONUNCIATION OF THIS WORD AS MUCH AS I DO, I FOUND THIS ON GOOD OLD TRUSTY GOOGLE:

“TAOISEACH (OR AN TAOISEACH) IS THE TITLE FOR THE HEAD OF GOVERNMENT AND THE EQUIVALENT OF PRIME MINISTER. THE ESTABLISHED ANGLICISATION FOR THIS WORD IS TEE-SHOCK (-EE AS IN MEET, -SH AS IN SHIP). THE ANGLICISED PRONUNCIATION TEE-SHUHCK IS ALSO WIDELY HEARD. NOV 25, 2010.”

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/we-voted-to-look-reality-in-the-eye-and-we-did-not-blink-leo-varadkar-on-landslide-referendum-result-36949348.html
'We voted to look reality in the eye and we did not blink' - Leo Varadkar on landslide referendum result
Constituencies declared: 40/40
Kevin Doyle
May 26 2018 6:46 PM

PHOTOGRAPH -- Taoiseach Leo Varadkar pictured at the Dublin County Count Centre in Citywest Photo: Frank Mc Grath

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar described the referendum result as a “quiet revolution” that came 100 years after women were given the right to vote.

With 66pc of voters backing the Government's proposal to allow abortions in Ireland, Mr Varadkar said: “We have voted to look reality in the eye and we did not blink."

For those who voted No, he said: "I would like to reassure you that Ireland is still be the same country today as it was before, just a little more tolerant, open and respectful.”

Mr Varadkar said for 35 years we had “hidden our conscience behind the Constitution” but voters had said “no more”.

“No more doctors telling their patients there is nothing that can be done for them in their own country.

“No more lonely journeys across the Irish Sea. No more stigma. The veil of secrecy is lifted.

How Did Your Constituency Vote?

FINAL RESULTS Constituencies declared: 40/40

IrelandDublin
+
-
Map Key

Yes55% 50%55% No
“No more isolation. The burden of shame is gone.”

Mr Varadkar said the campaign had been largely respectful and the Government now had a mandate to bring forward legislation and secure its passage by the end of the year.

“I said in recent days that this was a once in a generation vote. Today I believe we have voted for the next generation,” he said.

And paraphrasing poet Maya Angelou, he concluded: “The wrenching pain of decades of mistreatment of Irish women cannot be unlived. However, today we have ensured that it does not have to be lived again.”

Online Editors


A HIGHLY DETERMINED AND FORTHRIGHT IRISH BLACK WOMAN MAKES THE POINT, IN CASE ANYBODY MISSED IT.

https://www.independent.ie/videos/irish-news/video-men-should-know-their-place-in-abortion-debate-30526010.html
VIDEO: 'Men should know their place' in abortion debate
Orlagh Bailey/David O'Beirne
August 21 2014 12:55 PM
Video Irish News Video Saturday 26 May 2018

(2014) A speech made at a Dublin pro-choice rally yesterday said 'men must know their place in the abortion debate' and that 'it's a women's campaign'

A SPEECHMAKER at an abortion rally in Dublin yesterday said men should ‘know their place’ in the abortion campaign.

During the impassioned speech, the woman said that the campaign is a women’s campaign.

Speaking on the country’s latest abortion case, where a young women was refused an abortion and a c-section was carried out, she said:

“The hospitals in this wretched country gave her a horrible disservice.

“I am sorry to the women who are still having to go through this s**t in this country because of a cowardly government.”

She then addressed the men who attended the rally:

“I want to address all the men in this audience. All the men who have with their female friends who have come here today to be with us, to support us.

“I want to talk to all the men today, who made placards and banners of pro-choice.

“I want to talk to the men today who made countless articles to show support to women to have body autonomy for themselves

“I am saying to all those men – know your place. This is a women’s movement. And your support, as much as it's always needed, you must always remember you are here are here to support women.

“If you see any man, any man, friend or foe – if they are against any women who are trying to speak about their experience - you know nothing about it.

“You must listen to them, you must never tell them of any women’s studies or international development course that you decide of your won free choice to participate in. Your debate is not my life.

“I love and respect and appreciate the men who do this. But remember your place. This is a women’s movement.”

Stephanie Lord, spokeperson for Choice Ireland told Independent.ie:

"We understand that there may be people who felt unsettled at the comments but the sentiment of them was that men involved in the pro-choice movement should be supporting and not dominating the conversation.

"While the speaker also thanked the men present and stated that she respected them for being there.

"We are a movement aiming to eradicate gender inequality, so that also involves being self-critical and not replicating the oppression of dominant political structures where men consistently make decisions regarding women's reproductive choices.

"However, we do recognise that transgender men and people outside the gender binary may also experience pregnancy. This is their campaign too."

Jene Kelly of AIMSI said: "AIMSI congratulates Amanda on her powerful speech at yesterday's demonstration. Women's voices are so often lost in academic and political debate around maternal health and rights.

"There are often attempts to invalidate and discredit women's stories - instead of listening to and prioritising them as with a woman-centred approach.

"The voice of migrant women* needs to be front and centre in this discussion - they are all too frequently overlooked, yet disproportionately represented in tragedy after tragedy in our maternity wards."


MIGRANT WOMEN* http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2017/12/compilation-international-migrants-day

SEE ALSO "IRISH TRAVELLERS" IN WIKIPEDIA. THEIR HISTORY AND DNA INFORMATION IS REALLY FASCINATING. IN THE USA, AT LEAST, THOUGH, THEY HAVE A VERY SKETCHY REPUTATION, VERY MUCH LIKE "GYPSIES -- OR ROMA.


TRUMP EXPLAINING HIS CONSTANT ATTACKS ON THE PRESS WITH HIS BLATANT LIES. SEE THIS LESLIE STAHL INTERVIEW.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/05/23/leslie_stahl_trump_told_me_he_uses_term_fake_news_to_discredit_the_media.html
Back to Videos
Lesley Stahl: Trump Told Me He Uses Term "Fake News" To Discredit The Media
Posted By Ian Schwartz
On Date May 23, 2018

INTERVIEW VIDEO : LESLIE STAHL: TRUMP’S PLAN TO DISCREDIT ...

60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl revealed an off-camera conversation about the media and his use of "fake news" she had with then-candidate Donald Trump when she interviewed him for the newsmagazine show after he won the Republican nomination.

Stahl said in an interview with PBS News' Judy Woodruff that Trump told her he keeps hammering the press so that when they write negative stories no one will believe them.

LESLEY STAHL: It's just me, my boss, and him -- he has a huge office -- and he's attacking the press. There were no cameras, there was nothing going on and I said, 'That is getting tired, why are you doing it? You're doing it over and over and it's boring. It's time to end that, you've won the nomination. And why do you keep hammering at this?'


And he said: 'You know why I do it? I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you.'

So, put that in your head for a minute.


Watch the full 'Deadline Club' interview:


Related Topics: Donald Trump, JUDY WOODRUFF, Lesley Stahl



TRUMP AND THE “MADE UP” WHITE HOUSE NEWS SOURCE

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/reporters-call-bs-after-trump-claims-new-york-times-made-up-source-for-north-korea-story
Reporters call BS after Trump claims New York Times made up source for North Korea story
by Josh Siegel
| May 26, 2018 12:09 PM
| Updated May 26, 2018, 12:21 PM

Reporters called out President Trump on Saturday for claiming the New York Times falsely reported that a White House official told them it would be impossible for the president to reinstate a canceled summit meeting with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un in Singapore on June 12.

“The Failing @nytimes quotes “a senior White House official,” who doesn’t exist, as saying “even if the meeting were reinstated, holding it on June 12 would be impossible, given the lack of time and the amount of planning needed.” WRONG AGAIN! Use real people, not phony sources," Trump said in a Twitter post.

Reporters quickly defended the Times, saying the White House official spoke with a number of journalists in an arranged discussion on background, meaning they could not use his or her identity. One reporter, Yashar Ali of New York Magazine and Huffington Post, named the official, to prove Trump is not telling the truth. He reasoned that since he is not a White House reporter who agreed to the on-background terms, he felt okay naming the official.

Dan Hannan on the progress of a US-UK trade deal

“This is something a senior White House official, whose name is known to reporters, said on background on a conference call with lots of reporters. This person definitely exists,” said Katie Watson, a reporter with CBS News, in a Twitter post.

“I mean, every reporter on the call knows who this official was, and this official exists. And we all heard the official say it,” said Mike Warren, a writer at The Weekly Standard, in a tweet.

Another reporter, Benjy Sarlin of NBC News, threatened to stop following White House directions on how to refer to officials who brief the media. "Doesn’t seem like there’s any reason to honor WH demands for anonymous briefings if the WH is going to then claim their own briefings are fake news," Sarlin said on Twitter.

Seung Min Kim, a White House reporter for the Washington Post, shared the full quote from the official as well as the explanation given for not wanting to go on the record.

Trump also tried to deny Saturday that there is internal disagreement among his staff on whether or how to proceed with a summit meeting with Kim, after Trump had canceled the meeting in a letter to him. Trump now says he is hopeful to meet with the North's leader.

“Unlike what the Failing and Corrupt New York Times would like people to believe, there is ZERO disagreement within the Trump Administration as to how to deal with North Korea...and if there was, it wouldn’t matter. The @nytimes has called me wrong right from the beginning!” Trump tweeted.

The Times said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis favor negotiating with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program, while national security adviser John Bolton says that Trump should only meet with Kim if he is prepared to give up all its nuclear weapons.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Saturday that "the White House pre-advance team for Singapore will leave as scheduled in order to prepare should the summit take place.”


TRUMP V WORLD

https://washingtonpress.com/2018/05/26/trump-just-accused-the-media-of-inventing-a-source-and-reporters-immediately-hit-back/
Trump just accused the media of inventing a source, and reporters immediately hit back
BY VINNIE LONGOBARDO
PUBLISHED ON MAY 26, 2018

It’s Trump’s deliberate plan to weaken faith in the believability of any media outlet that doesn’t sing his praises so that as more and more news of his administration’s corruption and venality is published, the less impact it will have on a public made doubtful by his constant attacks.

He attacked the “failing,” as he invariably and falsely describes it, New York Times this morning in a tweet that accused the paper of inventing non-existent sources for its stories of internal White House turmoil.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
The Failing @nytimes quotes “a senior White House official,” who doesn’t exist, as saying “even if the meeting were reinstated, holding it on June 12 would be impossible, given the lack of time and the amount of planning needed.” WRONG AGAIN! Use real people, not phony sources.

11:21 AM - May 26, 2018
44.2K
27K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Now The Hill has published evidence refuting Trump’s claims, submitted by reporters who are fighting back, incensed by the president’s attacks on their credibility and basic competence at their jobs in general — and the veracity of this story in particular.

The reporters say that not only does this “senior White House official” exist but that they held an “in-person background briefing about the summit on Thursday.” They directly quoted the official, unnamed as per the journalistic norms of background briefings, as saying:

“The ball is in North Korea’s court right now. There’s really not a lot of time. We’ve lost quite a bit of time that we would need.”

Twitter was ablaze with comments from indignant reporters who pointed out the fallacy of the president’s latest deliberate lie.


View image on Twitter

Daniel Dale
✔
@ddale8
This is a ridiculous lie about the Times. The senior White House official is not only real - the official said June 12 was extremely unlikely *at an in-person White House briefing to the media* on Thursday.

11:33 AM - May 26, 2018
2,138
973 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

Alex Mallin
✔
@alex_mallin
.@realDonaldTrump is slamming the @nytimes for citing a senior White House official “who doesn’t exist,” but the portion of the article he appears to be referring to directly cites comments made at a background briefing the White House held for the whole press corps Thursday.

11:35 AM - May 26, 2018
1,413
994 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Mike Warren
✔
@MichaelRWarren
I mean, every reporter on the call knows who this official was, and this official exists. And we all heard the official say it. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1000396430371106817 …

11:31 AM - May 26, 2018
10.7K
4,011 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


The actual reporters of The New York Times story that Trump refers to also used the president’s preferred medium to respond to the cynically baseless accusations.


David Sanger
@SangerNYT
The reason that this official was not named in our story is that the White House press office insisted that its briefing -- for hundreds of reporters -- was on background. Best way to alleviate the President's concern about anonymous sources would be for WH to name the official. https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1000403695396446210 …

12:00 PM - May 26, 2018
962
475 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Maggie Haberman
✔
@maggieNYT
Trump told two demonstrable falsehoods this AM, one about his administration’s policy of separating undocumented immigrant kids inclu infants from their parents, which he tried to claim wasn’t his own policy. The other was falsely claiming his own aide didn’t give a bg briefing.

11:58 AM - May 26, 2018
12K
8,581 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Maggie Haberman
✔
@maggieNYT
Imagine being the WH background briefer who led this briefing, who now has his boss - the president of the US - saying he/she doesn’t exist. https://twitter.com/alex_mallin/status/1000399920627666944 …

11:50 AM - May 26, 2018
3,557
1,823 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

It took reporters who were not present at the background briefing and therefore not subject to the rules preventing them from identifying the person holding it to identify the source with an actual name.


Yashar Ali 🐘
✔
@yashar
The official is Matt Pottinger who serves on the National Security Council. He briefed dozens of reporters on background. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1000396430371106817 …

11:48 AM - May 26, 2018
12.3K
6,038 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Glenn Kessler
✔
@GlennKesslerWP
FYI, Matthew Pottinger is NSC Senior Director for Asian Affairs, @POTUS. Ask for a transcript of the briefing, done in the White House with the press office's approval. https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1000404335568785408 …

12:04 PM - May 26, 2018
455
204 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

After real journalists reveal the truth behind the president’s purposeful lies, there is only one thing to say to Trump:

“WRONG AGAIN! Use real facts, not phony excuses for your own administration’s inability to get your story straight.”

Follow Vinnie Longobardo on Twitter.

Add your name to millions demanding Congress take action on the President’s crimes. IMPEACH TRUMP & PENCE!

VINNIE LONGOBARDO

VINNIE LONGOBARDO IS A 35-YEAR VETERAN OF THE TV, MOBILE & INTERNET INDUSTRIES, SPECIALIZING IN START-UPS AND THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA BUSINESS. HIS PASSIONS ARE POLITICS, MUSIC AND ART.


LOST 1500 IMMIGRANT CHILDREN – THE ORIGINAL CNN STORY

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/26/politics/hhs-lost-track-1500-immigrant-children/index.html
US lost track of 1,500 immigrant children, but says it's not 'legally responsible'
By Dakin Andone, CNN
Updated 2:57 PM ET, Sat May 26, 2018

VIDEO – BORDER OFFICIALS GIVE CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF DEADLY SHOOTING

(CNN)The federal government has placed thousands of unaccompanied immigrant children in the homes of sponsors, but last year it couldn't account for nearly 1,500 of them.

New DHS policy could separate families caught crossing the border illegally

Steven Wagner, a top official with the Department of Health and Human Services, disclosed the number to a Senate subcommittee last month while discussing the state of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) that oversees the care of unaccompanied immigrant children.

Wagner is the acting assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families, which is part of the Department of Health and Human Services. ORR is a program of the Administration for Children and Families.

CNN reported earlier this month that, in his testimony, Wagner said during the last three months of 2017, the ORR lost track of nearly 1,500 immigrant children it had placed in the homes of sponsors.

Wagner's statement has attracted more attention amid reports that immigrant children are being separated from their parents at the US border.

Wagner said the Department of Homeland Security referred more than 40,000 immigrant children to the ORR during the 2017 fiscal year.

After a stay in an ORR shelter, the majority of children are sent to live with sponsors who have close ties to the children -- typically a parent or close relative, Wagner said, though some end up living with "other-than-close relatives or non-relatives."

Between October and December 2017, Wagner told the subcommittee, the ORR reached out to 7,635 unaccompanied children to check on them. But the ORR "was unable to determine with certainty the whereabouts of 1,475 children," Wagner testified. An additional 28 had run away.

That's more than 19% of the children that were placed by the ORR. But Wagner said HHS is not responsible for the children.

"I understand that it has been HHS's long-standing interpretation of the law that ORR is not legally responsible for children after they are released from ORR care," Wagner said.

The office is "taking a fresh look at that question," he added. But if the ORR were to be legally responsible for the well-being of unaccompanied immigrant children, it would need a significant increase in resources.

A request for comment from HHS on Saturday has not been returned.

The ORR has a series of evaluations to determine if a sponsor is suitable to provide and care for a child. Those policies have also been enhanced since February 2016. Among the ORR's practices, it evaluates potential sponsors' relationship with the children and conducts background checks to ensure children are protected from human traffickers or smugglers, Wagner said.

Woman in possible 'caravan' case accuses Sessions of discrimination

Wagner's statement has received increased scrutiny a month after the Department of Homeland Security defended an agency policy that will result in more families being separated at the border.

At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said similar separations happen in the US "every day."

Nielsen said the policy will refer everyone caught crossing the border illegally for prosecution, even if they are claiming they deserve asylum or have small children. Any parents who are prosecuted as a result will be separated from their children in the process.

"Our policy is if you break the law, we will prosecute you," Nielsen said. "You have an option to go to a port of entry and not illegally cross into our country."

CNN's Tal Kopan contributed to this report.


https://washingtonpress.com/2018/05/26/trump-just-gave-a-disgusting-excuse-for-losing-1500-immigrant-kids/
Trump just gave a disgusting excuse for losing 1,500 immigrant kids
BY VINNIE LONGOBARDO
PUBLISHED ON MAY 26, 2018

Facing growing outrage over the news widely disseminated yesterday about the plight of the nearly 1,500 children whom the government has lost track of after ripping them away from their immigrant parents at the border, President Trump did what he typically does when faced with a horrible situation resulting from policies that he himself instituted: shirk responsibility and blame the Democrats for his own reprehensible actions.

The president took to Twitter to spread his latest batch of lies.

Facebook's new algorithm changes have decimated the reach and the ad revenue of independent news sources like ours. Please become a patron of our news website and help us pay our writers by making a small contribution:
View our Patreon page >


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Put pressure on the Democrats to end the horrible law that separates children from there parents once they cross the Border into the U.S. Catch and Release, Lottery and Chain must also go with it and we MUST continue building the WALL! DEMOCRATS ARE PROTECTING MS-13 THUGS.

9:59 AM - May 26, 2018
60.4K
56.2K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Let’s get the trademarked grammatical errors out of the way before delving into the content of the tweet.

While we now know that White House communications staffers who sometimes commandeer Trump’s account to compose tweets on his behalf are imitating his misspellings and mangling of the lexicon to appear authentic, there is no excuse for using “there” instead of the possessive “their” in front of the word parents.

With that out of the way, it might be useful to remind the president that he and his party control both the legislative branch of government that makes the laws and the executive branch that enforces them. There’s no need to “put pressure on” Democrats to end any laws that separate children from their parents. If Republicans weren’t explicitly in favor of Trump’s immigration crackdown, they would end it and they haven’t done a thing to try.

It’s the second half of the tweet that explains why Trump’s rant against the very concept of immigration is the foundation of his political appeal to his base of aggrieved working-class whites who have been suckered by the 1% who control America’s wealth into blaming immigrants rather than the oligarch’s greed for their floundering fortunes.

Trump’s shift from blaming Democrats for his own heinous deportation policies that separate families at the border to his fear mongering blame of them for “PROTECTING MS-13 THUGS” demonstrates both the deep incoherence of his logic as well as the hypocritical media manipulation that may be his only talent.

Follow Vinnie Longobardo on Twitter.

VINNIE LONGOBARDO
VINNIE LONGOBARDO IS A 35-YEAR VETERAN OF THE TV, MOBILE & INTERNET INDUSTRIES, SPECIALIZING IN START-UPS AND THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA BUSINESS. HIS PASSIONS ARE POLITICS, MUSIC AND ART.



ONE OF MY FAVORITE OLD FAIRY TALES HAD A LINE IN IT THAT ALWAYS HAS MADE ME LAUGH. THE HERO HAD TO KILL A DRAGON WITH MANY HEADS WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE STORY, WERE “EACH MORE FEARSOME THAN THE OTHERS.” IT SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT EACH WAS WORSE THAN THE ONES BEFORE, BUT THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME RHYTHM. DONALD TRUMP’S PROBLEM IS THAT EACH OF HIS INTERNAL “SPIES” IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN ALL OF THE OTHERS, SO THAT EVERY TIME HE DOES ANOTHER PURGE A LEGION OF OTHERS SPRING UP. THAT’S BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE DISAGREE WITH HIM IN PRINCIPLE. WHAT HE CAN’T GET A GRIP ON IS THAT WITHOUT TRULY DRACONIAN MEASURES AGAINST THE AMERICAN CITIZENS, STATESMEN AND BUREAUCRATS HE WILL NOT BEAT THIS DRAGON.

ALSO, AS SOME OF US KNOW, IF AND WHEN HE DOES BEAT OUR GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE, HE MAY BE OUT GOLFING IN FLORIDA ONE FINE DAY WHEN A BULLET WILL DECIDE THE ISSUE. A FURIOUS CITIZEN? NO. THE CIA. THAT WOULD BE A TRAGEDY FOR ALL OF AMERICA, NOT JUST FOR HIM, SO I HOPE THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION WILL FIND JUICY MATERIAL AND INDICT HIM, INSTEAD, FOR MULTIPLE FINANCIAL CRIMES AND DEALING WITH THE RUSSIAN MAFIA.

https://washingtonpress.com/2018/05/26/leakers-just-leaked-that-trump-is-planning-to-take-action-against-white-house-leakers/
Leakers just leaked that Trump is planning to take action against White House leakers
BY COLIN TAYLOR
PUBLISHED ON MAY 26, 2018

Two sources close to the President have just revealed to the Independent Journal Review that the President is planning another purge of his administration in yet another attempt to cleanse his “well-oiled machine” of the leakers who are constantly humiliating and undermining him and his administration.

The constant appointments and firings of the Trump administration has been an endless source of chaos and disorganization as one group of idiot grifters and scheming ideologues are replaced with a different group of idiot grifters and scheming ideologues, a carousel of mediocrity and privilege that sees the absolute worst people America has to offer elevated to positions of prominence and power.

Facebook's new algorithm changes have decimated the reach and the ad revenue of independent news sources like ours. Please become a patron of our news website and help us pay our writers by making a small contribution:
View our Patreon page >

But since most of them are utterly shameless in their ambitions and selfish desires, they constantly leak information to damage their rivals within the administration and to get revenge on those who have slighted them, like when it was recently revealed that a Trump staffer had made an insensitive remark about Sen. John McCain’s brain cancer. Many leaks are “the result of someone losing an internal policy debate,” said a leaker to Axios.

While it’s unclear who is getting the axe, when it will happen, and which hungry jackals will replace those who just lost their jobs, it’s clear that the Trump administration is falling apart at the seams – which we can be thankful for, since it makes rolling out their heinous agenda of white supremacy and shameless plutocracy that much more difficult.


“YOU KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO…THE ONLY EFFECTIVE THING YOU CAN DO: VOTE IN THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER AND ELECT A DEMOCRATIC-CONTROLLED CONGRESS THAT WILL HOLD TRUMP ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS MULTIPLE ATROCITIES.”

https://washingtonpress.com/2018/05/26/trump-just-accidentally-exposed-his-guilt-in-unhinged-twitter-attack-on-russia-probe/
Trump just accidentally exposed his guilt in unhinged Twitter attack on Russia probe
BY VINNIE LONGOBARDO
PUBLISHED ON MAY 26, 2018

Whatever muse that inspires President Trump to bring his tiny fingers to the Twitter keyboard was particularly active this morning. Given the deliberately fallacious contents of his multiple tweets today that muse was probably a member of the Transformers villains, the Decepticons.

With the number of tweets that Trump excretes directly proportional to the amount of heat he’s feeling from the Mueller investigation, the temperature level must be getting particularly hellish today.

While his early morning tweets were focused on immigration and the “fake news” media, his attention turned back to his favorite guiltily paranoid fever dream of the Russia investigation in the early afternoon.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
With Spies, or “Informants” as the Democrats like to call them because it sounds less sinister (but it’s not), all over my campaign, even from a very early date, why didn’t the crooked highest levels of the FBI or “Justice” contact me to tell me of the phony Russia problem?

3:28 PM - May 26, 2018
34.6K
22K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
This whole Russia Probe is Rigged. Just an excuse as to why the Dems and Crooked Hillary lost the Election and States that haven’t been lost in decades. 13 Angry Democrats, and all Dems if you include the people who worked for Obama for 8 years. #SPYGATE & CONFLICTS OF INTEREST!

3:41 PM - May 26, 2018
33.4K
22.7K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
When will the 13 Angry Democrats (& those who worked for President O), reveal their disqualifying Conflicts of Interest? It’s been a long time now! Will they be indelibly written into the Report along with the fact that the only Collusion is with the Dems, Justice, FBI & Russia?

3:56 PM - May 26, 2018
31.1K
22.5K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


It’s certainly a bizarre spectacle when a president is asking the FBI why they didn’t tell him he was under investigation for colluding with Russia, but what makes it even more bizarre is the fact that they actually did tell him.

One could point out the obvious lies and deliberate misinformation that Trump is promulgating for the thousandth time, but with a president so desperately flailing away as the truth closes in on him from multiple directions, perhaps it would be more useful to point out the recent revelations that are forcing Trump to try to fight his way out of the corner.

There was yesterday’s scoop about Spanish police having delivered wiretapped conversations between a sanctioned Russian oligarch and a convicted money-launderer that had a senior Spanish prosecutor saying that “Mr. Trump’s son should be concerned.”

There are the 1,500 immigrant children who thanks to Trump’s immigration enforcement policies have been snatched from their families at the border and promptly lost track of by immigration authorities, possibly landing in the hands of human traffickers and sex offenders,

There’s the much-vaunted meeting between Congress members and the Justice Department to present the evidence that supposedly verifies the very accusations that Trump’s making in the tweets above that we know was a complete bust from the lack of valedictory press releases from the rabidly pro-Trump Republican Congress members who attended.

There’s the news that Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, met with another Russian oligarch at Trump Tower just eleven days before his inauguration.

Then, of course, the sight of former film mogul and accused rapist Harvey Weinstein being led away in handcuffs must have triggered an unpleasant foreshadowing of the possible fate that Trump himself may face for the numerous allegations of sexual assault that multiple women have lodged against him.

We could go on, but all of the above, plus the dream of a Nobel Peace Prize dissolving before his very eyes, is sufficient explanation for Trump’s pathetic attempts to place the blame for his criminal behavior everywhere but where it clearly belongs, squarely in his ample lap.

You know what you have to do…the only effective thing you can do: vote in the midterm elections in November and elect a Democratic-controlled Congress that will hold Trump accountable for his multiple atrocities.

Follow Vinnie Longobardo on Twitter.

Add your name to millions demanding Congress take action on the President’s crimes. IMPEACH TRUMP & PENCE!

VINNIE LONGOBARDO IS A 35-YEAR VETERAN OF THE TV, MOBILE & INTERNET INDUSTRIES, SPECIALIZING IN START-UPS AND THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA BUSINESS. HIS PASSIONS ARE POLITICS, MUSIC AND ART.



"ALAN BEAN ONCE SAID 'I HAVE THE NICEST LIFE IN THE WORLD,'" NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA) ADMINISTRATOR JIM BRIDENSTINE SAID IN A STATEMENT. "IT'S A COMFORTING SENTIMENT TO RECALL AS WE MOURN HIS PASSING."

REST IN PEACE

https://www.yahoo.com/news/alan-bean-u-astronaut-moonwalker-dies-houston-86-193807277.html?soc_trk=gcm&soc_src=937981b8-b832-11e5-a8a0-fa163e2c24a6&.tsrc=notification-brknews
Alan Bean, U.S. astronaut and moonwalker, dies in Houston at 86: NASA
Reuters DF • May 26, 2018

FILE PHOTO: Retired Astronaut Alan Bean, 66, poses for a portrait in his spacesuit at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, U.S., in this undated photo. Bean, who was the fourth man to walk on the moon in 1969, left NASA in 1981 and made a successful transition from spaceman to a full-time professional artist. REUTERS/Stringer/File Photo

NEW YORK (Reuters) - American astronaut Alan Bean, the fourth person to walk on the moon in 1969 during the Apollo 12 mission and commanded a crew on the Skylab space station in 1973, died in Houston on Saturday, federal officials said.

He was 86 years old.

"Alan Bean once said 'I have the nicest life in the world,'" National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in a statement. "It's a comforting sentiment to recall as we mourn his passing."

(Reporting by Gina Cherelus; Editing by Susan Thomas)

29 reactions13%66%21%

ronald
ronald5 minutes ago
A brave man when the world was brave.
ReplyReplies (2)301

tRumpUturd
tRumpUturd5 minutes ago
American astronaut Alan Bean. Rest Peacefully..... Walking on the moon.
Reply20

Cousin Fred
Cousin Fred4 minutes ago
Great man, great artist, so few like him nowadays...now we have comic book heroes.
Reply8



THIS IS AMERICA IN ACTION TODAY, OUR HISTORY AND A BEAUTIFUL VIDEO. ENJOY!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coast-guard-long-history-new-york-hamilton-fleet-week/
CBS NEWS May 26, 2018, 11:38 AM
U.S. Coast Guard's long history of service in New York

More than a dozen Navy and Coast Guard ships took part in a 30-year tradition this week, parading through New York Harbor for Fleet Week. The nautical display lasts just a few days, but the U.S. Coast Guard patrols the waterways of New York all year long, reports CBS News correspondent Don Dahler.

"As Frank Sinatra would say, start spreading the news. You are about to become a Coast Guard city," Adm. Paul F. Zukunft said.

This month, the city was honored as the country's 25th and largest Coast Guard city. The proclamation came from sector New York commander, Capt. Michael Day.

"Without a doubt New York is one of the most patriotic, one most welcoming cities that I've ever been stationed at," said Day, who is in charge of more than 1,000 active duty and reserve guardsmen and women in the city where Alexander Hamilton founded the Coast Guard nearly 240 years ago.

ctm-0526-us-coast-guard-capt-michael-day.jpg
Capt. Michael Day CBS NEWS

"Right here in New York City, right at Federal Hall. George Washington signed it in August 4, 1790. So we've got a lot of history here with the city of New York," Day said. He said it was first started as a "revenue cutter service."

"As the ships were coming in and there were people avoiding paying their taxes, so customs type of duty," Day said.

The history may have been lost on most, but not the creator of "Hamilton," the musical.

"How does Hamilton, the short-tempered, Protean creator of the Coast Guard, founder of the New York Post, ardently abuse his cab'net post, destroy his reputation?" the character of Aaron Burr raps in the musical.

"He just says 'creator of the Coast Guard, founder of The New York Post' just like randomly. … If you're not really listening to it, you would not catch it at all," said Michael Luwoye, who plays Alexander Hamilton on Broadway.

The Coast Guard's presence in New York has evolved considerably from the original revenue cutters. The service now oversees everything from maritime security for the U.N. General Assembly and July Fourth celebrations in the summer, to ice breaking missions in the Hudson River in the winter. Not to mention the rescues.

ctm-0526-us-coast-guard-new-york.jpg
CBS NEWS

"The Miracle on the Hudson of course, Superstorm Sandy, 9/11 – Coast Guard played an integral role in a lot of the darkest hours for the city," Day said.

Day lead what's been called America's Dunkirk. As explained in the 2011 documentary short, "Boatlift," 500,000 people were rescued from lower Manhattan after the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001. Day organized an amateur armada of private boats, ferries and tugboats.

"It started actually very small scale. But seeing how efficient it was, the Coast Guard made the call for all available boats and were just inundated with help in getting those people off," Day said.

Day's service was recognized by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who said what Day did "changed to course of history for the better." Day's tour of duty in the city is ending next month. Incoming Capt. Jason Tama will now lead the sector New York into the future.

"How would you define what the Coast Guard's duties are now?" Dahler asked him.

"I think a lot you can trace back to 1790 … and as the port has grown and the population has grown, that mission has become perhaps more dynamic in some ways. But really the roles are fundamentally the same. It's the safety, security and resilience of the harbor," Tama said.

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.


THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THAT I’VE POSTED THIS ARTICLE AND VIDEO. I’M NOT SURE WHY CBS IS RUNNING THIS STORY AGAIN, BUT I’M ENJOYING IT AS MUCH TODAY AS THE FIRST TIME. FIRST, WOMEN ARE ENERGIZED NOW, AS PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE, AND I DON’T BELIEVE WE ARE GOING TO FADE INTO THE BACKGROUND BEHIND THE MEN AGAIN, AT LEAST NOT IN THIS COUNTRY.

THEY ARE ALSO STANDING UP IN PARTS OF THE WORLD WHERE THEY SEEMED TO ME TO BE HOPELESSLY DEPRESSED, SUCH AS MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRIES. THEY ARE CASTING OFF THEIR OWN PERSONAL ACCEPTANCE OF A DEEPLY INFERIOR ROLE LIKE A CUMBERSOME PIECE OF OUTMODED CLOTHING, AND WALKING AWAY. THIS IS ALABAMA, NOT NEW YORK, WHICH MAKES THE STORY REALLY IMPORTANT. AND THE FREE THINKERS OF THE COUNTRY ARE SAYING “NO MORE.” BETTY FRIEDAN WOULD BE PROUD.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsn-originals-grassroots-in-alabama-emerging-womens-movement/
CBS NEWS March 25, 2018, 12:04 AM
Grassroots in Alabama: An Emerging Women's Movement

Something new is taking root amid the cotton and peanut fields and Gulf Coast beaches of Baldwin County, Alabama. A grassroots movement propelled by women is aiming to change politics here from the ground up.

"In Alabama we're taught that women are to be quiet, not cause trouble. But it seems like the climate has changed here," said Heather Brown, 42, a freelance writer, wife and mother of three who lives in the town of Summerdale.

She's not causing trouble, but she's not keeping quiet either. For her, it started last fall when Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore was accused of sexual misconduct by several women, including some who said they were in their teens when it happened.

"The sexual allegations against Roy Moore came out, and we just had the #MeToo movement, and it just seemed like the perfect time and opportunity to use our voices to speak our truths," Brown said.

Outraged and determined to take action, volunteers -- many of them new to politics -- knocked on doors and placed countless phone calls urging voters to do something Alabamians hadn't done in decades: elect a Democrat, Doug Jones, to the U.S. Senate.

women-heather-1.jpg
Heather Brown rallies for Democrat Doug Jones in the Alabama special election for senate in December 2017. CBS NEWS

In the lead up to the special election in December, Brown and local women organized a protest against Moore dressed in the red cloaks and white bonnets of "handmaids" -- women held as men's property in the dystopian novel and TV series, "The Handmaid's Tale."

Doug Jones won a hard-fought victory in a campaign watched nationwide. And Heather Brown realized she was just getting started.

"I never dreamed that this little 'handmaid' protest we were doing would change my life," she said. "When we had that big win with Doug Jones, it was like, 'Oh, we can do it!' You know, the little things we were doing helped bring about that win."

She decided to run for office herself, seeking a a seat on the Baldwin County Commission as part of a wave of new Democratic candidates challenging the local Republican power structure.

Brown is one of nine Democrats -- five of them women -- now running for office in a county where the party hasn't had local candidates on the ballot in more than a decade.

"I decided to run because I want to be the change, not just talk about being the change," she declared.

It's part of a trend seen nationwide as more women jump into political races to make their voices heard. According to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, so far this year 233 women have filed to run for U.S. Senate, House and governors races, and another 350 are considered likely to file soon -- numbers that would break records.

But the newly energized Democrats in Alabama have their work cut out for them. Alabama is one of the reddest of red states, giving President Trump 62.9 percent of the vote in 2016.

"To be blue here in sea of red, you are seriously outnumbered. It takes a lot of conversation, a lot of relationship building, to show we're not really all that different," Brown said.

Volunteer political consultant Hanh Hua is helping her get a handle on what it will take to compete. Hua, 32, grew up in Alabama after her family immigrated from Vietnam.

"I'm a weird mix of like a lot of different cultures -- of like Vietnamese, American, Southern," she quipped.

She moved back home last year after more than a decade of living and working in Boston and Hanoi, explaining, "I just felt, like, this weird calling that I had to be in Alabama at this time."

She's found political organizing for the candidates and causes she supports to be a challenge, especially compared to the resources of the party in power.

women-hahn3.jpg
Hanh Hua, left, and Heather Brown talk politics at an Alabama restaurant. CBS NEWS

"The Republican infrastructure's just super well organized and a well oiled machine," she said, while the state Democrats are still in startup mode.

"Actually when I consulted for the state party this summer, sometimes I wished I was Republican. I was like, 'Oh, infrastructure! Organization!' I wish I had that. But we'll slowly get there."

One of the issues driving Heather Brown to get involved in government is health care, and for her it's personal. She works from home and cares for her husband, Randy, who is disabled from complications of diabetes.

"You don't expect at 33 to hear from doctor, to hear you'll be permanently disabled, never work again. I wasn't even 30 at time. It's changed me a lot," she said. "And we went from your typical family to a family who had to struggle to raise their children. ... And I think going from somebody who knew what it was like to have the American dream and lose it, through something that you couldn't control ... I realized just how hard things can be."

She's bonded over those experiences with her friend Katrina Hardy, 40, a health care worker who also cares for a disabled husband.

"We agree a lot on where our health care is and what needs to be done in Medicare benefits and disability benefits because both of us have husbands that are disabled," Hardy said.

The bureaucratic problems her elderly patients encounter motivate her even more.

"You know, people like Miss Ella are why I'm going to involve myself in Washington at some point," she said. "They said she hadn't met her insurance deductible. So in order for this 93-year-old sweet woman to sleep, she has to pay $345 for a 30-day prescription. That breaks my heart."

But don't mistake Katrina Hardy for a progressive.

"I'm a big conservative," she declared, a proud Republican and Trump supporter who does not see eye to eye with her friend Heather on a host of other issues.

women-katrina2.jpg
Katrina Hardy describes herself as "a big conservative." CBS NEWS

Their friendship manages to transcend politics, but it isn't always easy. On a shopping trip together, the friendly banter turns divisive and Heather holds her tongue as Katrina says she doesn't want refugees or "people from terrorist countries" coming to America.

Later she reflects, "Katrina is probably more representative of the majority of Alabama, especially Baldwin County, than I would be. But Katrina and I can talk about health care and use that to build a relationship where you can talk about things like immigration, that you don't agree on, and still stay civil."

Back home with Randy, Heather gets some encouragement not to give up.

"You're part of a big movement that's needed to happen for quite some time and it's nothin' but a good thing and it's gaining momentum every day," he tells her. "I mean, I'm tired of the good old boy system. The good old boy system ain't done nothin' in the last 12-16 years in lower Alabama. It's time for the good old girl system."

She laughs, "I like that! We're gonna start a new trend."

She celebrated the news that she's qualified for the ballot, and even though she admits the odds are stacked against her, she's keeping up the fight.

"I want to make sure when I have grandchildren, that they come into a word [sic] that is receptive to them no matter what. Maybe I want their future to not be a fight to be them."

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.