Story 1: Totally Out-of-Control Federal Government Spending With $984 Billion Deficit For Fiscal Year 2019 and National Debt Approaching 23,000 Billion — Videos —
The release of The Heritage Foundation’s “Blueprint for Balance” – a detailed policy agenda for Congress to balance the budget without raising taxes, ensure a strong national defense, and protect individual liberty and economic freedom.
U.S. Economy 101: national debt vs. national deficit | Just The FAQs
Deficits & Debts: Crash Course Economics #9
The Who – My Generation
Generations: America’s 5 living generations
Who Are the Generations?
Generations Throughout History
Generations and the Next America: Paul Taylor
Generations: The History of America’s Future
Neil Howe & William Strauss discuss the Silent Generation on Chuck Underwood’s Generations | 2001
Neil Howe & William Strauss discuss the book “Generations” on CSPAN | 1991
The Fourth Turning: Why American ‘Crisis’ May Last Until 2030
Neil Howe Interview: “We Are 8 Years Into the Fourth Turning” What’s Next? | MWC 2017
Neil Howe: The World Is on the Verge of Generational Crisis
The Zeitgeist According to Steve Bannon’s Favorite Demographer Neil Howe
Neil Howe: Is Trump America’s ‘Gray Champion’ Like Lincoln or FDR?
Neil Howe: It’s going to get worse; more financial crises coming
Neil Howe discusses the Fourth Turning with Don Krueger of The Motley Fool | 2011
Are Generations Real? The History, The Controversy.
Generations and the Next America: Panel 1, Family and Society
Generations and the Next America: Panel 2, Politics and Policy
Jordan Peterson to Millennials: “Don’t Be A Damn Victim!”
Our Generation Is FAILING, Why Jordan Peterson Is One Remedy
Jordan Peterson Explains WHY The Youth Today are So Unhappy + Why you Shouldn’t Lie!
Jordan B. Peterson | Full interview | SVT/TV 2/Skavlan
Neil Howe (born October 21, 1951) is an American author and consultant. He is best known for his work with William Strauss on social generations regarding a theorized generational cycle in American history. Howe is currently the managing director of demography at Hedgeye and he is president of Saeculum Research and LifeCourse Associates, consulting companies he founded with Strauss to apply Strauss–Howe generational theory. He is also a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies‘ Global Aging Initiative, and a senior advisor to the Concord Coalition.
Howe was born in Santa Monica, California. His grandfather was the astronomer Robert Julius Trumpler. His father was a physicist and his mother was a professor of occupational therapy. He attended high school in Palo Alto, California, and earned a BA in English Literature at U.C. Berkeley in 1972. He studied abroad in France and Germany, and later earned graduate degrees in economics (M.A., 1978) and history (M.Phil., 1979) from Yale University.[1]
During the 1990s, Howe developed a second career as an author, historian and pop sociologist,[4] examining how generational differences shape attitudes, behaviors, and the course of history. He has since written nine books on social generations, mostly with William Strauss. In 1997 Strauss and Howe founded LifeCourse Associates, a publishing, speaking, and consulting company built on their generational theory. As president of LifeCourse, Howe currently provides marketing, personnel, and government affairs consulting to corporate and nonprofit clients, and writes and speaks about the collective personalities of today’s generations.
Howe has written a number of non-academic books on generational trends. He is best known for his books with William Strauss on generations in American history. These include Generations (1991) and The Fourth Turning (1997) which examine historical generations and describe a theorized cycle of recurring mood eras in American History (now described as the Strauss–Howe generational theory).[5][6] The book made a deep impression on Steve Bannon, who wrote and directed Generation Zero (2010), a Citizens United Productions film on the book’s theory, prior to his becoming White House Chief Strategist.[7]
Howe and Strauss also co-authored 13th Gen (1993) about Generation X, and Millennials Rising (2000) about the Millennial Generation.[8][9] Eric Hoover has called the authors pioneers in a burgeoning industry of consultants, speakers and researchers focused on generations. He wrote a critical piece about the concept of “generations” and the “Millennials” (a term coined by Strauss and Howe) for the Chronicle of Higher Education. Michael Lind offered his critique of Howe’s book “Generations” for The New York Times Book Review.[10][11]
Howe has written a number of application books with Strauss about the Millennials’ impact on various sectors, including Millennials Go to College (2003, 2007), Millennials and the Pop Culture (2006), and Millennials and K-12 Schools (2008). After Strauss died in 2007, Howe authored Millennials in the Workplace (2010).[12]
In 1988, he coauthored On Borrowed Time with Peter G. Peterson, one of the early calls for budgetary reform (the book was reissued 2004). Since the late 1990s, Howe has also coauthored a number of academic studies published by CSIS, including the Global Aging Initiative’s Aging Vulnerability Index and The Graying of the Middle Kingdom: The Economics and Demographics of Retirement Policy in China. In 2008, he co-authored The Graying of the Great Powers with Richard Jackson.[12]
Selected bibliography
On Borrowed Time (1988)
Generations (1991)
13th-GEN (1993)
The Fourth Turning (1997)
Global Aging: The Challenge of the Next Millennium (1999)
Millennials Rising (2000)
The 2003 Aging Vulnerability Index (2003)
Millennials Go To College (2003, 2007)
The Graying of the Middle Kingdom (2004)
Millennials and the Pop Culture (2005)
Long-Term Immigration Projection Methods (2006)
Millennials and K-12 Schools (2008)
The Graying of the Great Powers (2008)
Millennials in the Workplace (2010)
Notes
^Howe, Neil. “Profile”. LinkedIn. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
^Howe, Neil; Jackson, Richard; Rebecca Strauss; Keisuke Nakashima (2008). The Graying of the Great Powers. Center for Strategic and International Studies. p. 218. ISBN978-0-89206-532-5.
^“Neil Howe”. Center for Strategic and International Studies. Archived from the original on 2010-10-08. Retrieved 4 October2010.
This article is about the American historian. For the South African footballer, see Bill Strauss (footballer). For the American state legislator, see William M. Straus.
William Strauss (December 5, 1947 – December 18, 2007) was an American author, playwright, theater director, and lecturer. As an author, he is known for his work with Neil Howe on social generations and for Strauss–Howe generational theory. He is also known as the co-founder and director of the satirical musical theater group the Capitol Steps, and as the co-founder of the Cappies, a critics and awards program for high school theater students.
After receiving his degrees, Strauss worked in Washington, DC as a policy aid to the Presidential Clemency Board, directing a research team writing a report on the impact of the Vietnam War on the generation that was drafted. In 1978, Strauss and Lawrence Baskir co-authored two books on the Vietnam War, Chance and Circumstance, and Reconciliation after Vietnam. Strauss later worked at the U.S. Department of Energy and as a committee staffer for Senator Charles Percy, and in 1980 he became chief counsel and staff director of the Subcommittee on Energy, Nuclear Proliferation, and Government Processes.[1]
In 1981, Strauss organized a group of senate staffers to perform satirical songs at the annual office Christmas party of his employer, Senator Percy. The group was so successful that Strauss went on to co-found a professional satirical troupe, the Capitol Steps, with Elaina Newport. The Capitol Steps is now a $3 million company with more than 40 employees who perform at venues across the country.[1] As director, Strauss wrote many of the songs, performed regularly off Broadway, and recorded 27 albums.
During the 1990s, Strauss developed another career as an historian and pop sociologist,[3] examining how generational differences shape attitudes, behaviors, and the course of history. He wrote seven books on social generations with Neil Howe, beginning with Generations in 1991.[4] In 1997, Strauss and Howe founded LifeCourse Associates, a publishing, speaking, and consulting company built on their generational theory. As a partner at LifeCourse, Strauss worked as a corporate, nonprofit, education, and government affairs consultant.
In 1999, Strauss received a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. This prompted him to found the Cappies, a program to inspire the next generation of theater performers and writers.[1] Now an international program including hundreds of high schools, Cappies allows students to attend and review each other’s plays and musicals, publish reviews in major newspapers, and hold Tonys-style Cappies award Galas, in which Strauss acted as MC for the Fairfax County program. Strauss also founded Cappies International Theater, a summer program in which top Cappies winners perform plays and musicals written by teenagers.[5] In 2006 and 2007, Strauss advised creative teams of students who wrote two new musicals, Edit:Undo and Senioritis. Senioritis was made into a movie that was released in 2007.[6]
Strauss authored multiple books on social generations, as well as a number of plays and musicals.
In 1978, he and Lawrence Baskir co-authored Chance and Circumstance, a book about the Vietnam-era draft. Their second book, Reconciliation After Vietnam (1978) “was said to have influenced” President Jimmy Carter‘s blanket pardon of Vietnam draft resisters.[1]
Eric Hoover has called the authors pioneers in a burgeoning industry of consultants, speakers and researchers focused on generations. He wrote a critical piece about the concept of “generations” and the “Millennials” (a term coined by Strauss and Howe) for the Chronicle of Higher Education.[12] Michael Lind offered his critique of Howe’s book “Generations” for the New York Times.[13]
Strauss also wrote a number of application books with Howe about the Millennials’ impact on various sectors, including Millennials Go to College (2003, 2007), Millennials in the Pop Culture (2005), and Millennials in K-12 Schools (2008).
Strauss wrote three musicals, MaKiddo, Free-the-Music.com, and Anasazi, and two plays, Gray Champions and The Big Bump, about various themes in the books he has co-authored with Howe. He also co-wrote two books of political satire with Elaina Newport, Fools on the Hill (1992) and Sixteen Scandals (2002).[14]
US deficit hits nearly $1 trillion. When will it matter?
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
The Trump administration reported a river of red ink Friday.
The federal deficit for the 2019 budget year surged 26% from 2018 to $984.4 billion — its highest point in seven years. The gap is widely expected to top $1 trillion in the current budget year and likely remain there for the next decade.
The year-over-year widening in the deficit reflected such factors as revenue lost from the 2017 Trump tax cut and a budget deal that added billions in spending for military and domestic programs.
Forecasts by the Trump administration and the Congressional Budget Office project that the deficit will top $1 trillion in the 2020 budget year, which began Oct. 1. And the CBO estimates that the deficit will stay above $1 trillion over the next decade.
Those projections stand in contrast to President Donald Trump’s campaign promises that even with revenue lost initially from his tax cuts, he could eliminate the budget deficit with cuts in spending and increased growth generated by the tax cuts.
Here are some questions and answers about the current state of the government’s finances.
___
WHAT HAPPENED?
The deficit has been rising every year for the past four years. It’s a stretch of widening deficits not seen since the early 1980s, when the deficit exploded with President Ronald Reagan’s big tax cut.
For 2019, revenues grew 4%. But spending jumped at twice that rate, reflecting a deal that Trump reached with Congress in early 2018 to boost spending.
___
WHY DOESN’T WASHINGTON DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT?
Fiscal hawks have long warned of the economic dangers of running big government deficits. Yet the apocalypse they fear never seems to happen, and the government just keeps on spending.
There have been numerous attempts by presidents after Reagan to control spending. President George H.W. Bush actually agreed to a tax increase to control deficits when he was in office, breaking his “Read my lips” pledge not to raise taxes.
And a standoff between President Bill Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich did produce a rare string of four years of budget surpluses from 1998 through 2001. In fact, the budget picture was so bright when George W. Bush took office in 2001 that the Congressional Budget Office projected that the government would run surpluses of $5.6 trillion over the next decade.
That didn’t happen. The economy slid into a mild recession, Bush pushed through a big tax cut and the war on terrorism sent military spending surging. Then the 2008 financial crisis erupted and triggered a devastating recession. The downturn produced the economy’s first round of trillion-dollar deficits under President Barack Obama and is expected to do so again under Trump.
___
SHOULD WE WORRY?
As far as most of us can tell, the huge deficits don’t seem to threaten the economy or elevate the interest rates we pay on credit cards, mortgages and car loans. And in fact, the huge deficits are coinciding with a period of ultra-low rates rather than the surging borrowing costs that economists had warned would likely occur if government deficits got this high.
There is even a new school of economic theory known as the “modern monetary theory.” It argues that such major economies as the United States and Japan don’t need to worry about running deficits because their central banks can print as much money as they need.
Yet this remains a distinctly minority view among economists. Most still believe that while the huge deficits are not an immediate threat, at some point they will become a big problem. They will crowd out borrowing by consumers and businesses and elevate interest rates to levels that ignite a recession.
What’s more, the interest payments on the deficits become part of a mounting government debt that must be repaid and could depress economic growth in coming years. In fact, even with low rates this year, the government’s interest payments on the debt were one of the fastest growing items in the budget, rising nearly 16% to $375.6 billion.
___
HAVEN’T ECONOMISTS BEEN MAKING THESE WARNING FOR DECADES?
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell says the day of reckoning is still coming but isn’t here yet. Most analysts think any real solution will involve a combination of higher taxes and cost savings in the government’s huge benefit programs of Social Security and Medicare.
___
ANY SIGN THAT WASHINGTON MAY TAKE THE POLITICALLY PAINFUL STEPS TO CUT THE DEFICIT?
In short, no. There has been a major change since the first round of trillion-dollar deficits prompted the Tea Party revolt. This shift brought Republicans back into power in the House and incited a round of fighting between GOP congressional leaders and the Obama administration. A result was government shutdowns and near-defaults on the national debt.
But once Trump took office, things changed: The president focused on his biggest legislative achievement, the $1.5 trillion tax cut passed in 2017. This appeared to satisfy Republican lawmakers and quelled concerns about rising deficits.
Democratic presidential candidates have for the most part pledged to roll back Trump’s tax cuts for corporations and wealthy individuals. But they would use the money not to lower the deficits but for increased spending on expensive programs such as Medicare for All.
___
SO THE DEFICITS WON’T ANIMATE THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN?
It doesn’t seem likely, though former Rep. Mark Sanford, who has mounted a long-shot Republican campaign against Trump, is urging Republican voters to return to their historic concerns about the high deficits.
And economists note that today’s huge deficits are occurring when the economy is in a record-long economic expansion. This is unlike the previous stretch of trillion-dollar deficits, which coincided with the worst recession since the 1930s.
But analysts warn that if the economy does go into a recession, the huge deficits projected now will expand significantly — possibly to a size that would send interest rates surging. Such a development, if it sparked worries about the stability of the U.S. financial system, might produce the type of deficit crisis they have been warning about for so long.
PUBLISHED: 06:16 EDT, 8 October 2019 | UPDATED: 09:04 EDT, 8 October 2019
The US government ran a budget deficit of just under $1 trillion in the just-closed fiscal year, the Congressional Budget Office said Monday.
The $984 billion deficit tally for 2019 came in more than $200 billion more than last year’s, despite very low unemployment and continuing economic growth.
The figure is also slightly worse than the $960billion projected by the budget office back in August.
The US ran a budget deficit of $984billion in 2019, the Congressional Budget Office said Monday – $200million worse than last year, and $20million worse then August projections (pictured on this graph)
The CBO noted that deficits have been growing faster than the size of the economy for four years in a row, ending 2019 at 4.7 percent of gross domestic product.
Many mainstream economists have long taken the position that deficits and the nation’s $22trillion national debt are unsustainable.
Others say deficits are manageable and note continued low interest rates despite steadily growing debt.
There’s no appetite in Washington to try politically painful medicine to deal with the deficit.
Democrats have noted the spike in deficits since President Donald Trump’s tax cut plan was passed in 2017, while Trump has promised not to touch popular retirement benefits like Social Security and Medicare.
Donald Trump (pictured during a press conference announcing a US trade deal with Japan) repeatedly pledged to cut the deficit during the 2016 election, but it has grown faster than the size of the economy during every year of his presidency
Though the deficit has yet to hit the symbolic $1 trillion mark it registered during former President Barack Obama’s first term, it could jump if the economy slides into a recession.
The Treasury Department will release the final deficit figures mid-month. CBO’s preliminary estimate is based on daily Treasury reports.
During the election campaign in 2016, Trump repeatedly pledged to start cutting the size of the deficit when he became president, at one point suggesting that he could eliminate it entirely in eight years.
However, tax laws Trump championed in 2017 when limited the amount of revenue the government could collect, combined with spending pledges that breached agreed limits in the 2018 budget deal, have combined to entrench the problem.
Federal deficit increases 26% to $984 billion for fiscal 2019, highest in 7 years
The U.S. Treasury on Friday said that the federal deficit for fiscal 2019 was $984 billion, a 26% increase from 2018 but still short of the $1 trillion mark.
The U.S. government also collected nearly $71 billion in customs duties, or tariffs, a 70% increase compared to the year-ago period.
The gap between revenues and spending was the widest in seven years. Defense, Medicare and interest payments ballooned the shortfall.
Federal deficit baloons to $984 billion for fiscal 2019, highest in 7 years
The U.S. Treasury on Friday said that the federal deficit for fiscal 2019 was $984 billion, a 26% increase from 2018 but still short of the $1 trillion mark previously forecast by the administration.
The gap between revenues and spending was the widest it’s been in seven years as expenditures on defense, Medicare and interest payments on the national debt ballooned the shortfall.
The government said corporate tax revenues totaled $230 billion, up 12%, thanks to a rebound in the second half of the year. Individual tax revenues rose 2% to $1.7 trillion.
Receipts totaled $3.4 trillion, up 4% through September, while federal spending rose 8%, to $4.4 trillion.
The U.S. government also collected nearly $71 billion in customs duties, or tariffs, a 70% increase compared to the year-ago period. As a percentage of U.S. economic output the deficit was 4.6%, 0.8 percentage points higher than the previous year.
“President Trump’s economic agenda is working: the Nation is experiencing the lowest unemployment rate in nearly 50 years, there are more jobs to fill than there are job seekers, and Americans are experiencing sustained year-over-year wage increases,” said U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in a press release.
“In order to truly put America on a sustainable financial path, we must enact proposals—like the President’s 2020 budget plan—to cut wasteful and irresponsible spending,” he added.
Annual deficits have nearly doubled under President Donald Trump’s tenure notwithstanding an unemployment rate at multidecade lows and better earnings figures. Deficits usually shrink during times of economic growth as higher incomes and Wall Street profits buoy Treasury coffers, while automatic spending on items like food stamps decline.
Two big bipartisan spending bills, combined with the administration’s landmark tax cuts, however, have defied the typical trends and instead aggravated deficits. The Congressional Budget Office projects the trillion-dollar deficit could come as soon as fiscal 2020.
Still, the Treasury’s report will likely come as a relief to the Trump administration, which had previously forecast that the deficit would hit $1 trillion during the 2019 fiscal year. The White House pushed through a $1.5 trillion tax cut nearly two years ago that President Trump vowed would pay for itself.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – Steve Jobs with a new LISA computer during a press preview in 1983. Baby boomers like to claim this visionary for their own.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – On November 30, 1965, about 20,000 marchers protested in Washington against American involvement in the Vietnam War. Those who were born in 1945 were on the tail end of the “greatest generation,” and some participated in anti-war rallies in their youth.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – Many Millennials love “The Daily Show,” previously hosted by Jon Stewart.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – For generation X, Kurt Cobain of Nirvana was a cultural icon.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – Steve Jobs with a new LISA computer during a press preview in 1983. Baby boomers like to claim this visionary for their own.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – On November 30, 1965, about 20,000 marchers protested in Washington against American involvement in the Vietnam War. Those who were born in 1945 were on the tail end of the “greatest generation,” and some participated in anti-war rallies in their youth.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – Many Millennials love “The Daily Show,” previously hosted by Jon Stewart.
Photos:From millennials to the greatest generation
From millennials to the greatest generation – For generation X, Kurt Cobain of Nirvana was a cultural icon.
(CNN)Here’s a look at six generations of Americans in the 20th century: the Greatest Generation (or GI Generation), the Silent Generation, baby boomers, Generation X, millennials and Generation Z. In order to examine economic trends and social changes over time, demographers compare groupings of people bracketed by birth year. There are sometimes variations in the birth year that begins or ends a generation, depending on the source. The groupings below are based on studies by the US Census, Pew Research and demographers Neil Howe and William Strauss.
The Greatest Generation (or GI Generation)
Born in 1924 or earlier.
Tom Brokaw coined the term the Greatest Generation as a tribute to Americans who lived through the Great Depression and then fought in WWII. His 1998 bestselling book, “The Greatest Generation,” popularized the term.
The Silent Generation helped shape 20th century pop culture, with pioneering rock musicians, iconic filmmakers, television legends, beat poets, gonzo journalists and groundbreaking political satirists.
No members of the Silent Generation have served as president.
Baby Boomers Born 1946-1964 (Sometimes listed as 1943-1964)
Baby boomers were named for an uptick in the post-WWII birth rate.
Generation X
Born 1965-1980 (Sometimes listed as 1965-1979)
“Class X” was the name of a chapter in a 1983 book, “Class: A Guide Through the American Status System,” by historian Paul Fussell. Novelist Douglas Coupland used the term as the title of his first book, “Generation X: Tales for An Accelerated Culture,” published in 1991.
No members of Generation X have served as president.
About 39% of millennials ages 25-37 have a bachelor’s degree or higher, a larger percentage than previous generations, according to Pew. Millennials with a bachelor’s degree or higher had a median annual earnings valued at $56,000 in 2018, about the same earnings as Generation X workers in 2001. Millennials without a college education had lower earnings that prior generations. About 46% of millennials ages 25-37 were married in 2018, a lower percentage than Generation X (57%), baby boomers (67%) and the Silent Generation (83%).
About 15% of millennials age 25-37 lived at home with their parents as of 2018, according to Pew.Fewer members of older generations lived at home with their parents between the ages of 25-37. The rate for Generation-X was 9%. The rate for Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation was 8%. Education factors into the percentage of millennials living at home. Among millennials without college degrees, 20% lived at home with their parents.
2016 was the first year any millennial was eligible to run for president (the minimum age is 35).
Generation Z or Gen Z (sometimes called post-millennials) Born 1997-current
According to Pew, Gen Z is the most racially and ethnically diverse cohort. One in four members of Gen Z are Hispanic while 52% are non-Hispanic white and 14% are black. A total of 6% are Asian and the remaining 4% are of another racial identity, primarily two or more races. The majority of individuals in Gen Z live in metropolitan areas and western states, with just 13% residing in ruralareas.
High school completion and college enrollment rates for Gen Z are up, with significant increases for young adults who are Hispanic or African-American, according to Pew. In 2017, 64% of Gen Z women aged 18-20 were enrolled in college, an increase over millennials (57%) and Generation X (43%).
WASHINGTON — For more than two years, President Trump has repeatedly attacked the Russia investigation, portraying it as a hoax and illegal even months after the special counsel closed it. Now, Mr. Trump’s own Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into how it all began.
Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter. The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to convene a grand jury and to file criminal charges.
The opening of a criminal investigation is likely to raise alarms that Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies. Mr. Trump fired James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director under whose watch agents opened the Russia inquiry, and has long assailed other top former law enforcement and intelligence officials as partisans who sought to block his election.
Mr. Trump has made clear that he sees the typically independent Justice Department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies. That view factors into the impeachment investigation against him, as does his long obsession with the origins of the Russia inquiry. House Democrats are examining in part whether his pressure on Ukraine to open investigations into theories about the 2016 election constituted an abuse of power.
The move also creates an unusual situation in which the Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation into itself.
Mr. Barr’s reliance on Mr. Durham, a widely respected and veteran prosecutor who has investigated C.I.A. torture and broken up Mafia rings, could help insulate the attorney general from accusations that he is doing the president’s bidding and putting politics above justice.
It was not clear what potential crime Mr. Durham is investigating, nor when the criminal investigation was prompted. A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.
Mr. Trump is certain to see the criminal investigation as a vindication of the years he and his allies have spent trying to discredit the Russia investigation. In May, Mr. Trump told the Fox News host Sean Hannity that the F.B.I. officials who opened the case — a counterintelligence investigation into whether his campaign conspired with Moscow’s election sabotage — had committed treason.
“We can never allow these treasonous acts to happen to another president,” Mr. Trump said. He has called the F.B.I. investigation one of the biggest political scandals in United States history.
Federal investigators need only a “reasonable indication” that a crime has been committed to open an investigation, a much lower standard than the probable cause required to obtain search warrants. However, “there must be an objective, factual basis for initiating the investigation; a mere hunch is insufficient,” according to Justice Department guidelines.
When Mr. Barr appointed Mr. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, to lead the review, he had only the power to voluntarily question people and examine government files.
Mr. Barr expressed skepticism of the Russia investigation even before joining the Trump administration. Weeks after being sworn in this year, he said he intended to scrutinize how it started and used the term “spying” to describe investigators’ surveillance of Trump campaign advisers. But he has been careful to say he wants to determine whether investigators acted lawfully.
“The question is whether it was adequately predicated,” he told lawmakers in April. “And I’m not suggesting that it wasn’t adequately predicated. But I need to explore that.”
The F.B.I. did not use information from the C.I.A. in opening the Russia investigation, former American officials said. But agents’ views on Russia’s election interference operation crystallized by mid-August, after the C.I.A. director at the time, John O. Brennan, shared intelligence with Mr. Comey about it.
The C.I.A. did contribute heavily to the intelligence community’s assessment in early 2017 that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and tried to tip it in Mr. Trump’s favor, and law enforcement officials later used those findings to bolster their application for a wiretap on a Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page.
The special counsel who took over the Russia investigation in 2017, Robert S. Mueller III, secured convictions or guilty pleas from a handful of Trump associates and indictments of more than two dozen Russians on charges related to their wide-ranging interference scheme.
In his report, Mr. Mueller said that he had “insufficient evidence” to determine whether Mr. Trump or his aides engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the Russians but that the campaign welcomed the sabotage and expected to benefit from it.
Mr. Barr is closely managing the Durham investigation, even traveling to Italy to seek help from officials there to run down an unfounded conspiracy that is at the heart of conservatives’ attacks on the Russia investigation — that the Italian government helped set up the Trump campaign adviser who was told in 2016 that the Russians had damaging information that could hurt Clinton’s campaign.
But Italy’s intelligence services told Mr. Barr that they played no such role in the events leading to the Russia investigation, Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy said in a news conference on Wednesday. Mr. Barr has also contacted government officials in Britain and Australia about their roles in the early stages of the Russia investigation.
Revelations so far about Mr. Durham’s investigation have shown that he has focused in his first months on the accusations that Mr. Trump’s conservative allies have made about the origins of the Russia inquiry in their efforts to undermine it. Mr. Durham’s efforts have prompted criticism that he and Mr. Barr are trying to deliver the president a political victory, though investigators would typically run down all aspects of a case to complete a review of it.
Mr. Durham is running the investigation with a trusted aide, Nora R. Dannehy, and a pair of retired F.B.I. agents. Other prosecutors are also assisting, people familiar with the investigation said.
In interviewing more than two dozen former and current F.B.I. and intelligence officials, Mr. Durham’s investigators have asked about any anti-Trump bias among officials who worked on the Russia investigation and about one aspect of the investigation that was at the heart of highly contentious allegations that they abused their powers: the secret application seeking a court order for a wiretap on Mr. Page.
Law enforcement officials suspected Mr. Page was the target of recruitment by the Russian government, which he has denied.
Mr. Durham has also asked whether C.I.A. officials might have somehow tricked the F.B.I. into opening the Russia investigation.
Mr. Durham has indicated he wants to interview former officials who ran the C.I.A. in 2016 but has yet to question either Mr. Brennan or James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence. Mr. Trump has repeatedly attacked them as part of a vast conspiracy by the so-called deep state to stop him from winning the presidency.
Some C.I.A. officials have retained criminal lawyers in anticipation of being interviewed. It was not clear whether Mr. Durham was scrutinizing other former top intelligence officials. Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the former director of the National Security Agency, declined to say whether he had spoken with Mr. Durham’s investigators.
Mr. Durham also has yet to question many of the former F.B.I. officials involved in opening the Russia investigation.
As Mr. Durham’s investigation moves forward, the Justice Department inspector general is wrapping up his own inquiry into aspects of the F.B.I.’s conduct in the early days of the Russia investigation. Among other things, the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is scrutinizing the application for a warrant to wiretap Mr. Page.
Mr. Barr has not said whether Mr. Durham’s investigation grew out of the inspector general’s findings or something that prosecutors unearthed while doing interviews or reviewing documents. But the inspector general’s findings, which are expected to be made public in coming weeks, could contribute to the public’s understanding of why Mr. Durham might want to investigate national security officials’ activities in 2016.
Though the inspector general’s report deals with sensitive information, Mr. Horowitz anticipates that little of it will be blacked out when he releases the document publicly, he wrote in a lettersent to lawmakers on Thursday and obtained by The New York Times.
Mr. Durham has delved before into the secret world of intelligence gathering during the Bush and Obama administrations. He was asked in 2008 to investigate why the C.I.A. destroyed tapes depicting detainees being tortured. The next year, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. appointed Mr. Durham to spearhead an investigation into the C.IA. abuses.
Career prosecutors had already examined many of the same cases and declined to bring charges, and in an echo of the Russia investigation, they fumed that Mr. Holder was revisiting the issue. Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, then the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that the abuses had been “exhaustively reviewed” and that a new inquiry could put national security at risk.
After nearly four years, Mr. Durham’s investigation ended with no charges against C.I.A. officers, including two directly involved in the deaths of two detainees, angering human rights activists.
President Trump has ratcheted up his claim that the Obama White House spied on his 2016 campaign, charging in a new book that it was a “treasonous” act by the former Democratic president.
“The interesting thing out of all of this is that we caught them spying on the election. They were spying on my campaign. So you know? What is that all about?” said Trump.
“I have never ever said this, but truth is, they got caught spying. They were spying,” said Trump who then added, “Obama.”
President Trump (seated) meets with Doug Wead in the Oval Office of the White House. Wead provided the photo to Secrets.
(Official White House Photo/Tia Dufour)
In 2017, Trump tweeted that he felt the Obama White House “had my wires tapped” in Trump Tower. He later said he didn’t mean it literally but that he felt his campaign was being spied on.
Attorney General William Barr earlier this year said he was looking into whether “improper surveillance” may have occurred in 2016. “I think spying did occur,” he said.
He has tasked a prosecutor to look into Obama officials and other officials who sparked the Russia collusion investigation into Trump after a report showed no collusion. New reports on that investigation described it as “criminal” in nature.
“It turned out I was right. By the way,” Trump told Wead in excerpts provided to Secrets. “In fact, what I said was peanuts compared to what they did. They were spying on my campaign. They got caught and they said, ‘Oh we were not spying. It was actually an investigation.’ Can you imagine an administration investigating its political opponents?” said the president.
In the book, Trump said that the Russia investigation undercut his presidency.
“Anybody else would be unable to function under the kind of pressure and distraction I had. They couldn’t get anything done. No other president should ever have to go through this. But understand, there was no collusion. They would have had to make
Stefan Halper: The Cambridge don the FBI sent to spy on Trump
When Attorney General William Barr stated “spying did occur” against the 2016 Trump campaign, most attention was focused on the FBI’s surveillance of former junior foreign policy aide Carter Page.
But the spying Barr was thinking of, and which he said may or may not have been legally authorized, is more likely to be that carried out by Stefan Halper, a former Republican operative and White House aide who became a foreign policy academic with close ties to both American and British intelligence.
One could be forgiven for believing Halper was a creation of the spy novelist John Le Carré. A Cambridge don and White House veteran of the Nixon, Ford, and Reagan administrations, he has long operated in the gray area between academe and espionage. Gregarious, rumpled, and with an ample girth, Halper, now 74, was known as “Stef” to his friends and students, whom he would regale with tales of Washington intrigue.
While the FBI describes Halper as its “informant,” he did far more than report things he became privy to in the course of his normal life. Rather, he actively courted at least three Trump campaign officials, offering to pay for travel and misrepresenting himself as eager to work for Trump.
Columnist Kristen Soltis Anderson on the expanded Washington Examiner magazine
Watch Full Screen to Skip Ads
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Halper was asked by the FBI to gather information on Page and George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy aide with a junior but more central role than Page, and he met with Trump campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis.
As Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s investigation into alleged FISA abuse nears its conclusion in either May or June, new reports have emerged indicating that Halper has been looked at as part of that probe.
Halper graduated from Stanford in 1967 and received a Ph.D. from Oxford in 1971 and Cambridge in 2004. He was the director of American studies in the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge, where he taught classes and also delivered papers at institutions around the world, including Chatham House in London, the Center for Strategic and International Studies in D.C., and the U.S. Naval War College. Halper is now the emeritus senior fellow of the Centre of International Studies.
At Cambridge, he worked for years alongside Sir Richard Dearlove, who had spent decades with MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, the equivalent of the CIA, and was its director from 1999 to 2004.
Christopher Steele, hired by Fusion GPS and the eventual author of the Trump dossier that was used in FISA applications to target Trump associates, was in MI6 from 1987 until 2009. Dearlove has described Steele as the “go-to person on Russia in the commercial sector” and said his reputation is “superb.”
Halper organized and hosted a series of Cambridge Intelligence Seminars that were attended by intelligence community members, academics, and researchers from around the world. One such seminar in 2014, put together by both Halper and Dearlove, was attended by then-President Barack Obama’s Defense Intelligence Agency Director Mike Flynn, who played a prominent role in the Trump campaign beginning in early 2016.
After Trump’s win, Flynn left his position as Trump’s national security adviser following questions about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. He later pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during special counsel Mueller’s investigation regarding his contacts with the ambassador.
Dearlove and Halper both stepped down from the Cambridge Intelligence Seminars amid reports that Russian operatives were attempting to compromise the organization. Halper said he left due to “unacceptable Russian influence on the group.”
Today, Dearlove is listed as the chairman and Halper is listed as a partner at the Cambridge Security Initiative, which states it “provides a unique link between the worlds of business, government, and academia with unrivaled expertise in security and intelligence issues.”
This is not the first time that Halper has been accused of spying on a presidential campaign. In the lead-up to the 1980 presidential election between then-President Jimmy Carter and candidate Ronald Reagan, briefing documents from the Carter campaign were allegedly leaked to Reagan’s team before the one and only presidential debate on Oct. 28, 1980. Dubbed “Debategate,” the details on this scandal were not publicly revealed until 1983. And Halper was accused of being the person in charge of the operation, allegedly involving former CIA officials.
Though now on his second marriage, Halper’s father-in-law at the time was former top CIA official Ray Cline, best known for his key role in handling the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Cline denied Halper’s involvement and downplayed the alleged operation, saying, “I think this is all a romantic fallacy about an old CIA network … Such an effort would not have been worthwhile and I believe it was not executed.” Halper has denied his involvement as well.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Halper met with Page and Papadopoulos at the behest of the FBI as part of its investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Halper also met with Clovis, the Iowa-based national co-chairman of the Trump campaign, although it is not known if this was done with the authorization of the FBI.
Page, who was the subject of FISA warrants in 2016 and 2017, says he first met Stefan Halper in mid-July 2016, after receiving an invitation to one of Halper’s intelligence seminars, titled “2016’s Race to Change the World,” in May or June 2016. Page said that organizers paid for his travel to and from the conference. Halper continued reaching out to Page into at least 2017.
Stefan Halper also contacted Clovis via email in late August 2016, and Halper referenced his conversations with Page as part of his offer to meet. Halper and Clovis met up in Virginia a few days later. Of their conversation, Clovis said, “It had nothing to do with emails. No mention of Russia. No mention of Hillary Clinton. No mention of her campaign. Only a mention in passing that he had met with Carter Page.”
The FBI says it began its Trump-Russia investigation, dubbed “Crossfire Hurricane,” in July 2016, just a couple weeks after Halper met with Page. A meeting involving Trump dossier author Steele, DOJ official Bruce Ohr, and his wife and Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr occurred just before the launch of the investigation as well.
The Justice Department says its investigation was initiated following Australian diplomat Alexander Downer telling the FBI that Papadopoulos informed him at a London bar in the spring of 2016 that Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton.
Papadopoulos says that Halper sent him an unsolicited email in September 2016 asking to discuss foreign policy issues with him. “I’ll pay you $3,000 and I’ll fly you to London, and let’s talk about it for a couple days and let’s see what you can do, and just write a paper for me,” Papadopoulos quoted Halper as saying. He met Halper in London and says that Halper grilled him about Hillary Clinton’s hacked emails, Russia’s involvement, and how it may have benefited the Trump campaign. Papadopoulos said, “I think I pushed back and I told him, ‘I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.’”
When Halper’s role as an FBI informant was leaked to the media in May 2018, it led to accusations from Trump and Republicans in Congress that the Obama Justice Department had been using Halper as part of an illegal effort to spy on the Trump campaign. Dubbed “Spygate” by allies of the president, the revelation led Trump to tweet that this was “starting to look like one of the biggest political scandals in U.S. history.”
Democrats argue that Halper’s role as an FBI informant amounted to “spying,” though by any layman’s view of the term, it did. Back in 2018, Trump addressed this, saying, “The Democrats are now alluding to [sic] the the concept that having an informant placed in an opposing party’s campaign is different than having a Spy, as illegal as that may be. But what about an ‘informant’ who is paid a fortune and who ‘sets up’ way earlier than the Russian Hoax?”
Halper was the author of several books on international relations that were critical of U.S. foreign policy from a traditional realist perspective. Co-written in 2004 with former British diplomat Jonathan Clarke,America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order was deeply critical of the Bush administration’s post-9/11 strategy of vast military action and “nation-building.”
In 2007 he wrote The Silence of the Rational Center: Why American Foreign Policy is Failing on what he contended was the American obsession with “big idea” sloganeering rather than astute decision-making on the world stage. His 2012 book The Beijing Consensus spoke of China’s rapid rise, said that China “will not confront the West on the battlefield, but in the global information space,” and warned that U.S. foreign policy was woefully unprepared to deal with this.
When Halper contacted members of the Trump campaign, he did so under the guise of discussing foreign policy.
The FBI’s investigation into Russia and the Trump campaign was rolled into special counsel Mueller’s investigation following his appointment in May 2017. Last month, Barr provided a four-page letter outlining the baseline conclusions of Mueller’s investigation, including the fact that Mueller did not charge any Trump associates with crimes related to collusion with Russia. Barr said Mueller did not reach a conclusion one way or the other on whether Trump committed obstruction of justice.
And Barr said that the Justice Department inspector general’s investigation into possible FISA abuse by the DOJ and FBI should be done “probably in May or June.”
Congressional Republicans such as Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., had fought for access to DOJ information on Halper’s relationship with the FBI. Nunes now says he has prepared a series of criminal referrals that he will be sending to the DOJ within days, and Attorney General Barr has said that he will take a serious look at the documentation that Nunes sends him. It is not known whether Halper will be part of any of the referrals.
After decades of being an accessible public figure well known to journalists, foreign policy aficionados, and intelligence officials on both sides of the Atlantic, Halper has retreated into the shadows, refusing all unknown callers to his rural home in Great Falls, Va.
In 1977, Halper became Special Counsel to the Congressional Joint Economic Committee and Legislative Assistant to Senator William Roth (R-Del.).[6] In 1979 he became National Policy Director for George H. W. Bush‘s Presidential campaign and then in 1980 he became Director of Policy Coordination for the Reagan- Bush Presidential campaign.[6]
Halper played a central role in a scandal in the 1980 election. But it was not until several years after Reagan’s victory over Carter that this scandal emerged. In connection with his position Halper’s name came up in the 1983/4 investigations into the Debategate affair, which was a spying scandal in which Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officials passed classified information about Carter administration’s foreign policy to Reagan campaign officials in order to ensure the Reagan campaign knew of any foreign policy decisions that Carter was considering (Iran hostage crisis). Reagan Administration officials cited by The New York Times described Halper as “the person in charge” of the operation.[7][8] Halper called the report “just absolutely untrue”.[9]
In 1983, the UPI suggested that Halper’s handler for this operation was Reagan’s Vice Presidential candidate, ex-CIA-Director George H. W. Bush, who worked with Halper’s father-in-law, ex-CIA-Deputy-Director Ray Cline.[9] After Reagan entered the White House, Halper became Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs.[6] Upon leaving the Department in 1984, he remained a Senior Advisor to the Department of Defense and a Senior Advisor to the Department of Justice until 2001.[6][2][10]
Business (1984–1990)
From 1984 to 1990 Halper was chairman and majority shareholder of the Palmer National Bank of Washington, D.C., the National Bank of Northern Virginia and the George Washington National Bank.[6] Palmer National Bank was used to transfer money to Swiss Bank Accounts controlled by White House aid Oliver North.[11]
According to Peter Dale Scott‘s book The Iran-Contra Connection: Secret Teams and Covert Operations in Reagan Era on the Iran-Contra scandal, Ray Cline’s son-in-law Roger Fontaine “made at least two visits to Guatemala in 1980… (with General Sumner) drafting the May 1980 Santa Fe Statement, which said that World War III was already underway in Central America against the Soviets and that Nicauragua was the enemy. And some Reagan aides felt that Halper “was receiving information from the CIA.”[12]
The Palmer National Bank, where Halper worked, was described as “the DC hub by which Lt. Col. Oliver North sent arms and money to the anti-Sandinista guerrilla Contras in Nicaragua. One of Palmer’s founders, Stefan Halper, had no previous banking experience but was George H.W. Bush’s foreign policy director during Bush’s unsuccessful 1980 presidential campaign.” [13]
Academic and media (1986–2000)
From 1986 to 2000 Halper wrote a national security and foreign policy-focused weekly newspaper column, syndicated to 30 newspapers.[6]
Halper has worked as a senior foreign policy advisor to various think-tanks and research institutions, including the Center for Strategic and International Studies, The Center for the National Interest, where he is a Distinguished Fellow, and The Institute of World Politicswhere he is a Research Professor. He has served on the Advisory Board of Directors of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies and contributed to various magazines, journals, newspapers and media outlets. These include: The National Interest, The Washington Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the BBC, CNN, SKY NEWS, ABC, CBS, NBC, C-Span, and a range of radio outlets.
In a 2007 book, The Silence of the Rational Center, Halper analyzed “institutional failures” in United States policy-making:
“Three times since World War II, Big Ideas have seized the political discourse and driven policy experts to the sidelines: during the Red Scare of the early Cold War; during the entry to the Vietnam War, with its talk off democracy and dominos; and at the onset of the Iraq War. Each time, framing concepts rooted in Big Ideas turned complex foreign policy challenges into undifferentiated, apocalyptic threats to the nation’s very existence. Professionals and area experts were excluded from the debate if they diverged from the patriotic consensus, and the mainstream institutions and publications that could have opposed the rush to simplification were either silent or instead provided an echo chamber for the dominant narrative.”[14]
Russian Berlin-based journalist Leonid Bershidsky wrote in May 2018, that “the Trump-Russia scandal born of this operation [FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign] could be added to The Silence of the Rational Center as a fourth institutional failure.”[14]
United States government research (2012–2016)
From 2012 to 2016 Halper received $1 million in contracts for “social sciences and humanities” research from the Defense department‘s Office of Net Assessment, some of which Halper subcontracted to other researchers. Forty percent of the money had been awarded before Trump announced his candidacy in 2015.[15]
FBI Operation ‘Crossfire Hurricane’
Halper acted as an FBI informant for Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, and was a subject of the Spygateconspiracy theory initiated by President Donald Trump in May 2018. The theory alleges that the Obama administration planted a paid spy in the 2016 Trump campaign “for political purposes” to gather information in support of Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. Beginning in summer 2016, Halper spoke separately to three Trump campaign advisers – Carter Page, Sam Clovis and George Papadopoulos – but there is no evidence that Halper had actually joined Trump’s campaign.
Page said that he “had extensive discussions” with Halper on “a bunch of different foreign-policy-related topics”, ending in September 2017.[16] A former federal law enforcement official told The New York Times that their initial encounter at a London symposium on July 11–12, 2016 was a coincidence, rather than at the direction of the FBI.[17][16] Clovis’s attorney said that Clovis and Halper had discussed China during their sole meeting on August 31 or September 1, 2016.[16] On September 2, 2016, Halper contacted Papadopoulos, inviting him to London and to write a paper on Mediterranean oil fields, which he did.[16] On September 15, 2016, Halper asked Papadopoulos if he knew of any Russian efforts to disrupt the election campaign; Papadopoulos twice denied he did, despite Joseph Mifsudtelling him the previous April that Russians had embarrassing Hillary Clinton emails, and Papadopoulos bragging about it to Alexander Downer in May. The New York Times reported in April 2019 that the FBI had asked Halper to approach Page and Papadopoulos, although it was not clear if he had been asked to contact Clovis.[18] In May 2019, the Times reported that Page had urged Halper to meet with Clovis and that the FBI was aware of the meeting but had not instructed Halper to ask Clovis about Russia matters. The Timesalso reported that the FBI also sent an investigator using the name Azra Turk to meet with Papadopoulos, while posing as Halper’s assistant. The Times stated that the FBI considered it essential to add a trained and trusted investigator like Turk as a “layer of oversight”, in the event the investigation was ultimately prosecuted and the government needed the credible testimony of such an individual, without exposing Halper as a longtime confidential informant.[19]
Trump’s Spygate allegations were thoroughly debunked,[19][20][21] despite renewed interest in April 2019 after attorney general William Barr testified to Congress that “spying did occur” on the Trump campaign, although his characterization of “spying” was ambiguous and he declined to be specific. He stated he was assembling a team to examine the matter, although the Justice Department inspector general had been looking into it and related matters for some time and was expected to release his report within weeks. Prior to his 2016 activities, Halper had a February 2014 encounter at a London intelligence conference with Michael Flynn, then the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and later a Trump supporter and first national security advisor. Harper became so alarmed by Flynn’s close association with a Russian woman that a Halper associate expressed concerns to American authorities that Flynn may have been compromised by Russian intelligence. Flynn was forced out of the DIA six months later, although public accounts at the time cited other reasons for his removal, including his management style and views on Islam.[22] The “Russian” woman, former Cambridge academic Svetlana Lokhova, sued Halper in 2019 for $25 million, alleging he had conspired with multiple news outlets to spread the false and salacious narrative that she had seduced Flynn on orders from the Russian government. [23]
Halper’s former wife, Sibyl Cline, is the daughter of the former CIA deputy director for intelligence, Ray S. Cline.[8]
Books
He is the co-author of the bestselling book America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order, published by the Cambridge University Press in 2004, and also co-author of The Silence of the Rational Center: Why American Foreign Policy is Failing (2007). In April 2010, his book The Beijing Consensus: Legitimizing Authoritarianism in Our Time was published by Basic Books. Also a bestseller, it has been published in Japan, Taiwan, China, South Korea, and France.[citation needed]
Awards
Halper is a recipient of the State Department’s Superior Honor Award, the Justice Department’s Director’s Award, and the Defense Department’s Superior Honor Award.
John Durham, U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut. Courtesy photo.
News reports indicate U.S. Attorney General William Barr has tapped U.S. Attorney John Durham of the District of Connecticut to examine the origins of the Russia investigation, and to determine if intelligence collection involving President Donald Trump’s campaign was appropriate.
But who is Durham, the 68-year-old who’s had a four-decade-long career as a federal prosecutor, and who has now been named to lead that part of the investigation?
1. Durham prosecuted the Boston Mob.
A Republican, Durham is the 52nd U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut. He began in his role as the lead federal prosecutor in that state in February 2018.
He has been a Justice Department attorney since 1982. He is a former acting U.S. attorney and deputy U.S. attorney, and was chief of the Criminal Division. He also once headed the New Haven field office and the Boston Strike Force on Organized Crime, and was involved in special investigation projects under four attorneys general.
In 2002, Durham helped secure the conviction of retired FBI agent John Connolly Jr., who was sentenced to 10 years in prison on federal racketeering charges tied to his relationship with well-known mobster James “Whitey” Bulger.
2. He led investigations into a former Connecticut governor.
Durham also helped prosecute former Republican Connecticut Gov. John Rowland, who served two prison stints for not paying taxes and accepting $107,000 in gifts from people doing business with the state. He was also responsible for prosecuting mobsters in the Boston area, and led an inquiry into allegations that FBI agents and Boston police had ties with the mob.
3. He investigated the Central Intelligence Agency.
In 2009, then-Attorney General Eric Holder, a Democrat, appointed Durham to lead the Justice Department’s investigation into the legality of the CIA’s use of “enhanced” interrogation techniques.
4. Durham’s reputation as nonpartisan made him Barr’s ‘surprise choice.’
Those who know Durham said they are surprised that Barr, who many view as a partisan Trump ally, would pick a prosecutor who is reputed not to allow politics to enter into his work.
“Frankly, I’m very surprised Barr picked John Durham,” attorney and ethics expert Jamie Sullivan said. “Like [Robert] Mueller, Mr. Durham has an impeccable reputation. Barr did not pick someone who is in any way political.”
Sullivan, a managing partner with Hartford-based Howard, Kohn, Sprague & FitzGeraldand the co-author of a book on Connecticut legal ethics, added that Durham has a reputation for being “extremely tenacious and skilled and driven to come to the correct result.”
“He gives the process integrity,” Sullivan said.
For instance, when Durham conducted his investigation of Rowland, who had been a popular and well-liked governor, both men were staunch Republicans, Sullivan said.
“There was no political basis of any kind in that investigation and prosecution,” he said.
5. Observers say he permits no leaks.
Stan Twardy Jr., Day Pitney partner and U.S. attorney for Connecticut from 1985 to 1991, has known Durham for more than three decades and says the career prosecutor “is straight down the middle.”
“He is a person of tremendous integrity and is completely apolitical,” Twardy said Tuesday. “He does not have a political bias in any way. … He avoids it by keeping his head down and conducting the investigation without leaks. He is as close to Bob Mueller as anyone can be. He will conduct the investigation thoroughly.”
After Durham’s volunteer work, he became a state prosecutor in Connecticut. From 1977 to 1978, he served as a Deputy Assistant State’s Attorney in the Office of the Chief State’s Attorney. From 1978 to 1982, Durham served as an Assistant State’s Attorney in the New Haven State’s Attorney’s Office.[8]
Federal government
Following those five years as a state prosecutor, Durham became a federal prosecutor, joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut.[7] From 1982 to 1989, he served as an attorney and then supervisor in the New Haven Field Office of the Boston Strike Force in the Justice Department’s Organized Crime and Racketeering Section. From 1989 to 1994, he served as Chief of the Office’s Criminal Division. From 1994 to 2008, he served as the Deputy U.S. Attorney, and served as the U.S. Attorney in an acting and interim capacity in 1997 and 1998.[8][9]
In December 2000, Durham revealed secret FBI documents that convinced a judge to vacate the 1968 murder convictions of Enrico Tameleo, Joseph Salvati, Peter J. Limone and Louis Greco because they had been framed by the agency. In 2007, the documents helped Salvati, Limone, and the families of the two other men, who had died in prison, win a $101.7 million civil judgment against the government.[10]
On November 1, 2017, he was nominated by President Donald Trump to serve as U.S. Attorney for Connecticut.[11] On February 16, 2018, his nomination was confirmed by voice vote of the Senate. He was sworn in on February 22, 2018.[8]
Appointments as special investigator
Whitey Bulger case
Amid allegations that FBI informantsJames “Whitey” Bulger and Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi had corrupted their handlers, US Attorney GeneralJanet Reno named Durham special prosecutor in 1999. He oversaw a task force of FBI agents brought in from other offices to investigate the Boston office’s handling of informants.[10] In 2002, Durham helped secure the conviction of retired FBI agent John J. Connolly Jr., who was sentenced to 10 years in prison on federal racketeering charges for protecting Bulger and Flemmi from prosecution and warning Bulger to flee just before the gangster’s 1995 indictment.[10] Durham’s task force also gathered evidence against retired FBI agent H. Paul Rico who was indicted in Oklahoma on state charges that he helped Bulger and Flemmi kill a Tulsabusinessman in 1981. Rico died in 2004 before the case went to trial.[10]
In August 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder appointed Durham to lead the Justice Department’s investigation of the legality of CIA’s use of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” in the torture of detainees.[17] Durham’s mandate was to look at only those interrogations that had gone “beyond the officially sanctioned guidelines”, with Attorney General Holder saying interrogators who had acted in “good faith” based on the guidance found in the torture memos issued by the Bush Justice Department were not to be prosecuted.[18] Later in 2009, University of Toledo law professor Benjamin G. Davis attended a conference where former officials of the Bush administration had told conference participants shocking stories, and accounts of illegality on the part of more senior Bush officials.[19] Davis wrote an appeal to former Bush officials to take their accounts of illegality directly to Durham. A criminal investigation into the deaths of two detainees, Gul Rahman in Afghanistan and Manadel al-Jamadi in Iraq, was opened in 2011. It was closed in 2012 with no charges filed.[20][21]
Special Counsel Investigation
In April 2019,[22] Attorney General William Barr announced that he had launched a review of the origins of the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections[23] and it was reported in May that he had assigned Durham to lead it several weeks earlier.[24] Durham was given the authority “to broadly examin[e] the government’s collection of intelligence involving the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russians,” reviewing government documents and requesting voluntary witness statements.[24]
On October 24, 2019, it was reported that the Justice Department had elevated the inquiry to a criminal investigation.[25][26]
Accolades
In November 2011, Durham was included on The New Republic’s list of Washington’s most powerful, least famous people.[27]
Story 1: The Big Fail: Democrat Coup 2.0 Against Trump and American People Blown — Fear and Trembling Over Justice Department Inspector General’s Report on FISA Abuse in Obama Administration — Spygate Indictments and Prosecutions Coming — Videos —
President Trump on whistleblower
Joe Biden Admits to Getting Ukrainian Prosecutor who Investigated Son Fired
Hannity: Dems are guilty of everything they accuse Trump of
Hunter Biden Situation Could Be ‘Albatross Around Joe Biden’s Neck’ | THE CIRCUS | SHOWTIME
CBN NewsWatch PM: September 30, 2019
Top U.S. & World Headlines — September 30, 2019
President Trump And Allies Focus Attacks On Whistleblower
Pompeo was on Trump’s call with Ukrainian President, source says
Trump focuses anger at whistleblower as impeachment inquiry deepens
A look at Hunter Biden’s time in Ukraine
“BIDEN IS A DISGRACE” President Trump RIPS Joe Biden Over Ukraine Controversy
Tucker: Democrats don’t seem happy about impeachment
Stephen Miller calls whistleblower a ‘partisan hit job’ in fiery interview
I wouldn’t cooperate with Adam Schiff’: Giuliani | ABC News
House Intelligence Committee expects to hear from whistleblower ‘very soon’: Schiff | ABC News
Glenn reveals the facts that the media refuse to share and breaks down the entire Ukraine timeline on the chalkboard. Tune in to watch as Glenn makes yet another complex issue simple. BlazeTV Presents a Glenn Beck Special – Ukraine: The Democrats’ Russia.
‘COUP’: Trump blasts Democrats’ impeachment efforts in tweet
The Trump tweet came about 12 hours after Trump adviser Peter Navarro called the impeachment inquiry an “attempted coup d’etat’
President-elect Donald Trump looks on during a rally at the DeltaPlex Arena in Grand Rapids, Michigan on Dec. 9, 2016.Drew Angerer / Getty Images file
By Dareh Gregorian
President Donald Trump on Tuesday escalated his attacks on Democrats’ impeachment efforts, referring to the inquiry as a “coup.”
“As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP,” he said.
Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump
As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the….
The House last month launched a formal impeachment inquiry stemming from a July 25 phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president as well as a related whistleblower complaint.
The tweets came hours after reports that former Ukraine special envoy Kurt Volker and former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch would be sitting for depositions before the House committees involved in the impeachment inquiry.
The State Department’s Inspector General also scheduled a surprise briefing for Wednesday with staffers from a group of House and Senate committees on documents related to the State Department and Ukraine, multiple Congressional sources told NBC News.
Earlier Tuesday, Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro told Fox Business Network he thought the president was the victim “of an attempted coup d’etat.”
“This is a very dangerous game that I think the Democrats could play,” Navarro said.
Trump has claimed to be the victim of takeover attempts before — he called former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election an “attempted coup.”
“They tried for a coup, it didn’t work out so well. And I didn’t need a gun for that one, did I?,” Trump told a crowd at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting in Indianapolis in April.
The president on Sunday also promoted a quote from a pastor who told Fox News that impeaching the president would lead to a “Civil War-like fracture in this nation.”
The Justice Department’s inspector general told lawmakers Friday his team is nearly finished with its long-awaited review of alleged surveillance abuses by the DOJ and FBI during the Russia investigation, saying they have submitted a draft to Attorney General Bill Barr and are “finalizing” the report ahead of its public release.
“We have now begun the process of finalizing our report by providing a draft of our factual findings to the department and the FBI for classification determination and marking,” Michael Horowitz wrote in a Friday letter to several House and Senate committees. “This step is consistent with our process for reports such as this one that involve classified material.”
Barr has received the draft report from Horowitz and will begin the process of reviewing it, according to a source familiar with the situation. The inspector general said his team has “reviewed over one million records and conducted over 100 interviews, including several of witnesses who only recently agreed to be interviewed.”
Horowitz and his investigators have probed how the infamous anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele was used to secure the original Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant for former Trump aide Carter Page in October 2016, as well as for three renewals. Horowitz’s team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster Steele’s credibility.
In his letter Friday, Horowitz indicated that once the Justice Department and the FBI send back a marked document relating to classified material, his team will “proceed with our usual process for preparing final draft public and classified reports, and ensuring that appropriate reviews occur for accuracy and comment purposes.”
Meanwhile, a key FBI player during the time frame, former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, is facing the prospect of federal charges after Horowitz faulted him in a separate inquiry over statements he made during a Hillary Clinton-related investigation. The review found that McCabe “lacked candor” when talking with investigators, but the former FBI official has denied wrongdoing.
As Fox News reported Thursday, Washington D.C. U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu has recommended moving forward with charges against McCabe, a CNN contributor, though no indictment has been handed down.
The Horowitz letter also comes amid other similar inquiries related to the 2016 election:
Barr has assigned John Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, to conduct an inquiry into alleged misconduct and alleged improper government surveillance on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.
And U.S. Attorney John Huber was appointed by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to review not only alleged surveillance abuses by the Justice Department and the FBI but also their handling of the investigation into the Clinton Foundation and other matters.
PUBLISHED: 19:46 EDT, 30 September 2019 | UPDATED: 09:34 EDT, 1 October 2019
Two U.S. officials say Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was on the July 25 call between President Donald Trump and Ukraine‘s president that is at the center of a whistleblower complaint.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an internal matter.
It was the first confirmation that a Cabinet official was on the call in which Trump pressed President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate Hunter Biden’s membership on the board of a Ukrainian gas company.
It also increases the number of people known to have first-hand knowledge of a call that has sparked an impeachment inquiry by Congress.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is seen at United Nations in New York last week
Pompeo overheard the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (seen far left next to Trump), according to two U.S. officials
Pompeo leaves for Italy amid reports he took part in Ukraine call
Pompeo boarded a plane to fly to Italy on Monday.
Joining him aboard the official State Department flight was Sebastian Gorka, a former White House aide and Trump supporter.
‘It’s not quite Air Force One, but it’s very close,’ Gorka, who is now a media personality, tweeted.
News of Pompeo’s involvement broke after it was learned that another associate of the president is more deeply ensnared in the ongoing impeachment inquiry.
Democrats on Monday subpoenaed Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer who was at the heart of Trump’s efforts to get Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden’s family.
That was after one of Trump’s staunchest defenders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, said he would have ‘no choice’ but to consider articles of impeachment if the House approved them.
With Congress out of session for observance of the Jewish holidays, Democrats moved aggressively against Giuliani, requesting by Oct. 15 ‘text messages, phone records and other communications’ that they referred to as possible evidence.
They also requested documents and depositions from three of his business associates.
McConnell, a steadfast Trump defender, nonetheless swatted down talk that that the GOP-controlled Senate could dodge the matter of impeachment if the House approved charges against Trump.
‘It’s a Senate rule related to impeachment, it would take 67 votes to change, so I would have no choice but to take it up,’ McConnell said on CNBC.
FILE – In this May 5, 2018, file photo, Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for President Donald Trump, speaks in Washington. Giuliani says he’d only cooperate with the House impeachment inquiry if his client agreed. Central to the investigation is the effort by Giuliani to have Ukraine conduct a corruption probe into Joe Biden and his son’s dealings with a Ukrainian energy company. Trump echoed that request in a July 2019 call with Ukraine’s president. The House Intelligence Committee is leading the inquiry, and Chairman Adam Schiff hasn’t decided if he wants to hear from Giuliani. AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File)
The lawmakers cited claims by Giuliani in a series of TV interviews over the past week
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani has coffee with Ukrainian-American businessman Lev Parnas at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, U.S. September 20, 2019. Committees are seeking documents related to his mission to seek information from Ukraine
President Trump again Monday called his phone call with the President of Ukraine where he urged him to get in touch with Giuliani ‘perfect’
Giuliani has repeatedly pushed unsubstantiated claims that Joe Biden pushed Ukraine to fire a prosecutor to keep it from probing a company tied to his son
UP TO HERE: ‘If (Trump) decides that he wants me to testify of course I’ll testify – even though I think Adam Schiff is an illegitimate chairman,’ Giuliani said.
‘How long you’re on it is a whole different matter.’
Trump took to Twitter to defend anew his phone call with Zelenskiy as ‘perfect’ and to unleash a series of attacks, most strikingly against House intelligence committee Chairman Adam Schiff.
The Democrat, he suggested, ought to be tried for a capital offense for launching into a paraphrase of Trump during a congressional hearing last week.
‘Rep. Adam Schiff illegally made up a FAKE & terrible statement, pretended it to be mine as the most important part of my call to the Ukrainian President, and read it aloud to Congress and the American people,’ the president wrote.
‘It bore NO relationship to what I said on the call. Arrest for Treason?’
Trump tweeted repeatedly through the day but was, for the most part, a lonely voice as the White House lacked an organization or process to defend him.
Senior staffers, including acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and White House counsel Pat Cipollone, were to present Trump this week with options on setting up the West Wing’s response to impeachment, officials said.
A formal war room was unlikely, though some sort of rapid response team was planned to supplement the efforts of Trump and Giuliani.
But Trump was angry over the weekend at both Mulvaney and press secretary Stephanie Grisham for not being able to change the narrative dominating the story, according to two Republicans close to the White House not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations.
+13
Democrats have orders from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to keep momentum going despite a two-week recess that started Friday.
Staff for three committees are scheduled on Wednesday and Thursday to depose Marie ‘Masha’ Yovanovitch, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who was removed by the Trump administration earlier this year, and Kurt Volker, who resigned last week as America’s Ukrainian envoy.
Members of intelligence committee on Friday will interview Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community who first received the whistleblower’s complaint.
Democrats are driving the proceedings toward what some hope is a vote to impeach, or indict, Trump by year’s end.
They have launched a coordinated messaging and polling strategy aimed at keeping any political backlash in closely divided districts from toppling their House majority.
Meanwhile, an outside group that supports GOP House candidates was starting anti-impeachment digital ads on Monday against three House Democrats from districts Trump won in 2016.
The ads by the Congressional Leadership Fund accuse Reps. Matt Cartwright of Pennsylvania, Elaine Luria of Virginia and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan of ‘tearing us apart,’ and are among the first in which Republicans are trying to use the impeachment issue against Democratic candidates.
However, support across America for impeachment has grown significantly from its level before the House launched its formal inquiry last week.
A new poll from Quinnipiac University shows 47 per cent of registered voters say Trump should be impeached and removed from office, while 47 per cent say he should not.
Just a week before, it was 37 per cent for impeachment and 57 per cent against.
That was before the White House released its rough version of the call between Trump and Ukraine’s president and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s announcement of a formal impeachment inquiry.
SMOKING TABLET: Rudy Giuliani claims he has 15 texts which will show his Ukraine activities were fully coordinated with the State Department
Rudy Giuliani reiterated previous claims that the State Department asked him to reach out to Ukraine to inquire about Ukrainian investigations, including into Joe and Hunter Biden, in an appearance on Laura Ingraham’s show on Fox
TALK AGAIN: Giuliani shared his texts with U.S. special envoy for Ukraine Kurt Volker
In the CNN poll, 47 per cent said Trump should be impeached and removed from office, up from 41 per cent in May.
Both polls showed dramatic partisan polarization remains on impeachment: most Democrats expressing support, the vast majority of Republicans opposed.
The polls disagreed over whose opinions are changing – Quinnipiac showing increased impeachment support coming more from Democrats, CNN from Republicans.
Schiff said on Sunday that his intelligence panel would hear from the still-secret whistleblower ‘very soon’ but that no date had been set and other details remained to be worked out.
A day after Trump demanded to meet the whistleblower, whom he has repeatedly assailed, he said when asked about the person: ‘Well, we’re trying to find out about a whistleblower,’ who made his perfect call ‘sound terrible.’
The whistleblower’s attorney, Andrew Bakaj, said Monday that the person ‘is entitled to anonymity. Law and policy support this, and the individual is not to be retaliated against. Doing so is a violation of federal law.’
Separately, the Justice Department disclosed that Trump recently asked Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and other foreign leaders to help Attorney General William Barr with an investigation of the origins of the Russia investigation that has shadowed his administration for more than two years.
Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said Trump made the calls at Barr’s request.
Trump was requesting help for U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation into the origins of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The investigation outraged Trump, who cast it as a politically motivated ‘witch hunt.’
The Russia probe remains Trump’s motivating factor, according to Tom Bossert, the president’s former homeland security adviser.
‘I honestly believe this president has not gotten his pound of flesh yet from past grievances on the 2016 investigation,’ Bossert said Sunday on ABC.
‘If he continues to focus on that white whale, it’s going to bring him down.’
Story 1: The Big Winner Is President Donald J. Trump — Senators: Republicans 55 — Democrats 45, Representatives: Republicans 201 — Democrats — 234 — No Blue Wave But Blue Ripple — Videos —
Midterm election 2018: The biggest winners
Republicans, Democrats weigh in on midterm election results
Trump will help Republicans win midterm elections: Rep. Biggs
Story 2: President Trump’s Reaction To Election Results — Videos —
Trump press conference following midterm elections
Trump holds press conference after mixed night at midterms
Donald Trump: 50 supporters explain why they love him – BBC News
A look at potential 2020 contenders
‘Sit down, you’re very rude, you’re fake news!’ President Trump’s extraordinary confrontation with CNN reporter as his aide wrestles for the microphone and he takes credit for mid-terms ‘victory’
Democrats took control of the House of Representatives during the US mid-terms in a blow to Donald Trump
Party vowed to frustrate his populist political agenda while launching investigations into his administration
But Republicans are set to increase their majority in the Senate, providing the President with a partial victory
Trump hailed a ‘big win’ for his party and those who backed his pro-business, anti-illegal immigration agenda
He also threatened to go to war in the Capitol if Democrats try to launch investigations into his administration
PUBLISHED: 02:03 EST, 7 November 2018 | UPDATED: 14:54 EST, 7 November 2018
Donald Trump hailed ‘a historic day’ for Republicans in the American mid-term elections and became embroiled in an extraordinary confrontation with a CNN reporter at his press conference today.
Democrats won back control of the House of Representatives, and are projected to win 238 seats to the Republicans 197 seats – with Republicans projected to retain control of the Senate and increase their majority to 54 seats.
At the press conference President Trump took credit for victory, then when taking questions from the media, got into a furious row with CNN reporter Jim Acosta who challenged his characterisation of migrants heading for the US border in a ‘caravan’ from Central America as ‘an invasion.’
A riled President Trump points and admonishes CNN reporter Jim Acosta in a tense argument between the two at his press conference today. The duo often clash during the President’s briefings at the White House
President Trump denied using a migrant caravan making its way to the US border through Mexico to whip up fear ahead of Tuesday’s election to win votes, and then went on to admonish Acosta
A clearly riled President Trump then said: ‘Why don’t you let me run the country you run CNN and if you did it well your ratings would improve.’
Acosta attempted to ask a further question that was denied to him before him and a White House Aide then got into a strange fight over the microphone.
The reporter attempted to ask a question about whether President Trump was ‘concerned about the investigation into Russia’, with a quick riposte coming from Trump who said the investigation was a ‘hoax.’
The President added: ‘CNN should be ashamed of itself having you working for them. You are a very rude ..terrible person.. the way you treat Sarah Huckabee is…’
The room went temporarily silent before another question from a reporter was taken who defended Acosta describing him as ‘diligent’.
President Trump shot back at the reporter he ‘wasn’t a big fan of his either’ to laughter from the room, before Acosta stood up again and started talking to the President.
Trump said ‘just sit down please’ and then accused Acosta of reporting ‘fake news’ and branded him ‘an enemy of the people.’
A White House aide takes the microphone from Jim Acosta as he attempts to ask a further question to President Trump. The reporter managed to ask a further question about Russia that President Trump rebutted saying the investigation was a ‘hoax’
At the start of the news conference President Trump claimed the largest Senate gains for a President’s first midterms since President Kennedy in 1962.
He said: ‘We saw the group of candidates I supported achieve tremendous success last night.’
The President said he they had a ‘big day yesterday, an incredible day and last night the Republican party defied history to expand our Senate.’
They managed this despite being ‘getting bombarded with money on the other side’ and ‘a very hostile media coverage to put it mildly,’ he added – ‘it set a new standard.’
Donald Trump hailed a ‘Big Win’ for Republicans in the mid-term elections on Tuesday after the party increased its majority in the Senate, marking the first time since 2002 that a ruling party has picked up seats in the upper house of government
Trump said he had made history in raising the number of Senators to 55, ‘the largest number of Republican Senators for the last 100 years.’
Responding to Democrats threats over claims of Russian election tampering, Trump said ‘It’s been a long time they’ve got nothing.’
He continued, ‘They can play that game but we can play it better because we’ve got the Unites States Senate.’
He was also critical of some Republican candidates who did not accept his ’embrace.’
‘Those are some of the people that decided for their own reasons – whether its me or what we stand for, but what we stand for meant a lot to most people and we have had tremendous support of the Republican party – at 93% its a record.’ Trump said.
There may be some room, however, for Trump and Democrats to work together on issues with bipartisan support such as a package to improve infrastructure or protections against prescription drug price increases.
‘It really could be a beautiful bipartisan situation,’ Trump said.
He said Nancy Pelosi, who may be the next speaker of the House, had expressed to him in a phone call a desire to work together. But Trump doubted there would be much common ground if Democrats press investigations.
‘You can’t do it simultaneously,’ he said.
He also said he hopes he can work with Congress to get enough money to build his long-promised border wall but that he would not necessarily force a government shutdown over the issue.
‘We need the money to build the wall, the whole wall, not pieces of it,’
‘We need the wall, many Democrats know we need the wall, and we’re just going to have to see what happens.’
Republicans are forecast to hold 54 out of 100 seats in the Senate once all votes are counted, up from 51, while the Democrats are projected to take 238 seats in the House of Representatives, with 218 needed for a majority.
Trump used the result – the first time since 2002 that the ruling party has gained Senate seats – to congratulate himself, saying: ‘Yesterday was such a very Big Win, and all under the pressure of a Nasty and Hostile Media!’
Despite the Democrats making gains, Tuesday failed to live up to expectations that a ‘blue wave’ of support would sweep them into power in both houses and leave Trump as a lame duck.
But winning the House does give Democrats the ability to block Republican legislation they disagree with, frustrating Trump’s political agenda for the remaining two years of his term.
They also win control of several powerful committees which they have pledged to use to launch investigations into Trump, including subpoenaing tax records he refused to release during the 2016 election and probing whether he has received money from Russia.
Trump preempted that tactic on Wednesday, vowing to go to war on Capitol Hill if necessary.
He said: ‘If the Democrats think they are going to waste Taxpayer Money investigating us at the House level, then we will likewise be forced to consider investigating them for all of the leaks of Classified Information, and much else, at the Senate level. Two can play that game!’
The President used the victory to attack critics within his own party, saying that those who supported his pro-business, anti-illegal immigration policies ‘did very well’
As well as gaining the House, Democrats gained control of powerful committees which they plan to use to investigate Trump. But he preempted that tactic on Wednesday, vowing to fight fire with fire
The Democrats are on course to win 238 seats in the House following the mid-term elections on Tuesday, though the figure falls short of the upper limit of 245 that they hoped to win
Republicans clung on to power in the Senate after the Democrats were defeated in key battleground states of Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, Texas and North Dakota
Nancy Pelosi, who could return as Democrat House Speaker after last night’s result, proclaimed victory and said the party would work to impose Constitutional checks and balances on Donald Trump
Trump tweeted out his support for Pelosi after she said the Democrats would work with Republicans in the House ‘where we can find common ground’
Nancy Pelosi thanks candidates for returning House to Dems
Democrats can also use their new powers to force Republicans into uncomfortable conversations on issues such as gun control and healthcare by sending bills on these subjects from the House to the Senate.
Should any of these bills pass both houses and make it to Trump’s desk, it could force him to veto the legislation, something he hasn’t had to do so far and allowing Democrats to paint him as the bad guy.
But maintaining control of the Senate allows Trump to nominate justices and recruit members of his cabinet unopposed, and puts a stop to any hopes the Democrats may have had of impeaching him.
The result also helps silence Trump’s critics within his own party, a fact he seemed very aware of when he tweeted: ‘Those that worked with me in this incredible Midterm Election, embracing certain policies and principles, did very well. Those that did not, say goodbye!’
The omens are not all bad for Trump’s hopes of winning a second term in 2020 either. Obama lost the House and Senate in the 2010 mid-terms, which he described as a ‘shellacking’, but went on to win a second term in 2012.
Nancy Pelosi, former Democrat Speaker in the House, hailed the victory early Wednesday, vowing to apply ‘checks and balances’ to Trump’s power, but also saying Democrats would cooperate with Republicans where possible.
Donald Trump called her to congratulate her on the win, and later endorsed her for Speaker, suggesting that Republicans could back her if Democrat hardliners choose to vote her down.
The Democrats also made gains in the elections for state governors – which act like lesser Presidents for the state they represent – gaining seven seats from the Republicans.
However, high-profile candidates Andrew Gillum and Stacey Abrams fell short in Florida and Georgia, leaving the Republicans with a majority of governors nationwide.
Gillum was hoping to become the first black governor of Florida, while in Georgia Stacey Abrams was aiming to enter history as America’s first female black governor.
Gillum finished less than a percent shy of Republican rival Ron DeSantis, while Abrams finished two per cent short of Brian Kemp. However, Abrams was refusing to concede on Wednesday, in the hopes that a recount could force another contest in December.
Encouragingly for the Democrats, they won governor’s races in states where Trump claimed victory in 2016, and while facing down candidates the President had endorsed.
In Kansas, Laura Kelly triumphed by a four-point margin over Kris Kobach – a strong ally of Trump’s immigration policies – while in Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer opened up an eight-point lead over Republican Bill Schuette.
Taylor Swift’s intervention also flopped as Marsha Blackburn won the Senate in Tennessee by 11 points over Democrat candidate Phil Bredesen, who the singer backed.
Trump called the night a ‘tremendous success’ for Republicans on Twitter because the incumbent party typically loses seats during the mid-terms, while he managed to make gains in the senate
The President also praised himself as a ‘magic man’, quoting from TV news reports that said the Republicans were ‘lucky’ to have him as their leader
One key Senate battleground was Texas, which had been widely seen as a safe seat for Republican Ted Cruz (pictured) until Beto O’Rourke emerged from obscurity to take him on
Ultimately Beto (pictured alongside wife Amy Sanders) fell short of victory, though many have pegged him as a rising star within the Democrat part
I’m so f***ing proud of you! Beto drops F-bomb after defeat
Ted Cruz supporter Marie Rice sheds tears of joy as Cruz declares victory at their election night headquarters
While the Democrats’ grass-roots organisation allowed them to seize the House, Trump’s showmanship and personality thwarted them in key Senate battleground states of Indiana, Missouri, and Tennessee – where he held rallies in the closing days of the election.
WHY IS LOSING THE HOUSE SIGNIFICANT?
Losing the House of Representatives will make it more difficult for Trump to govern by making it harder for Republicans to pass laws.
Laws start their life as bills submitted in either the House of Representatives – often shortened to House – or Senate, which makes up the legislative branch of the US government.
Bills must pass a vote in both of those houses before they can become law, giving the Democrats an opportunity to thwart bills they disagree with.
Holding the House also gives Democrats the opportunity to introduce bills on subjects the Republicans would rather not discuss – such as gun control, the environment, or healthcare – and force a debate.
Finally, the House includes several powerful committees which the Democrats now control and could use to probe Trump’s misdeeds.
Russian election meddling, Trump’s tax returns, and security clearances granted to members of the Trump clan could all come under scrutiny.
If a Democrat bill does make it through both the House and Senate it will land with the executive branch – which Trump leads – for approval.
This could force Trump into vetoing legislation he disagrees with, which is something he has not had to do so far.
However, maintaining control of the Senate allows Republicans to hold sway over the third branch of government – the judiciary – which is responsible for enforcing these laws.
The President is responsible for appointing justices, but they must be confirmed by Senators, which is why keeping control here was a key goal.
Senators are also responsible for confirming nominations to Trump’s cabinet, which he will also keep control of after Tuesday.
One of the most bitter defeats for the Democrats came in Texas, where rising star Beto O’Rourke was defeated by incumbent Ted Cruz – a onetime foe of Trump who has since warmed to him – though the contest was closer than anticipated.
In Arizona, Republican Martha McSally looked set to triumph over Kyrsten Sinema as counting stopped early on Wednesday, though the result might not be announced until later in the week.
The seat was left vacant after Jeff Flake, a Republican critic of Trump, announced he was retiring from politics.
Clare McCaskill, a moderate Democrat senator for Missouri, was handed a thumping defeat on Tuesday by Josh Hawley, a Republican who has allied himself to Trump, who won by more than 10 percentage points.
As the dust settled on Wednesday, Democrats standing ready to return next year as chairmen of House Oversight and Judiciary Committees were sharpening their pens and preparing to drag Trump through his own swamp.
‘We probably will’ seek Trump’s tax returns, said Reps. Elijah Cummings and Jerrold Nadler.
As Tuesday headed to Wednesday, presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway told reporters at the White House: ‘I guess they could try.’
‘I don’t know that there will be much of an appetite … for their members to be spending all of their time, or even most of their time, or a fraction of their time investigating, instigating, trying to impeach or subpoena people,’ Conway said.
Nadler said it was ‘way too early’ to talk about impeaching Trump, but wouldn’t rule it out depending on the results of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s expansive Russia probe.
‘He’s going to learn that he’s not above the law,’ he said, according to CNN.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters that ‘the president’s agenda isn’t going to change regardless of whose party is there.’
Democrats will also find themselves empowered to launch probes into voting-rights matters and questions about whether Trump has violated the Constitution’s ‘Emoluments Clause’ that prohibits presidents from receiving income from foreign governments.
Security clearances in the Trump White House could also come under close examination, along with prescription drug prices, family separations along the U.S.-Mexico border, gun control and insurance coverage for Americans with pre-existing medical conditions.
As results rolled in from around the country, the Democrats made gains in suburban areas outside of Washington, Philadelphia, Miami, Chicago and Denver that fell to Trump in 2016.
In Florida, Trump’s adopted home state, Ron DeSantis won the race to become state governor, defeating rival Andrew Gillum
Gillum said he regretting not being able to ‘bring it home’ in Florida after he lost the election with 49 per cent to 50 per cent
Speaking alongside his tearful wife, Gillum urged Democrats not to give up the fight in Florida, which was a key battleground state in 2016 that ultimately went to Trump
Republican Marsha Blackburn (left) claimed victory in Tennessee despite an unexpected intervention by pop princess Taylor Swift (right), who urged people to vote for her Democrat rival Phil Bredesen
Scott Walker, the Republican governor of Wisconsin who ran for President against Trump in 2016 (pictured), lost his race against Democrat Tony Evers
Marsha Blackburn defeats Bredesen in Tennessee’s senate race
But Trump tightened his grip on support in rural areas and among blue-collar workers. In Kentucky, one of the top Democratic recruits, retired Marine fighter pilot Amy McGrath, lost her bid to oust to three-term Rep. Andy Barr.
History was working against the president in the Senate: 2002 was the only midterm election in the past three decades when the party holding the White House gained Senate seats.
As the news broke that the Republicans had achieved just that, Trump began retweeting quotes from later night news bulletins praising himself as a ‘magic man’.
Whether voters opposed or supported him, Trump certainly electrified the mid-term contest, which has been a lackluster event under previous administrations with voter turnout struggling to hit 40 per cent.
High turnouts were recorded across the nation on Tuesday following record spending on advertising. Two thirds of those who voted said that Trump was the reason they cast their ballot, either to support or oppose him.
Overall, 6 in 10 voters said the country was headed in the wrong direction, but roughly that same number described the national economy as excellent or good.
Twenty-five percent described health care and immigration as the most important issues in the election.
Claire McCaskill (left), the incumbent Democrat in Missouri, lost her Senate seat to Republican challenger Josh Hawley, who attacked her for refusing to nominate Trump’s two Supreme Court picks
Abrams’s supporters cheer after learning she was making up ground on opponent Brian Kemp, though the election was still too close to call on Wednesday morning
The night was a record-breaker for women, who now hold more seats in the House than at any point in history. Among them is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 29-year-old Democrat who has come to embody what Trump brands the ‘far left’
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez beats Republican Anthony Pappas
Trump encouraged voters to view the first nationwide election of his presidency as a referendum on his leadership, pointing proudly to the surging economy at recent rallies.
He bet big on a xenophobic closing message, warning of an immigrant ‘invasion’ that promised to spread violent crime and drugs across the nation. Several television networks, including the president’s favorite Fox News Channel, yanked a Trump campaign advertisement off the air on the eve of the election, determining that its portrayal of a murderous immigrant went too far.
The president’s current job approval, set at 40 percent by Gallup, was the lowest at this point of any first-term president in the modern era. Both Barack Obama’s and Bill Clinton’s numbers were 5 points higher, and both suffered major midterm losses of 63 and 54 House seats respectively.
Democrats, whose very relevance in the Trump era depended on winning at least one chamber of Congress, were laser-focused on health care as they predicted victories that would break up the GOP’s monopoly in Washington and state governments.
Yet Trump’s party will maintain Senate control for the next two years, at least.
In Texas, Sen Ted Cruz staved off a tough challenge from Democrat Beto O’Rourke, whose record-smashing fundraising and celebrity have set off buzz he could be a credible 2020 White House contender.
In Indiana, Trump-backed businessman Mike Braun defeated Democratic incumbent Joe Donnelly. In Missouri, Josh Hawley knocked off Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. And in Tennessee, Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn defeated former Gov. Phil Bredesen, a top Democratic recruit.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said that Trump has no plans to alter his political agenda despite losing the House to the Democrats
Democrat voters in Georgia learn that Stacey Abrams is trailing her Republican opponent, though she has refused to concede
Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, cheers as she declares victory in the governor’s race in Detroit, Michigan, one of the areas which was key to Trump’s victory in 2016
A Democrat supporter puts her head in her hands as she learns that Republicans are projected to hold the Senate
What are the mid-terms and why do they matter?
Mid-term elections come mid-way through a President’s term in office, and typically serve as a referendum on their work so far while shaping how the rest of their term will play out.
The office of President is not on the ballot paper, however, and voters are instead asked to pick candidates for the two houses of government – the House and Senate – and state governor, who acts like a lesser President for their own state.
In the November 2018 mid-terms, all 435 seats in the House and 35 of the 100 seats in the Senate were up for election, along with 36 out of 50 state governors.
The Republicans held majorities in both houses before the election, allowing them to pass legislation, nominate judges, and appoint members of Trump’s cabinet unimpeded.
The Democrats were hoping to win back control of both houses in a so-called ‘blue wave’ that would have left Trump a lame duck and made it extremely difficult for him to get anything done in his last two years.
Supporters of Democrat Beto O’Rourke, who was running for the Senate in Texas, wait to hear the result. He ultimately lost the race to incumbent Republican Ted Cruz
As it happened, a divided nation produced a divided result, with Democrats winning back control of the House but Republicans increasing their majority in the Senate.
For Trump, that means the business of governing will become more difficult, with Democrats vowing to frustrate his populist political agenda.
Democrats also gained control of several powerful House committees and have promised to use them to investigate Trump, including a potential subpoena of his tax records.
But any hopes of impeachment, which was whispered about in Democrat circles during the campaign, are firmly off the table since the Senate would be required to find Trump guilty of an impeachable offence – which Republicans will not do.
Good showings for candidates who closely aligned themselves with Trump and his views will also help to quieten his opponents within his own party, and having Democrats in the House could provide a useful scapegoat for failed policies.
While state governors cannot affect Trump’s national agenda in the same way that representatives or senators can, he will rely on them to help enact his policies at a local level – and in these races, Republicans also lost ground.
The Democrats gained seven seats from Republicans, flipping states like Kansas and Michigan where Trump won big in 2016, but lost out in high profile races in Florida and Georgia.
A man dressed as Donald Trump lends his support to Florida governor candidate Ron DeSantis, an ally of the President who ultimately won his election against Democrat Andrew Gillum
Story 3: President Trump Fires Attorney General Jeff Sessions By Accepting His Requested Letter of Resignation — Second Special Counsel To Investigate and Prosecute Clinton Obama Democrat Criminal Conspiracy? — — The 2020 Presidential Election Begins –Videos Videos
Jeff Sessions resigns as Attorney General
Special Report: Jeff Sessions resigns as Attorney General
Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired
Schumer says he finds timing of Sessions’ resignation ‘suspect’
Trump slams Jeff Sessions: ‘I don’t have an attorney general’
GOP lawmakers call on Sessions to resign
Embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigns under pressure from Trump
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is leaving the Trump administration after more than a year of public criticism from his boss, President Donald Trump.
Trump has repeatedly hammered Sessions for his decision last year to recuse himself from the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin.
Sessions’s chief of staff Matthew Whitaker will serve as acting attorney general, Trump announced. Whitaker also will assume oversight of the ongoing investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and possible collusion by Trump’s campaign in that meddling.
Embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigned at the “request” of President Donald Trump on Wednesday after more than a year of public criticism from the president.
Sessions’s chief of staff Matthew Whitaker will serve as acting attorney general, Trump announced.
Whitaker also will assume oversight of the ongoing investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and possible collusion by Trump’s campaign in that meddling, according to the Justice Department.
Whitaker, who has publicly criticized the Mueller investigation, by law can serve as acting AG for a maximum of 210 days.
Whitaker will have the power to fire Mueller “for cause” as outlined under rules governing the special counsel’s office, if such cause is found.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein up till now has had oversight over the Mueller probe, as a result of Sessions’ move to recuse himself from the investigation in 2017.
Sessions, 71, had been repeatedly blasted by Trump for his recusal.
Trump has said that moment opened the door to special counsel Mueller’s probe, which the president has repeatedly called a “witch hunt.”
Sessions’ resignation was expected to happen sometime after Tuesday’s midterm elections, particuarly given the drumbeat of the president’s repeated criticism of the attorney general.
Bob Woodward’s recently published book about the Trump administration, “Fear,” says that Trump had called Sessions “mentally retarded” and a “dumb southerner.” Trump has publicly claimed, “I said neither” about Sessions.
But the abruptness of the move, less than 24 hours after the close of the polls Tuesday, stunned Trump’s closet allies both inside and outside of the White House.
“I didn’t know this was coming, especially so soon after the midterms,” one source said on the condition of anonymity.
Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump
·
We are pleased to announce that Matthew G. Whitaker, Chief of Staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions at the Department of Justice, will become our new Acting Attorney General of the United States. He will serve our Country well….
Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump
….We thank Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his service, and wish him well! A permanent replacement will be nominated at a later date.
Hours before the resignation was announced, Trump was asked about Sessions’ future in the administration.
“I’d rather answer that at a little bit different time,” Trump answered.
Trump’s press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the White House received a resignation letter from Sessions earlier Wednesday and Trump accepted it.
Sessions’ letter to Trump, which is not dated, begins by saying, “At your request, I am submitting my resignation.”
Getty Images
Attorney General Jeff Sessions
A spokesman for Mueller’s office declined to comment when contacted by CNBC about the resignation.
But Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who is the odds on favorite to become the next speaker of the House of Representatives, called Sessions’ “firing” a “blatant attempt” by Trump to undermine Mueller.
Nancy Pelosi
✔@NancyPelosi
It is impossible to read Attorney General Sessions’ firing as anything other than another blatant attempt by @realDonaldTrump to undermine & end Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation.
It is impossible to read Attorney General Sessions’ firing as anything other than another blatant attempt by @realDonaldTrump to undermine & end Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation.
Nancy Pelosi
✔@NancyPelosi
Given his record of threats to undermine & weaken the Russia investigation, Matthew Whitaker should recuse himself from any involvement in Mueller’s investigation. Congress must take immediate action to protect the rule of law and integrity of the investigation. #FollowTheFacts
Sen. Chuck Schumer, the New York Democrat and Senate minority leader, said, “Protecting Mueller and his investigation is paramount.”
“It would create a constitutional crisis if this was a prelude to ending or greatly limiting the Mueller investigation and I hope President Trump and those he listens to will refrain from that,” Schumer said.
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-NY, the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, in a tweet wrote: “Americans must have answers immediately behind” Trump removing Sessions from the Justice Department.
“Why is the President making this change and who has authority over Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation? We will be holding people accountable,” Nadler wrote.
Additional reporting by Kevin Breuninger and Brian Schwartz of CNBC.
Story 1: Bomb Device Suspect, Cesar Altier Sayoc, Arrested Trump Supporter — Red Capped Make America Great Again Native American Indian — Crazy Van Easy Rider — Busted — Videos —
Easy Rider (Peter Fonda & Jack Nicholson)
One suspect in custody in connection to suspicious packages
Arrest Made In Explosive Device Mailings
Suspicious packages reporting has a level of amateurishness: Sebastian Gorka
1 in custody in connection with suspected mail bomb campaign: Special Report
Tucker: When political debate turns into sectarianism
Easy Rider – The Weight
PICTURED: Trump-supporting, bodybuilding, Native American Florida strip-club worker is revealed as the ‘MAGAbomber’ who ‘sent suspicious packages to 12 liberals’
Federal authorities arrested a suspect in the mail bombing spree on Friday in South Florida
The suspect is reportedly a male in his 50s who has a history of threatening judges
FBI discovered suspicious package addressed to Senator Cory Booker in Florida on Thursday night
Then a postal inspector intercepted another package to James Clapper in Manhattan Friday morning
The suspicious package was addressed to Clapper at headquarters of CNN, where he is a contributor
NYPD bomb squad’s Total Containment Vessel responded to postal facility in Midtown to remove package
Discoveries mark the 11th and 12th suspicious packages targeting outspoken critics of President Trump
FBI warns the public to be on the lookout for similar packages and says there could be more bombs
PUBLISHED: 12:06 EDT, 26 October 2018 | UPDATED: 12:31 EDT, 26 October 2018
The suspect in a mail bombing spree targeting critics of President Donald Trump has been identified.
Cesar Altier Sayoc was taken into custody on Friday morning in Plantation, Florida in connection with the 12 suspicious packages that have been discovered this week.
According to Sayoc’s Facebook page, he is a Trump fan who posted pictures and videos of himself at one of the President’s rallies in October 2016.
He posted a photograph of himself wearing a MAGA hat in front of the US Capitol in 2017.
He is Native American, and according to a picture posted on his social media page, he is a member of the Seminole Tribe of Florida.
In a post a year ago, Sayoc shared a photograph of Governor Rick Scott and Donald Trump, writing: ‘The greatest Governor in Country Fla Rick Scott and great friend of We Unconquered Seminole Tribe . Trump Trump Trump’
He shared bodybuilding pictures and appears to have worked in a strip club.
He expressed his dislike of Hillary Clinton and posted stories about incidents of Islamic terrorism.
The suspect in his 50s was arrested in front of an AutoZone store in Plantation, a police source tells DailyMail.com.
Michelle Taylor, a nurse at the Senior Medical Associates clinic, saw police taking a vehicle believed to be Sayoc’s into custody.
‘We’ve been in the office for an hour and we’re so nervous,’ she said. ‘The police were surrounding some kind of a van. Thank god we’re done with our patients for the day and there’s only two of us in here.’
He posted a photograph of himself wearing a MAGA hat in front of the US Capitol in 2017
According to Sayoc’s Facebook page, he is a Trump fan who posted pictures of himself wearing a ‘MAGA’ hat
Sayoc is seen at an event supporting Trump and wearing a ‘MAGA’ hat in this photo posted to Facebook in October 2016
A driver snapped a photo of this van, believed to belong to Sayoc. The van is seen covered in stickers expressing support for Trump, and disdain for his liberal critics
A witness who works at Marlins Insurance said dozens of police cars descended on the area around State Road 7 and SW 8th Street about 10am, a few feet away from her office.
‘It’s really bad,’ the woman said by telephone. She declined to give her name. ‘We heard a loud bang, like a bomb exploding. Police officers who told us to stay inside said they were arrested the guy who’s been sending bombs all over the place. It’s pretty scary but we’re inside trying to get some work done.’
The suspect is reportedly a former resident of New York who is living in Florida. The 12 mail bombs are all believed to have been handled by a regional mail sorting facility in southern Florida.
The suspect is known to law enforcement, and has a history of making terroristic threats to judges, sources said.
Heavy police activity was seen in Plantation, Florida, a town to the west of Fort Lauderdale and directly south of Sunrise, the location of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s office, which the bombs listed as a return address.
Police impounded a white panel van that is believed to be connected to the investigation.
The Department of Justice announced a press conference for 2.30pm at which further details are expected to be available.
Police impounded a white panel van (above) that is believed to be connected to the investigation
Investigators are seen impounding a white panel van in Plantation, Florida on Friday in connection with an arrest
The van as covered with a blue tarp and transported away by investigators after the arrest on Friday
Earlier in the day, the investigators said they had found two new packages believed to be part of the mail bombing spree, addressed to Senator Cory Booker and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
The package to Booker was found on Thursday night at a mail sorting facility in Florida, and the package addressed to Clapper was found at a postal facility in Manhattan on Friday.
The two new packages marked the 11th and 12th suspected mail bombs in a spree that has targeted critics of Trump.
Trump’s first public response to the latest suspicious packages was a tweet at 10.19am reading: ‘Republicans are doing so well in early voting, and at the polls, and now this ‘Bomb’ stuff happens and the momentum greatly slows – news not talking politics. Very unfortunate, what is going on. Republicans, go out and vote!’
The FBI found two new packages believed to be part of the mail bombing spree, addressed to Senator Cory Booker (left) and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (right)
The suspicious package (above) addressed to James Clapper at the Time Warner Center was intercepted by postal inspectors at a Manhattan sorting facility on Friday morning
NYPD’s Total Containment vessel arrives as law enforcement respond to the scene of a suspicious package at a postal facility on Friday in New York
The Total Containment Vessel is used to transport explosive devices and is designed to contain powerful blasts
The special NYPD vehicle is seen transporting the package addressed to James Clapper to a secure facility in the Bronx
NYPD Deputy Commissioner Intelligence and Counterterrorism John Miller was on scene during an investigation of a bomb addressed to James Clapper at a US Post Office on W 52nd Street on Friday in Manhattan
FDNY set up a command post at an investigation of a bomb at a postal sorting facility in Midtown Manhattan on Friday
A police dog assists in a suspicious package response at a postal facility in Manhattan on Friday morning
Postal workers stand on the street after evacuating a sorting facility during a report of a suspicious package in Manhattan
Postal workers stand on the street after evacuating a Midtown Manhattan postal facility on Friday
The facility was evacuated after inspectors intercepted a suspicious package addressed to James Clapper
The map above shows the locations of 12 suspicious packages that have all been linked to a mail bombing spree
N
The package to Clapper was addressed to CNN’s headquarters in the Time Warner Center in Midtown Manhattan, but was intercepted before delivery.
A photo of the package showed that it matched notable characteristics of the previous mail bombs, none of which have exploded.
Clapper joined CNN as a contributor after stepping down as the nation’s most senior intelligence official last year.
‘At least they got the correct spelling of my name and they got the right network,’ Clapper said in remarks to CNN, referring to a mail bomb sent to CNN earlier this week and addressed to ‘John Brenan’.
John Brennan, a former CIA director, is a contributor for MSNBC.
‘This is definitely domestic terrorism, no question about it in my mind,’ Clapper said in an interview with the cable network. ‘This is not going to silence the administration´s critics.’
Clapper said that he had been on vacation with his wife, and had warned the neighbors who were collecting his mail to be on the lookout for suspicious packages as the mail bomb spree developed this week.
Like the other targets in the mail bomb spree, Clapper has been harshly critical of Trump. In a speech last year, he said that Trump was guilty of ‘ignorance or disrespect’.
First respondents are seen on the scene where suspicious package was found in Midtown. There were no reports of injuries and the stretcher is believed to be a precaution
Police respond to a report of a suspicious package at a postal facility in Midtown Manhattan on Friday morning
Police respond to a report of a suspicious package in the Manhattan borough of New York
Police swarmed the area outside a Manhattan postal facility after a package was found
The package intercepted on Friday was addressed to Clapper care of CNN, but was spotted by postal inspectors at a sorting facility before delivery.
The NYPD bomb squad was on scene at the postal facility at West 52nd Street and 8th Avenue on Friday morning.
The NYPD’s Total Containment Vessel was spotted at the scene by about 9.30am.
Streets in the area were closed off and postal workers were seen waiting on the sidewalks after the facility was evacuated.
The containment vehicle departed the area at 10am transporting the suspected bomb to a secure police facility in Rodman’s Neck in the Bronx.
Police respond to a report of a suspicious package addressed to James Clapper in Manhattan
Streets were shut down and the facility evacuated after a suspicious package was found
Police respond to a report of a suspicious package in the Manhattan borough of New York on Friday
On Thursday, a local police bomb squad and canine units joined federal investigators to examine a sprawling U.S. mail distribution center at Opa-Locka, northwest of Miami, Miami-Dade County police said.
Investigators believe that all of the suspicious packages were sorted at the facility, which processes mail regionally in South Florida.
It was at the Opa-Locka facility that the 11th bomb was discovered, addressed to Senator Booker.
Booker is a Democrat from New Jersey. Like Clapper and the other targets of the mail bombs in the recent spree, he is an outspoken critic of Trump.
The identity and motives of the bomber have not been revealed, however, with the FBI saying it is pursuing the case as the agency’s highest priority.
No one has claimed responsibility for the bombs.
A police car sits outside New Jersey Democratic Senator Cory Booker’s office in Camden, New Jersey on Friday. The FBI says a suspicious package addressed to Booker has been recovered in Florida and is similar in appearance to recent mail bombs
A police dog is loaded into an SUV outside New Jersey Democratic Senator Cory Booker’s office in Camden, New Jersey
A police officer and dog are shown outside a postal facility on Thursday in Opa-locka, Florida. The search uncovered a suspicious package addressed to Senator Cory Booker
‘In America, love always trumps hate’: Cory Booker at 2016 DNC
Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, told MSNBC on Friday that the mail bombs were stoking fear across the county and that U.S. leaders, including Trump, must reassure the public.
Elected officials and others need to say that this is not who we are as a country, Warner said. ‘That would be a heck of a lot stronger if that message also came from the White House.’
U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said that Florida appeared to be the starting point for at least some of the bomb shipments.
‘Some of the packages went through the mail. They originated, some of them, from Florida,’ she said during an interview with Fox News Channel on Thursday.
‘I am confident that this person or people will be brought to justice.’
Story 2: Incoming Caravan of Illegal Alien Mob Moving in Mexico towards United States — Invasion of America By Illegal Aliens Continues — Where is The Wall? — Videos —
US Military Will Stop Migrant Caravan Of Illegal Immigrants Heading To Border (Full Compilation)
Will migrant caravan photos influence voters before midterms?
Nielsen on response to migrant caravan, pipe bomb threat
Honduran migrants stranded on bridge between Mexico and Guatemala
Life Inside the Migrant Caravan: ‘Everyone Is Tired’ | Dispatches
‘The Five’ reacts to growing migrant caravan crisis
Geraldo, Gorka spar over how to deal with migrant caravan
Story 3: Advanced Estimate Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Increases By 3.5% In Third Quarter — Consumption Up By 4.0%, Investment Flat And Housing Construction Slump — Videos
Strong GDP growth is sign of middle-class tax law working, says Rep. Kevin Brady
Consumer Spending Helps GDP Slow Less Than Expected
Today News – US economic growth slows less than expected in Q3
Early North American trade on 26.10.2018: USD, EUR
GDP grew at 3.5% in the 3rd quarter, but some areas of the economy that aren’t fairing as well.
Today News – Trumps trade war took a stunning bite out of the US economy
Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 3.5 percent in the third quarter of 2018 (table 1), according to the “advance” estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the second quarter, real GDP increased 4.2 percent.
The Bureau emphasized that the third-quarter advance estimate released today is based on source data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency (see “Source Data for the Advance Estimate” on page 2). The “second” estimate for the third quarter, based on more complete data, will be released on November 28, 2018.
The increase in real GDP in the third quarter reflected positive contributions from personal consumption expenditures (PCE), private inventory investment, state and local government spending, federal government spending, and nonresidential fixed investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from exports and residential fixed investment. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased (table 2).
The deceleration in real GDP growth in the third quarter reflected a downturn in exports and a deceleration in nonresidential fixed investment. Imports increased in the third quarter after decreasing in the second. These movements were partly offset by an upturn in private inventory investment.
Current dollar GDP increased 4.9 percent, or $247.1 billion, in the third quarter to a level of $20.66 trillion. In the second quarter, current-dollar GDP increased 7.6 percent, or $370.9 billion (table 1 and table 3).
The price index for gross domestic purchases increased 1.7 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 2.4 percent in the second quarter (table 4). The PCE price index increased 1.6 percent, compared with an increase of 2.0 percent. Excluding food and energy prices, the PCE price index increased 1.6 percent, compared with an increase of 2.1 percent.
Personal Income (table 8)
Current-dollar personal income increased $180.4 billion in the third quarter, compared with an increase of $180.7 billion in the second quarter. Accelerations in rental income, wages and salaries, and nonfarm proprietors’ income were offset by a downturn in farm proprietors’ income and a slowdown in dividend income.
Disposable personal income increased $155.0 billion, or 4.1 percent, in the third quarter, compared with an increase of $168.9 billion, or 4.5 percent, in the second quarter. Real disposable personal income increased 2.5 percent, the same increase as in the second quarter.
Personal saving was $999.6 billion in the third quarter, compared with $1,054.3 billion in the second quarter. The personal saving rate — personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income — was 6.4 percent in the third quarter, compared with 6.8 percent in the second quarter.
Source Data for the Advance Estimate
Information on the source data and key assumptions used for unavailable source data in the advance estimate is provided in a Technical Note that is posted with the news release on BEA’s Web site. A detailed “Key Source Data and Assumptions” file is also posted for each release. For information on updates to GDP, see the “Additional Information” section that follows.
Midnight
Not a sound from the pavement
Has the moon lost her memory
She is smiling alone
In the lamplight
The withered leaves collect at my feet
And the wind begins to moan
Memory
All alone in the moonlight
I can smile happy your days (I can dream of the old days)
Life was beautiful then
I remember the time I knew what happiness was
Let the memory live again
Every street lamp seems to beat
A fatalistic warning
Someone mutters and the street lamp gutters
And soon it will be morning
Daylight
I must wait for the sunrise
I must think of a new life
And I mustn’t give in
When the dawn comes
Tonight will be a memory too
And a new day will begin
Burnt out ends of smoky days
The still cold smell of morning
A street lamp dies, another night is over
Another day is dawning
Touch me,
It is so easy to leave me
All alone with the memory
Of my days in the sun
If you touch me,
You’ll understand what happiness is
Look, a new day has begun
Songwriters: Andrew Lloyd Webber / T.S Eliot / Trevor Nnunn
Psychologist Elizabeth Loftus studies memories. More precisely, she studies false memories, when people either remember things that didn’t happen or remember them differently from the way they really were. It’s more common than you might think, and Loftus shares some startling stories and statistics, and raises some important ethical questions we should all remember to consider. TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world’s leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design — plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
False Memories: How Our Memory Deceives Us (Discover Psychology)
Clinicians and researchers at Cedars-Sinai are working together to better understand the mechanisms of memory in order to develop new treatments to improve memory function. Dr. Ueli Rutishauser and Dr. Adam Mamelak show their latest groundbreaking research into groups of neurons that correspond to memory and confidence.
Implanting False Memories
How False Memories Corrupt Our Identities, Politics, and Justice System | Julia Shaw | TEDxBergen
Story 2: FBI Supplemental Information Report on Brett Kavanaugh Submitted to Senate and White House — Senators Respond — Let The Voting Begin Saturday — Videos
Senate Republican Leaders EXPLOSIVE Press Conference on Kavanaugh Confirmation after FBI Report
Senate Dems slam FBI Kavanaugh report as ‘limited’
9PM Hannity 10/3/2018 – Fox News – October 3 2018
Scott Adams – The FBI Report, Bullies and Male Privilege
Christine Blasey Ford Refuses To Give Up Name Of Only Person That Can Corroborate Her Story
“You Fly A Lot On Planes Don’t You?” Prosecutor Asks Christine Blasey Ford To Explain Herself
Story 3: Former FBI General Counsel James Baker Gave “Explosive” Information To Congressional Investigators About The Russian Probe and Clinton Campaign Involvement That Led To Intelligence Community Spying on Trump Campaign — Another Democratic Party Smear Campaign Was A Hoax From The Start — Waiting For Attorney General Sessions To Appoint A Second Special Counsel To Investigate FBI and Department of Justice — Videos —
FBI lawyer gives ‘explosive’ testimony on Russia probe
EXCLUSIVE: Trump says exposing ‘corrupt’ FBI probe could be ‘crowning achievement’ of presidency
Perkins Coie is going to be sued: Joe diGenova
Joe diGenova: Walls closing in on Obama DOJ officials
Fox News
Published on Sep 13, 2018
News Wrap: Trump excoriates Sessions in interview
Solomon previews Trump’s interview with ‘The Hill’
Solomon on Bruce Ohr’s efforts to shape Trump probe
Hannity: FISA court was abused for political gain
Docs reveal DOJ’s Ohr was deeply connected to Trump dossier
BREAKING: FBI lawyer Connected to Comey under Investigation for leaking classified info to Media
Catherine Herridge: Dem Memo Does Appear To Be In Direct Conflict James Comey Testimony
Why James Comey knows he’s going to be indicted — 9/14/18
Collusion bombshell: DNC lawyers met with FBI on Russia allegations before surveillance warrant
By John Solomon Opinion Contributor
Congressional investigators have confirmed that a top FBI official met with Democratic Party lawyers to talk about allegations of Donald Trump-Russia collusion weeks before the 2016 election, and before the bureau secured a search warrant targeting Trump’s campaign.
Former FBI general counsel James Baker met during the 2016 season with at least one attorney from Perkins Coie, the Democratic National Committee’s private law firm.
That’s the firm used by the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to secretly pay research firmFusion GPS and Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence operative, to compile a dossier of uncorroborated raw intelligence alleging Trump and Moscow were colluding to hijack the presidential election.
The dossier, though mostly unverified, was then used by the FBI as the main evidence seeking a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant targeting the Trump campaign in the final days of the campaign.
The revelation was confirmed both in contemporaneous evidence and testimony secured by a joint investigation by Republicans on the House Judiciary and Government Oversight committees, my source tells me.
It means the FBI had good reason to suspect the dossier was connected to the DNC’s main law firm and was the product of a Democratic opposition-research effort to defeat Trump — yet failed to disclose that information to the FISA court in October 2016, when the bureau applied for a FISA warrant to surveil Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
“This is a bombshell that unequivocally shows the real collusion was between the FBI and Donald Trump’s opposition — the DNC, Hillary and a Trump-hating British intel officer — to hijack the election, rather than some conspiracy between Putin and Trump,” a knowledgeable source told me.
Baker was interviewed by lawmakers behind closed doors on Wednesday. Sources declined to divulge much about his testimony, other than to say it confirmed other evidence about the contact between the Perkins Coie law firm and the FBI.
The sources said Baker identified lawyer Michael Sussman, a former DOJ lawyer, as the Perkins Coie attorney who reached out to him and said the firm gave him documents and a thumb drive related to Russian interference in the election, hacking and possible Trump connections.
Information gathered separately by another congressional committee indicate the contact occurred in September, the month before the FISA warrant was approved.
A spokeswoman for the FBI declined comment. Spokespersons for Perkins Coie and the Justice Department did not return a message seeking comment.
The sources also said Baker’s interview broke new ground both about the FBI’s use of news media in 2016 and 2017 to further the Trump case and about Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s conversations in spring 2017 regarding possible use of a body wire to record Trump.
“The interview was one of the most productive we had and it opened up many new investigative leads,” one source said.
Another said Baker could not answer some questions about FBI media contacts, citing an ongoing investigation by the Justice Department inspector general into alleged illegal leaks, during and after the election, about the Trump collusion probe and other matters.
These revelations illustrate anew how much the FBI and Justice Department have withheld from the public about their collaboration and collusion with clearly partisan elements of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, Fusion and Steele, that were trying to defeat Trump.
The growing body of evidence that the FBI used mostly politically-motivated, unverified intelligence from an opponent to justify spying on the GOP nominee’s campaign — just weeks before Election Day — has prompted a growing number of Republicans to ask President Trump to declassify the rest of the FBI’s main documents in the Russia collusion case.
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), House Freedom Caucus leaders Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), veteran investigator Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) and many others have urged the president to act on declassification even as FBI and Justice Department have tried to persuade the president to keep documents secret.
Ryan has said he believes the declassification will uncover potential FBI abuses of the FISA process. Jordan said he believes there is strong evidence the bureau misled the FISA court. Nunes has said the FBI intentionally hid exculpatory evidence from the judges.
“There’s a strong suggestion that confidential human sources actually taped members within the Trump campaign,” Meadows told Hill.TV hosts Krystal Ball and Ned Ryun.
John Solomon is an award-winning investigative journalist whose work over the years has exposed U.S. and FBI intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal scientists’ misuse of foster children and veterans in drug experiments, and numerous cases of political corruption. He is The Hill’s executive vice president for video.
This post has been updated from a previous version.
Lawyer for Clinton campaign and DNC gave FBI documents for Russia probe, sources say
By Catherine Herridge| Fox News
A top lawyer working with the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign contacted the FBI’s general counsel in late 2016 and provided documents for the Russia probe as federal investigators prepared a surveillance warrant for Trump campaign aide Carter Page, sources close to a congressional investigation told Fox News, citing new testimony.
The FBI official who was contacted, James Baker, revealed the exchange to congressional investigators during a closed-door deposition Wednesday. He said Perkins Coie lawyer Michael Sussmann initiated contact with him and provided documents as well as computer storage devices on Russian hacking. The sources said Baker described the contact as unusual and the “only time it happened.”
Perkins Coie was a key player in the funding of the controversial anti-Trump dossier, which Republicans have long suspected helped fuel the FBI’s investigation. The DNC and Clinton campaign had hired opposition research firm Fusion GPS in April 2016, through Perkins Coie, to dig into Trump’s background. Fusion, in turn, paid British ex-spy Christopher Steele to compile the dossier, memos from which were shared with the FBI in the summer of 2016.
Sussmann’s contact with Baker suggests another connection between the early stages of the FBI’s Russia probe and those working with the DNC and Clinton campaign. Sussmann’s bio on the Perkins Coie website describes him as a former senior Justice Department official with extensive national security and cybersecurity experience: “[Sussmann] is engaged on some of the most sophisticated, high-stakes matters today, such as his representation of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in their responses to Russian hacking in the 2016 presidential election.”
Asked about Baker’s statements, however, a Perkins Coie spokesperson said Sussmann’s contact was not connected to the firm’s representation of the DNC or Clinton campaign.
The spokesperson said in a statement:
“Prior to joining Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann served as a cybercrime prosecutor in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice during both Republican and Democratic administrations. As a result, Sussmann is regularly retained by clients with complex cybersecurity matters.
“When Sussmann met with Mr. Baker on behalf of a client, it was not connected to the firm’s representation of the Hillary Clinton Campaign, the DNC or any Political Law Group client.”
Separately, two Republican lawmakers said after Baker’s deposition that he gave “explosive” closed-door testimony detailing how the Russia probe was handled in an “abnormal fashion” reflecting “political bias.”
Reps. Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan would not provide many specifics about the private transcribed interview, citing a confidentiality agreement with Baker and his attorneys. However, they indicated in broad terms that Baker was cooperative and forthcoming about the genesis of the Russia case in 2016, and about the surveillance warrant application for Carter Page in October 2016.
Jordan also discussed the revelation of the FBI’s additional source. “During the time that the … DOJ and FBI were putting together the FISA (surveillance warrant) during the time prior to the election, there was another source giving information directly to the FBI, which we found the source to be pretty explosive,” Jordan said.
Baker is at the heart of surveillance abuse allegations, and his deposition lays the groundwork for next week’s planned closed-door interview with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Baker, as the FBI’s top lawyer, helped secure the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant for Page, as well as three subsequent renewals. Prior to the deposition, Republican investigators said they believed Baker could explain why information about Steele and his apparent bias against then-candidate Trump were withheld from the FISA court, and whether any exculpatory information was known to Rosenstein when he signed the final FISA renewal for Page in June 2017.
Fox News asked Baker after the deposition about the handling of the Trump dossier, what he told Rosenstein about potential exculpatory evidence and whether he is the subject of an FBI leak investigation. Baker told Fox News he could not answer the questions. Baker, who had a close working relationship with former FBI Director James Comey, left the bureau earlier this year.
Rosenstein is expected on Capitol Hill on Oct. 11 for what Republican House sources have described as a closed-door interview. It comes after The New York Times reported last month that he’d discussed secretly recording the president and removing him from office using the 25th Amendment. Rosenstein and the DOJ disputed that report, calling it “inaccurate.” Rosenstein’s planned in-person meeting with Trump, meanwhile, has been pushed off amid prior speculation he might be fired or resign.
A Justice Department official said Rosenstein agreed to meet with the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., but offered no details on the format of that meeting.
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.
Trump allies, offering no specifics, say former FBI official gives ‘explosive’ testimony in Russia probe
By Karoun Demirjian
Congressional reporter focusing on national security
October 3
President Trump’s closest congressional allies said Wednesday that a four-hour interview with former FBI general counsel James Baker had “fundamentally changed” their understanding of the Justice Department’s Russia investigation, confirming and furthering their previous convictions that federal law enforcement agencies were biased in their scrutiny of President Trump’s campaign.
Reps. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), both leaders in the conservative House Freedom Caucus, called the closed-door meeting the “most informative” interview they have had in the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees’ nearly year-long probe into the FBI’s investigations of the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russia and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.
Democrats have repeatedly argued that the Republicans’ aim is to undermine and discredit the FBI and Justice Department, as well as special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s ongoing probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. They have also criticized the probe’s format of conducting private interviews, saying that doing so allows Republicans to misrepresent witnesses’ testimony.
Jordan told reporters that Baker informed them of a “completely new” and “explosive” source who provided information “directly” to the FBI “during the time that the DOJ and the FBI were putting together” an application to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. He offered no details about the source or the information the source provided to the bureau beyond saying it was “related to the whole Russia investigation.”
Baker declined to comment to reporters as he departed the interview.
How is Fusion GPS connected to the Trump dossier, Donald Trump Jr.’s Trump Tower meeting and the 2016 election? The Fact Checker explains.(Video: Meg Kelly/Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
The FBI’s press office did not immediately respond to a request to comment on Jordan’s characterization of Baker’s testimony.
Meadows and Jordan have been among Trump’s most dogged defenders as the president seeks to discredit federal law enforcement’s Russia investigations, which Trump has labeled a “witch hunt.” Earlier this year, Meadows and Jordan led a movement to impeach Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein for refusing to turn over documents they believed would expose the Mueller investigation’s “rotten foundation,” as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) has described it.
Republican Party leaders’ support for their efforts has ebbed and flowed.
Jordan hinted that Baker’s testimony may have bolstered their complaint that the FBI failed to include in its surveillance application evidence that would have steered suspicion away from Page. It “sheds even more light on just how wrong this whole idea, when they took this dossier to the secret court and did what they did,” he said.
The dossier — a collection of intelligence detailing Trump’s alleged personal and business ties to Russia — has also been a chief focus of GOP lawmakers who say it was the source of the FBI’s entire investigation. The bureau denies that charge, which has also been undercut by reports that Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos told Australia’s ambassador to Britain that the Russians had dirt on Clinton months prior.
A spokesman for the House Judiciary Committee Democrats did not immediately respond to a request to comment on Jordan’s characterization of Baker’s testimony. Only a handful of lawmakers attended Wednesday’s hearing, as the House is not in session.
In recent weeks, the panel has interviewed individuals who members believe are linked to the dossier’s production and dissemination throughout the intelligence and federal law enforcement communities, including Bruce Ohr, the Justice Department official who spoke with the dossier’s author on several occasions. Later this month, the panel plans to interview Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, who briefly worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS when the research firm was involved with Steele. Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson has declined an invitation to meet with the panel. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) has since subpoenaed Simpson for a deposition.
Meadows and Jordan suggested Baker’s interview could be the most important for them as they prepare to speak with Rosenstein, to whom they plan to pose many of the same questions they asked of Baker about the FBI’s application to surveil Page.
Lawmakers also want to talk to Rosenstein about a New York Times report that he suggested recording Trump and potentially removing him from office. Rosenstein has denied he said those things, though he offered to resign in the wake of the report’s publication.
Baker is expected to return to Capitol Hill to finish his interview, which was cut short because of a scheduling conflict, Meadows and Jordan said. They described him as a “cooperative” witness.
Baker left the FBI in the spring, and now works at the Brookings Institution. He was a close associate of former FBI director James B. Comey, on at least one occasion receiving a memo Comey drafted following a meeting with Trump.
Baker was also linked to the members of Comey’s inner circle, including former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, who wrote memos detailing Rosenstein’s alleged suggestion of wiring the president; and former FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged anti-Trump text messages. McCabe, Strzok and Page have left the bureau amid questions of their ethics and conduct.
Baker was caught up in a leak probe last year surrounding news reports about surveillance techniques of an email provider that appeared to stem from a dispute between the FBI and National Security Agency. He was accused by Republicans, in a report published by Politico, of disclosing information about the Trump-Russia dossier to Mother Jones, a left-leaning media outlet. David Corn, the author of that story, has denied that Baker was his source.
Baker was never charged with wrongdoing, but he was reassigned when FBI Director Christopher A. Wray took office. He left the bureau after a decades-long career this spring, and now works at the Brookings Institution think tank.
James Baker, FBI Lawyer: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
James Baker, a top FBI lawyer and confidante of former FBI director James Comey, resigned his position with the bureau on May 4, 2018.
Baker quit on the same day as controversial FBI lawyer, Lisa Page, whose political and sometimes anti Donald Trump texts with FBI agent Peter Strzok have raised questions of bias within the Robert Mueller investigation into the president. The upheaval at the FBI has social media buzzing about Jim Baker; Baker’s name has surfaced before because he was a recipient of one of the memos that Comey wrote after meeting with President Donald Trump.
It was also previously reported by Politico that Congress was interested in contact Baker allegedly had with a reporter who first broke the story on the infamous anti-Trump dossier, although that reporter denied Baker was the leak.
According to CNN, Baker “will be going to Lawfare, a national security blog affiliated with the Brookings Institution,” and a source said he left voluntarily and was unaware Page would be resigning the same day.
Who is James A. Baker?
Here’s what you need to know:
1. Comey Called James Baker a ‘Great Public Servant’ But He Was Reassigned by Christopher Wray
Former FBI Director James Comey is sworn in while testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill June 8, 2017 in Washington, DC.
ames Comey, who has been a lightning rod figure since his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, and continuing through his book disparaging the president, tweeted out kind words for Baker. According to The Post, Comey also worked with Baker at Bridgewater Associates, an investment management company.
“A great public servant retired from the FBI today,” Comey wrote on May 4, 2018 on his Twitter page. “Jim Baker’s integrity and commitment to the rule of law have benefitted our country through 5 presidents, of both parties. We are fortunate he and so many others choose to devote their lives to justice.
The previous tweet before that one was a defense by Comey of the FBI in light of comments by new Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani. “I know the New York FBI. There are no ‘stormtroopers’ there; just a group of people devoted to the rule of law and the truth. Our country would be better off if our leaders tried to be like them, rather than comparing them to Nazis,” Comey wrote.
Jim Baker was reassigned once Trump’s nominee Chris Wray took over the Bureau. “The FBI’s top lawyer, James Baker, is being reassigned — one of the first moves by new director Christopher A. Wray to assemble his own team of senior advisers as he tries to fend off accusations of politicization within the bureau,” The Washington Post reported in December 2017.
Baker was a recipient of a Comey memo involving his conversation with Trump.
The Comey memo that Baker received by email described a purported conversation with the president about unverified allegations involving Russian prostitutes in the infamous Christopher Steele dossier, which the president has denied.
New York Magazine reported that Comey kept Baker updated about his conversations with Trump, and Baker was listed in the article as an official who might be able to corroborate Comey’s accounts. “One senior law enforcement official familiar with the matter said that Comey specifically sought legal advice from Baker about when and how to tell the DOJ about Trump pressing Comey to shut down the Russia probe,” the magazine reported.
2. James Baker, Who Was Caught Up in a Leak Probe, Was Made the FBI’s General Counsel in 2014
n December 2017, The Washington Post reported that Baker had been caught up in a probe of alleged leaking in the FBI. Baker “had become caught up in what some law enforcement officials considered a particularly frustrating probe of a leak involving the FBI, the National Security Agency and stories that appeared about a year ago involving surveillance techniques for a particular email provider,” reported The Post.
Politico reported at that time that a Congressional leak investigation into Baker involved the infamous Steele dossier. “House Republicans are investigating contact between the FBI’s top lawyer and a Mother Jones reporter in the weeks before the left-leaning outlet” was first to break the story on the dossier, reported Politico, stating that “James Baker, the FBI’s general counsel, communicated with Mother Jones reporter David Corn in the weeks leading up to the November 2016 election.” However, Politico also reported that Corn denied Baker was the source for his reporting on the dossier.
It was later revealed that the Hillary Clinton campaign and DNC helped fund the dossier research through a law firm. The FBI authorized payments to Steele but then fired him for contacts with the news media, The Washington Times reported.
Baker also acted as counsel for Andrew McCabe, the controversial former top FBI official, Politico reported.
Comey, then FBI director, tapped James A. Baker to be the FBI’s general counsel in 2014, according to a press release put out by the FBI. The Post reported that he played a major role in many controversies, including “the FBI’s unsuccessful battle with Apple over the growing use of encryption in cellphones.”
“Jim’s experience as a career prosecutor and as a national security official, as well his experience in the private sector, make him an excellent fit for his new position here at the FBI,” Comey said in the news release.
Baker first joined the FBI in 1999. After “clerking for the Honorable Bernard A. Friedman in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Mr. Baker joined the Department of Justice (DOJ) with the Criminal Division through the Attorney General’s Honors Program in 1990 and worked as a federal prosecutor with the division’s Fraud Section,” the press release stated.
3. Baker Handled National Security & Intelligence Matters for the FBI & Said He Told Bush’s AG of Civil Liberty Concerns
During his years at the bureau, Baker often handled legal issues relating to national security and intelligence gathering matters. A 2007 article in The Washington Post stated that Baker and another official said they “kept Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales apprised of FBI violations of civil liberties and privacy safeguards in recent years.” Gonzales was the AG for President George W. Bush.
Gonzales had denied being aware of civil liberty violations, but Baker stated, “I have discussed and informed attorneys general, including this one, about mistakes the FBI has made or problems or violations or compliance incidents, however you want to refer to them,” according to The Post.
In 2006, the Post reported that some judges were upset about the use of NSA spy data and added that Baker “discovered in 2004 that the government’s failure to share information about its spying program had rendered useless a federal screening system that the judges had insisted upon…” and that led to the “temporary suspension of the NSA spying program.”
In 1996, “Mr. Baker joined the former Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR), which later became part of DOJ’s National Security Division. From 2001 to 2007, Mr. Baker served as counsel for intelligence policy and head of OIPR,” the FBI press release stated.
“In this position, he developed, coordinated, and implemented national security policy with regard to intelligence and counterintelligence matters for the department. Moreover, he provided the attorney general, the U.S. intelligence community, and the White House with legal and policy advice on a range of national security issues and conducted oversight of the intelligence community, including the FBI, on behalf of the attorney general.”
4. Baker Lectured at Harvard Law School & Worked for Verizon
In 2006, Baker “received the George H.W. Bush Award for Excellence in counterterrorism—the CIA’s highest counterterrorism award,” the FBI press release stated.
“A year later, he received the NSA’s Intelligence Under Law Award; the NSA Director’s Distinguished Service Medal; and DOJ’s highest award— the Edmund J. Randolph Award.”
He then worked in academia and in the private sector – for Verizon – before returned to the FBI to work on cyber security matters.
“That same year, he became a fellow at the Institute of Politics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and a lecturer at Harvard Law School,” the press release said. “From 2008 to 2009, Mr. Baker was assistant general counsel for national security at Verizon Business. He then returned to DOJ, and from 2009 to 2011, served as an associate deputy attorney general working on a range of national security issues, including cyber security.”
5. Baker Attended College in Michigan & at Notre Dame
Baker “holds a juris doctorate and master’s degree from the University of Michigan and is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame,” the FBI press release stated.
Michigan Law School published an article about Baker’s career, in which he was quoted as saying, “Throughout my career, I’ve been extremely lucky to have a series of fascinating jobs that have been extremely rewarding. Being General Counsel for the FBI means I have to deal with all of the legal risks and issues that confront the entire FBI—everything from counterterrorism to civil rights, and all of the FBI’s priorities across the board.”
Baker explained why he kept choosing a career in government, telling Michigan Law, of his “desire to serve the country and to have a positive impact on the world” has led him to return to roles in government time and again.”
Story 4: Trump vs. New York Times — Fred Trump’s Tax Avoidance or Tax Evasion Scheme — Smear Campaign or Expose — Behind Every Great Fortune There Is a Crime — Videos
How Donald Trump’s Dad Made Him a Landlord at 3 | NYT News
How Fred Trump’s Children Became His Bankers | NYT News
How The Trumps Held On to Generational Wealth | NYT News
Judge Napolitano on the possible legal fallout from NYT report on Trump taxes
Trump helped parents shield millions from taxes: NY Times
NYT Reveals President Donald Trump’s Elaborate Tax Con | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC
Fraud Of Donald Trump’s Self-Made Persona Exposed In Father’s Financials | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC
Trump defends himself against allegations of tax fraud from a New York Times investigation
NY Times reporter responds to Trump’s story denial
NYT investigation unearths new details about Trump’s early millions
NYT Report Refutes Donald Trump’s Repeated Claim He’s A Self-Made Man | The 11th Hour | MSNBC
NYT: President Trump Family Used Tax Schemes To Avoid Paying Millions | Velshi & Ruhle | MSNBC
Reporter News TV – Filing by Trump’s Federal Judge Sister Led to NYT Tax-Fraud Exposé
NYT accuses Trump of engaging in ’90s era ‘tax schemes’
Trump expresses outrage over New York Times tax report
NYT reporter who broke Trump tax story details investigation
With No Evidence, President Donald Trump Calls NYT Story A ‘Hit Piece’ | Hardball | MSNBC
Paul Krugman: Trump and the aristocracy of fraud
Posted
By Paul Krugman
NEW YORK — It turns out that I may have done President Donald Trump an injustice.
You see, I’ve always been skeptical of his claims to be a great dealmaker. But what we’ve just learned is that his negotiating prowess began early. Indeed, it was so amazing that he was already making $200,000 a year in today’s dollars at a very young age.
Specifically, that’s what he was making when he was three years old. He was a millionaire by the age of eight. Of course, the money came from his father — who spent decades evading the taxes he was legally required to pay on money given to his children.
The blockbuster New York Times report on the Trump family’s history of fraud is really about two distinct although linked kinds of fraudulence.
On one side, the family engaged in tax fraud on a huge scale, using a variety of money-laundering techniques to avoid paying what it owed. On the other, the story Donald Trump tells about his life — his depiction of himself as a self-made businessman who made billions starting from humble roots — has always been a lie: Not only did he inherit his wealth, receiving the equivalent of more than $400 million from his father, but Fred Trump bailed his son out after deals went bad.
One implication of these revelations is that Trump supporters who imagine that they’ve found a straight-talking champion who will drain the swamp while using his business acumen to make America great again have been suckered, bigly.
But the tale of the Trump money is part of a bigger story. Even among those unhappy at the extent to which we live in an era of soaring inequality and growing concentration of wealth at the top, there has been a tendency to believe that great wealth is, more often than not, earned more or less honestly. It’s only now that the amounts of sheer corruption and lawbreaking that underlie our march toward oligarchy have started to come into focus.
Until recently, my guess is that most economists, even tax experts, would have agreed that tax avoidance by corporations and the wealthy — which is legal — was a big issue, but tax evasion — hiding money from the tax man — was a lesser one. It was obvious that some rich people were exploiting legal if morally dubious loopholes in the tax code, but the prevailing view was that simply defrauding the tax authorities and hence the public wasn’t that widespread in advanced countries.
SHAKY FOUNDATIONS
But this view always rested on shaky foundations. After all, tax evasion, almost by definition, doesn’t show up in official statistics, and the superwealthy aren’t in the habit of mouthing off about what great tax cheats they are. To get a real picture of how much fraud is going on, you either have to do what The Times did — exhaustively investigate the finances of a particular family — or rely on lucky breaks that reveal what was previously hidden.
Two years ago, a huge lucky break came in the form of the Panama Papers, a trove of data leaked from a Panamanian law firm that specialized in helping people hide their wealth in offshore havens, and a smaller leak from HSBC. While the unsavory details revealed by these leaks made headlines right away, their true significance has only become clear with work done by Berkeley’s Gabriel Zucman and associates in cooperation with Scandinavian tax authorities.
Matching information from the Panama Papers and other leaks with national tax data, these researchers found that outright tax evasion actually is a big deal at the top. The truly wealthy end up paying a much lower effective tax rate than the merely rich, not because of loopholes in tax law, but because they break the law. The wealthiest taxpayers, the researchers found, pay on average 25 percent less than they owe — and, of course, many individuals pay even less.
This is a big number. If the United States’ wealthy evade taxes on the same scale (which they almost surely do), they’re probably costing the government around as much as the food stamp program does. And they’re also using tax evasion to entrench their privilege and pass it on to their heirs, which is the real Trump story.
CHEATING
The obvious question is, what are our elected representatives doing about this epidemic of cheating? Well, Republicans in Congress have been on the case for years: They’ve been systematically defunding the Internal Revenue Service, crippling its ability to investigate tax fraud. We don’t just have government by tax cheats; we have government of tax cheats, for tax cheats.
What we’re learning, then, is that the story of what’s happening to our society is even worse than we thought. It’s not just that the president of the United States is, as veteran tax reporter David Cay Johnston put it, a “financial vampire,” cheating taxpayers the way he has cheated just about everyone else who deals with him.
Beyond that, our trend toward oligarchy — rule by the few — is also looking more and more like kakistocracy — rule by the worst, or at least the most unscrupulous. The corruption isn’t subtle; on the contrary, it’s cruder than almost anyone imagined. It also runs deep, and it has infected our politics, quite literally up to its highest levels.
Statement to The Times from Charles J. Harder, a lawyer for President Trump
The New York Times’ allegations of fraud and tax evasion are 100% false, and
highly defamatory. There was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone. The facts upon
which the Times bases its false allegations are extremely inaccurate. All
estate matters were handled by licensed attorneys, licensed CPAs and licensed
real estate appraisers who followed all laws and rules strictly. All matters were
filed with the IRS and New York taxing authorities. The returns and tax positions
that the Times now attacks were examined in real time by the relevant taxing
authorities. The taxing authorities requested a few minor adjustments, which
were made, and then fully approved all of the tax filings. These matters have now
been closed for more than a decade.
President Trump had virtually no involvement whatsoever with these matters.
The affairs were handled by other Trump family members who were not experts
themselves and therefore relied entirely upon the aforementioned licensed
professionals to ensure full compliance with the law. Should the Times state or
imply that President Trump participated in fraud, tax evasion, or any other
crime, it will be exposing itself to substantial liability and damages for
defamation.
11 Takeaways From The Times’s Investigation Into Trump’s Wealth
Image
President Trump received today’s equivalent of over $400 million from the real estate empire of his father, Fred C. Trump, whose photograph sits behind him in the Oval Office.CreditCreditDoug Mills/The New York Times
Donald J. Trump built a business empire and won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help. “I built what I built myself,” the president has repeatedly said.
But an investigation by The New York Times has revealed that Donald Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire. What’s more, much of this money came to Mr. Trump through dubious tax schemes he participated in during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, The Times found.
In all, the president’s parents transferred well over $1 billion in wealth to their children, which could have produced a tax bill of at least $550 million under the 55 percent tax rate on gifts and inheritances that was in place at the time. Helped by a variety of tax dodges, the Trumps paid $52.2 million, or about 5 percent, tax returns show.
The president declined requests over several weeks to comment for this article.
A lawyer for Mr. Trump, Charles J. Harder, provided a written statement. “There was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone. The facts upon which The Times bases its false allegations are extremely inaccurate,” he said. “President Trump had virtually no involvement whatsoever with these matters,” he continued, saying the president had delegated those tasks to relatives and tax professionals. “The affairs were handled by other Trump family members who were not experts themselves and therefore relied entirely upon the aforementioned licensed professionals to ensure full compliance with the law.”
In a statement on behalf of the Trump family, the president’s brother, Robert Trump, said, “All appropriate gift and estate tax returns were filed, and the required taxes were paid.”
Since Donald Trump first refused to release his income tax returns, his campaign and then his presidency have been suffused with questions about the extent and sources of his wealth, questions that have only intensified with the Russia investigation. The Times’s new reporting reveals little about his recent business dealings. But the investigation — based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, and at more than 13,000 words one of the longest investigative articles ever published in The Times — offers the first comprehensive examination of the inherited fortune and tax dodges that guaranteed Mr. Trump a gilded life.
Here are some key takeaways.
The Trumps’ tax maneuvers show a pattern of deception, tax experts say
The line between legal tax avoidance and illegal tax evasion is often murky, and there is no shortage of clever tax-avoidance tricks that have been blessed by either the courts or the Internal Revenue Service itself; the wealthiest Americans rarely pay anything close to full freight. The Trumps’ tax maneuvers met with little resistance from the I.R.S., The Times found.
But tax experts briefed on The Times’s findings said the Trumps appeared to have done more than exploit legal loopholes. They said the conduct described here represented a pattern of deception and obfuscation that repeatedly prevented the I.R.S. from taxing large transfers of wealth to Fred Trump’s children.
Donald Trump began reaping wealth from his father’s real estate empire as a toddler
In Donald Trump’s version of how he got rich, he was the master dealmaker who broke free from his father’s “tiny” Brooklyn and Queens real estate operation and built a $10 billion empire that would slap the Trump name on hotels, high-rises, casinos and golf courses the world over.
Mr. Trump in 1982 atop Trump Tower, a Manhattan skyscraper that his father’s money helped build and that established him as a major player in New York.CreditFred R. Conrad/The New York Times
But The Times’s investigation makes clear that in every era of Mr. Trump’s life, his finances were deeply entwined with, and dependent on, his father’s wealth. By age 3, he was earning $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father’s empire. He was a millionaire by age 8. In his 40s and 50s, he was receiving more than $5 million a year.
There was a clear pattern to this largess: When his son began expensive new projects, Fred Trump increased his help. In the late 1970s, when Donald Trump crossed the river into the glittering precincts of Manhattan — converting the old Commodore Hotel near Grand Central Terminal into a Grand Hyatt — his father opened a spigot of loans. When he made his first forays into Atlantic City casinos a few years later, his father devised a plan to sharply increase the flow of aid.
That ‘small loan’ of $1 million was actually at least $60.7 million — much of it never repaid
In Mr. Trump’s books and TV shows and on the campaign trail, a central trope of his self-mythology has been that, as he began building his own empire, the only financial help he got from his father was a $1 million loan. Not only that: “I had to pay him back with interest.”
In fact, The Times found, Fred Trump lent his son at least $60.7 million, or $140 million in today’s dollars. Much of it was never repaid, records show.
Fred Trump wove a safety net that rescued his son from one bad bet after another
As the 1980s ended, Donald Trump’s big bets began to go bust — Trump Shuttle, the Plaza Hotel, the Atlantic City casinos. But as he careened from one financial disaster to another, family partnerships and companies dramatically increased their payouts.
Between 1989 and 1992, four of the entities that Fred Trump created paid his son today’s equivalent of $8.3 million. And when Donald Trump pleaded with bankers for an emergency line of credit, he used as collateral the stake his father had given him in a group of apartment buildings.
Tax records also reveal that at the peak of Mr. Trump’s financial distress, in 1990, his father extracted an extraordinary sum — nearly $50 million — from his empire. While The Times could find no evidence that Fred Trump made any significant debt payments, charitable donations or personal expenditures, there are indications that he wanted plenty of cash on hand to bail out his son if need be.
That was what happened at Trump’s Castle casino, where an $18.4 million bond payment was due in December 1990. Fred Trump dispatched a trusted bookkeeper to Atlantic City with checks to buy $3.5 million in casino chips without placing a bet. With this ruse — an illegal loan under New Jersey gaming laws, resulting in a $65,000 civil penalty — Donald Trump narrowly avoided defaulting on his bonds.
The Trumps turned an $11 million loan debt into a legally questionable tax write-off
By 1987, Donald Trump’s loan debt to his father had grown to at least $11 million. Had Fred Trump simply forgiven the debt, his son would have owed millions in income taxes. They found another solution — one that appears to constitute both an unreported multimillion-dollar gift and an illegal tax write-off.
That December, records show, Fred Trump spent $15.5 million to buy a 7.5 percent stake in Trump Palace, his son’s condo tower rising on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Four years later, tax returns and financial statements show, Fred Trump sold that stake for just $10,000. The buyer, other documents indicate, was his son.
According to tax experts, with Trump Palace condos selling briskly, selling shares worth $15.5 million to your son for a mere sliver of that would constitute a multimillion-dollar gift under I.R.S. rules. But Fred Trump’s tax returns show no such gift to Donald Trump. What they do reveal is that he used the transaction to declare an enormous tax write-off. That appears to violate federal tax law that prohibits deducting any loss from the sale or exchange of property between family members.
In all, Fred Trump dodged roughly $8 million in gift taxes and $5 million in income taxes on the transaction.
Father and son set out to create the myth of a self-made billionaire
All told, The Times documented 295 distinct streams of revenue Fred Trump created over five decades to channel wealth to his son.
But the partnership between Donald Trump and his father was about more than the pursuit, and the preservation, of riches. They were also confederates in a more ambitious project: creating the myth of Donald J. Trump, Self-Made Billionaire. If Fred Trump was the silent partner, helping finance the accouterments of wealth, it was Donald Trump who spun them into a seductive narrative.
Emblematic of this dynamic is Trump Tower, the talisman of privilege that established Donald Trump as a player in New York. Fred Trump’s money helped build it. His son recognized and exploited its iconic power as the primary stage for both “The Apprentice” and his presidential campaign.
Donald Trump tried to change his ailing father’s will, setting off a family reckoning
In December 1990, Donald Trump sent his father a document that left him both angered and alarmed. It was a codicil seeking to make a variety of changes to Fred Trump’s will. Among them: strengthening provisions that made Donald Trump sole executor of his estate. But amid Mr. Trump’s financial shambles — it was the month of the $3.5 million Trump’s Castle rescue — Fred Trump feared that the document potentially put his life’s work at risk, that his son might use the empire as collateral to save his own failing businesses, according to depositions given years later during a family dispute.
Fred Trump rebuffed the maneuver, refusing to sign the codicil. But the episode prompted a family reckoning: Fred Trump was aging and ailing. Without speedy intervention, he could die leaving a vast estate — not just his real estate empire, but also tens of millions of dollars in cash — vulnerable to the 55 percent inheritance tax.
So with Donald Trump playing a central role, the family formulated a plan that included unorthodox tax strategies that experts told The Times were legally dubious and, in some cases, appeared to be fraudulent.
The Trumps created a company that siphoned cash from the empire
The first major component was creating a company called All County Building Supply & Maintenance. On paper, All County was Fred Trump’s purchasing agent, buying everything from boilers to cleaning supplies. But All County was, in fact, a company only on paper, records and interviews show — a vehicle to siphon cash from Fred Trump’s empire by simply marking up purchases already made by his employees. Those millions in markups, effectively untaxed gifts, then flowed to All County’s owners — Donald Trump, his siblings and a cousin.
Lee-Ford Tritt, a leading expert in gift and estate tax law at the University of Florida, said the Trumps’ use of All County was “highly suspicious” and could constitute criminal tax fraud. “It certainly looks like a disguised gift,” he said.
Image
In President Trump’s version of how he got rich, he was the master dealmaker who parlayed a $1 million loan from his father into a $10 billion empire.CreditMarilynn K. Yee/The New York Times
All County also had an insidious downside for Fred Trump’s tenants. He used the padded invoices to justify higher rent increases in rent-regulated buildings, records show.
Mr. Harder, the president’s lawyer, disputed The Times’s reporting: “Should The Times state or imply that President Trump participated in fraud, tax evasion or any other crime, it will be exposing itself to substantial liability and damages for defamation.”
The Trump parents dodged hundreds of millions in gift taxes by grossly undervaluing the assets they would pass on
With the cash flowing out of Fred Trump’s empire, the Trumps began transferring ownership of the lion’s share of the empire itself to Donald Trump and his siblings. The vehicle they created to do that was a special kind of trust called a grantor-retained annuity trust, or GRAT.
The purpose of a GRAT is to pass wealth across generations without paying the 55 percent estate tax. The Trump parents did have to pay gift taxes based on one crucial number: the market value of Fred Trump’s empire. But The Times found evidence that they dodged hundreds of millions of dollars in gift taxes by submitting tax returns that grossly undervalued the assets placed in two GRATs, one for each parent.
Fred Trump’s 1995 gift tax return claimed that the 25 apartment complexes and other properties in the trusts were worth just $41.4 million. The implausibility of this claim would be made plain in 2004, when banks valued that same real estate at nearly $900 million.
“They play around with valuations in extreme ways,” said Mr. Tritt, the tax law expert, who was briefed on The Times’s findings. “There are dramatic fluctuations depending on their purpose.”
Mr. Harder, the president’s lawyer, said: “All estate matters were handled by licensed attorneys, licensed C.P.A.’s and licensed real estate appraisers who followed all laws and rules strictly.”
After Fred Trump’s death, his empire’s most valuable asset was an I.O.U. from Donald Trump
When Fred Trump died in June 1999 at the age of 93, the vast bulk of his empire was nowhere to be found in his estate — testament to the success of the tax strategies devised by the Trumps in the early 1990s. The single largest item included in his estate tax return was a $10.3 million I.O.U. from Donald Trump, money his son appears to have borrowed the year before he died. As for the remnants of empire left in Fred Trump’s estate, the tax return cited appraisals that once again grossly understated their market values.
As their father’s executors, Donald, Maryanne and Robert Trump were legally responsible for the accuracy of his estate tax return. They were obligated not only to give the I.R.S. a complete accounting of the value of his estate’s assets, but also to disclose all the taxable gifts he had made during his lifetime. If they knew anything was wrong and failed to reveal it, tax experts said, they could be in violation of tax law.
Mr. Harder, the president’s lawyer, defended the tax returns filed by the Trumps. “The returns and tax positions that The Times now attacks were examined in real time by the relevant taxing authorities,” he said. “These matters have now been closed for more than a decade.”
Donald Trump got a windfall when the empire was sold. But he may have left money on the table.
In 2003, once again in financial trouble, Donald Trump began engineering the sale of the empire Fred Trump had hoped would never leave the family. The sale, completed in 2004, brought him his biggest payday ever from his father: His cut was $177.3 million, or $236.2 million in today’s dollars. But as it turned out, banks at the time valued the empire at hundreds of millions more than the sale price. Donald Trump, master dealmaker, had sold low.
Trump Lawyer Warns New York Times of Tax Story ‘Defamation,’ ‘Substantial Liability’
By Craig Bannister | October 3, 2018 | 9:38 AM EDT
Pres. Donald Trump (Screenshot)
The lawyer who won a multi-million dollar libel settlement for Melania Trump is now warning The New York Times about a story suggesting her husband, President Donald Trump, may have committed tax fraud.
“President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York Times has found.”
….
“But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.”
….
“While the records do not include the president’s personal tax returns and reveal little about his recent business dealings at home and abroad, dozens of corporate, partnership and trust tax returns offer the first public accounting of the income he received for decades from various family enterprises.”
In its story, the Timeslinks to a statement from Charles J. Harder, a lawyer for Pres. Trump, declaring the story’s allegations are “100% false, and highly defamatory” – and based on “extremely inaccurate” claims.
Harder warns that the Times allegations expose it to “substantial liability and damages for defamation”:
Statement to The Times from Charles J. Harder, a lawyer for President Trump
The New York Times’ allegations of fraud and tax evasion are 100% false, and highly defamatory. There was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone. The facts upon which the Times bases its false allegations are extremely inaccurate. All estate matters were handled by licensed attorneys, licensed CPAs and licensed real estate appraisers who followed all laws and rules strictly. All matters were filed with the IRS and New York taxing authorities. The returns and tax positions that the Times now attacks were examined in real time by the relevant taxing authorities. The taxing authorities requested a few minor adjustments, which were made, and then fully approved all of the tax filings. These matters have now been closed for more than a decade.
President Trump had virtually no involvement whatsoever with these matters. The affairs were handled by other Trump family members who were not experts themselves and therefore relied entirely upon the aforementioned licensed professionals to ensure full compliance with the law. Should the Times state or imply that President Trump participated in fraud, tax evasion, or any other crime, it will be exposing itself to substantial liability and damages for defamation.
“The Daily Mail apologized to Melania Trump on Wednesday and agreed to pay damages to settle two lawsuits she had filed over an article last year asserting that the professional modeling agency she worked for in the 1990s had also been an escort service.”
Story 1: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Announces The United States Termination of Treaty of Amity With Islamic Republic of Iran — Long Overdue — Videos —
The United Nation’s Top Court Ordered The Trump Administration To Lift Sanctions On
Iran | TIME
USA: US to cancel 1955 treaty with Iran on economic ties, consular rights – Pompeo
Bolton: Iran made a mockery of the Treaty of Amity
John Bolton Says U.S. Will Review All Agreements That Expose It To The World Court
UN court orders US to lift some Iran sanctions
USA: US to cancel 1955 treaty with Iran on economic ties, consular rights – Pompeo
Watch Now: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo holds press conference, live stream
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivers its Order in the case of Iran v. USA
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivers its Order in the case of Iran v. USA
Iran Seeks Ruling of UN’s Highest Court to Lift US Sanctions
Iran today takes the USA to the Court of Justice in the Hague for imposing sanctions
US and Iran wait for the world court ruling on the legitimacy of US sanctions against Iran
Nigel Farage reacts to Trump trading barbs with Iran
Iran nuclear deal will remain valid regardless of U.S. decision, says EU policy chief
What comes next for the Iran nuclear deal?
The Iran Nuclear Deal: The Future of the JCPOA
Trump clashes with EU over Iran sanctions
Trump no nonsense approach on Iran is the right strategy: Gen. Jack Keane
Trump sanctions may spell the end for Iranian Revolution: John Hannah
President Donald Trump Delivers Remarks On Iran Deal – May 8, 2018 | CNBC
What is the International Court of Justice? The Role and Activities of the ICJ
US urges World Court to dismiss Iran’s lawsuit
Iran ‘Violated Its Obligations,’ U.S. Says As It Defends Sanctions | NBC News
PUBLISHED: 12:12 EDT, 3 October 2018 | UPDATED: 12:12 EDT, 3 October 2018
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says the United States is terminating a 1955 friendship treaty with Iran after it was cited in a ruling against US sanctions by the International Court of Justice
The United States on Wednesday called an international court ruling against its Iran sanctions a defeat for Tehran as it terminated a 1955 treaty on which the case was based.
The International Criminal Court ordered the United States to lift sanctions on medicine, food and civilian airplane spare parts, just as President Donald Trump tries to squeeze Iran’s economy.
But Secretary of State Mike Pompeo noted that the UN court did not rule more broadly against US sanctions and he insisted that the United States already exempted humanitarian goods from the sanctions.
“The court’s ruling today was a defeat for Iran. It rightly rejected all of Iran’s baseless requests,” Pompeo told reporters.
Accusing Iran of “abusing the ICJ for political and propaganda purposes,” Pompeo announced that the United States was ending a friendship treaty signed when Iran was ruled by the pro-US shah.
“This is a decision, frankly, that is 39 years overdue,” Pompeo said, referring to the time since the 1979 Islamic revolution transformed Iran from one of the closest allies to a determined foe.
“Given Iran’s history of terrorism, ballistic missile activity and other malign behaviors, Iran’s claims under the treaty are absurd,” he said.
The Treaty of Amity with Iran, signed in 1955 and ratified by the US Senate a year later, lays out practicalities for unfettered economic relations and consular rights between the two countries.
The US withdrawal will have limited direct effect, with the two countries not even having diplomatic relations.
But Iran has repeatedly cited the treaty to press claims from the United States, including when the US Navy shot down an Iran Air civilian plane in 1988, killing 290 people.
nistration has been tightening the screws on Iran ever since the U.S. withdrew in May from the nuclear deal. It has imposed sanctions, increased its hostile rhetoric, and threatened its own allies for working with Tehran. Now comes one more item on that list: On Wednesday, the Trump administration tore up the little-known, Eisenhower-era Treaty of Amity with the Islamic Republic on the same day the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that U.S. sanctions on Iran must exempt humanitarian items.
Play The Atlantic Crossword
Our mini puzzle gets bigger and more challenging each day. See if you can solve your way through the week.
In announcing the decision concerning the 1955 treaty, Mike Pompeo, the U.S. secretary of state, said at the State Department, “This is a decision, frankly, that is 39 years overdue.”
The more than six-decade-old accord survived the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran that was followed by the takeover of the U.S. Embassy, and the hostage-taking of 52 Americans, including diplomats, for 444 days. It also survived what has mostly been low after low in the intervening decades, including near weekly chants of “Death to America” in the Islamic Republic, round after round of crippling U.S. sanctions, and even the shooting down, by the U.S. military, of an Iranian airliner with 290 people on board. As Farshad Kashani wrote in The National Interest, the two countries have used the treaty’s dispute-resolution mechanism, which relies on the ICJ, at various times since 1988, when the Iran Air flight was shot down—most recently in July.
That’s when Iran brought a case at The Hague–based court alleging violations of the Treaty of Amity, challenging, among other things, the U.S. withdrawal from the multilateral nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic. But the court’s ruling Wednesday was much narrower in scope, dealing only with the sale of “humanitarian” goods to Iran, which the court said the U.S. should not sanction. Pompeo said that “existing exceptions, authorizations, and licensing policies for humanitarian-related transactions and safety of flight will remain in effect.” But, he added, “we’re disappointed that the court failed to recognize that it has no jurisdiction to issue any orders related to these sanctions measures with the United States.” The ICJ’s orders are legally binding but not enforceable.
The Trump administration is meanwhile preparing to impose more punitive measures on the Islamic Republic next month. At the United Nations last week, Donald Trump asked “all nations to isolate Iran’s regime as long as its aggression continues.”
The Trump administration says it wants countries that buy Iranian oil to reduce their imports to zero, and has even threatened to sanction its partners who do business with Iran if they don’t stop. Those partners, which include European countries, Russia, and China, are working to devise their own system to work with Iran in order to keep the Islamic Republic in the nuclear agreement under which it agreed to freeze its nuclear program in exchange for political and economic incentives. Additionally, the administration has set up an Iran Action Group whose work is centered on nuclear activities, terrorism, and the detention of American citizens in Iran.
The U.S. says the nuclear agreement rewarded Iran despite its malign activities. It accuses the Islamic Republic of supporting terrorism, of pursuing a ballistic-missile program, of supporting Syria’s Bashar al-Assad regime, and of fomenting unrest in Yemen, Lebanon, and Iraq. Indeed, Iran’s influence in Iraq has become a key point of friction between the two countries as the fragile Iraqi state tries to form a government. Both countries have a strong influence in Iraq that they are keen to preserve. In past years, they have maintained a tacit understanding on their respective allies in the country.
But last week, the U.S. pulled American diplomats from the consulate in Basra, just days after accusing Iran of not preventing rockets being fired at the facility. On Wednesday, Pompeo repeated those remarks, holding Tehran responsible.
“Iran is the origin of the current threat to Americans in Iraq,” he said. “Our intelligence in this regard is solid. We can see the hand of the ayatollah and his henchmen supporting these attacks on the United States.”
Pompeo announces termination of 1955 treaty with Iran after sanctions ruling
Last Updated Oct 3, 2018 2:14 PM EDT
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced on Wednesday that the United States would be terminating a 1955-era treaty of amity with Iran that regulates economic and consular ties between the two countries. Pompeo called it a move that was “39 years overdue.”
Ties between the two nations have been strained for decades but have come to a head since the Trump administration moved to pull out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. The administration has admonished Iran and the regime’s leadership for its “malign behavior” and for pursuing nuclear ambitions.
The move to end the treaty comes after the United Nations’ top court on Wednesday ordered the United States to lift sanctions on “humanitarian” goods to Iran that Mr. Trump re-imposed after pulling out of the nuclear pact. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) unanimously ruled that Washington “shall remove by means of its choosing any impediments arising from the measures announced on May 8 to the free exportation to Iran of medicines and medical devices, food and agricultural commodities” as well as airplane parts, Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf wrote.
The court said sanctions on goods “required for humanitarian needs… may have a serious detrimental impact on the health and lives of individuals on the territory of Iran.”
Pompeo said Iran had brought a “meritless case” to the ICJ, alleging violations of the 1955 pact, and he suggested Iran wants to challenge the U.S. decision to pull out of the nuclear deal.
“Iran has attempted to interfere with the sovereign rights of the United States to take lawful actions as necessary to protect our national security and Iran is abusing the ICJ for political and propaganda purposes,” said Pompeo.
Pompeo said in the meantime, the U.S. will continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iranian people, but called on Iranian leadership to spend money on its own people, instead of “fomenting terror around the world.”
“Those are dollars the Iranian leadership is squandering, they could be providing humanitarian assistance to their own people but have chosen a different path,” he said.
In addition to leaving the amity treaty, national security adviser John Bolton announced during Wednesday’s press briefing that the U.S. will also withdraw from the Optional Protocol and Dispute Resolution to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, in connection with a case brought by the Palestinians to the ICJ challenging the United States’ embassy move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem earlier this year.
“We will commence a review of all international agreements that may still expose the US to purported binding jurisdiction dispute resolution in the International Court of Justice — admin will conduct a review of all its involvement with the International Court of Justice,” he said.
Bolton told reporters that the U.S. remains a party to the underlying Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, “and we expect all other parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention.”
The administration’s latest comments came after President Trump chaired a meeting of the UN Security Council last week and emphasized the importance of keeping the world free of the scourge of chemical weapons. The meeting focused on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, particularly in Iran.
Bolton calls U.N. world court ‘politicized,’ U.S. to limit exposure
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States is taking steps to avoid exposure to binding decisions by the International Court of Justice, the U.S. national security adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday as he accused the U.N. court of being “politicized and ineffective.”
U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton answers a question from a reporter about how he refers to Palestine during a news conference in the White House briefing room in Washington, U.S.,
October 3, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo earlier on Wednesday said that Washington was terminating a treaty of amity with Tehran, after the International Court ordered the United States to ensure that sanctions against Iran, due to be tightened next month, did not affect humanitarian aid or civil aviation.
The ICJ, based in The Hague, in the Netherlands, is the United Nations’ venue for resolving disputes between nations.
There have been mounting concerns among U.S. allies about the Trump administration’s commitment to multilateralism.
In the nearly two years since being elected, President Donald Trump has withdrawn the United States from a nuclear agreement between six powers and Iran, pulled out of a global climate accord, left the U.N. cultural agency, and threatened NATO military allies that the United States would “go its own way” if members did not spend more on defense.
U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton answers questions from reporters after announcing that the U.S. will withdraw from the Vienna protocol and the 1955 “Treaty of Amity” with Iran as White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders looks on during a news conference in the White House briefing room in Washington, U.S., October 3, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis
Wednesday’s ruling by the International Court handed a small victory to Tehran, which had argued that sanctions imposed since May by the Trump administration violated the terms of a 1955 Treaty of Amity between the two countries.
Bolton, citing what he called “Iran’s abuse of the ICJ,” said that the United States would withdraw from the “optional protocol” under the 1961 Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations.
“We will commence a review of all international agreements that may still expose the United States to purported binding jurisdiction, dispute resolution in the International Court of Justice,” Bolton said on Wednesday. “The United States will not sit idly by as baseless politicized claims are brought against us.”The decision to withdraw from the optional protocol follows a complaint brought by the Palestinians in September, which challenged Washington’s decision to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
The Vienna Convention is an international treaty setting out diplomatic relations between states. It is often cited as a means to provide diplomatic immunity.
In 2005, the Bush administration took issue with the ICJ after it ruled that the execution of a Mexican national in Texas breached U.S. obligations under international law.
The Palestinians argued that the U.S. government’s placement of its embassy in Jerusalem violated an international treaty and that it should be moved.
“This really has less to do with Iran and the Palestinians than with the continued consistent policy of the United States to reject the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, which we think is politicized and ineffective,” Bolton said.
He added: “I’d like to stress the United States remains a party to the underlying Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and we expect all other parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention.”
Palestine was recognized by the U.N. General Assembly in 2012 as a non-member observer state, though its statehood is not recognized by either Israel or the United States.
The Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights between the United States and Iran was signed in Tehran on August 15, 1955 and entered into force on 16 June 1957.[1]
The International Court of Justice (abbreviated ICJ; commonly referred to as the World Court)[1] is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It settles legal disputes between member states and gives advisory opinions to authorized UN organs and specialized agencies. It comprises a panel of 15 judges elected by the General Assembly and Security Council for nine-year terms. It is seated in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands.[2]
Activities
The Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, seat of the ICJ
The court’s workload covers a wide range of judicial activity. After the court ruled that the United States‘s covert war against Nicaragua was in violation of international law (Nicaragua v. United States), the United States withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction in 1986 to accept the court’s jurisdiction only on a case-by-case basis.[4]Chapter XIV of the United Nations Charter authorizes the UN Security Council to enforce Court rulings. However, such enforcement is subject to the veto power of the five permanent members of the Council, which the United States used in the Nicaragua case.[5]
The ICJ is composed of fifteen judges elected to nine-year terms by the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council from a list of people nominated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The election process is set out in Articles 4–19 of the ICJ statute. Elections are staggered, with five judges elected every three years to ensure continuity within the court. Should a judge die in office, the practice has generally been to elect a judge in a special election to complete the term.
No two judges may be nationals of the same country. According to Article 9, the membership of the court is supposed to represent the “main forms of civilization and of the principal legal systems of the world”. Essentially, that has meant common law, civil law and socialist law (now post-communist law).
There is an informal understanding that the seats will be distributed by geographic regions so that there are five seats for Western countries, three for African states (including one judge of francophonecivil law, one of Anglophone common law and one Arab), two for Eastern European states, three for Asian states and two for Latin American and Caribbean states.[6] For most of the court’s history, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (France, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and the United States) have always had a judge serving, thereby occupying three of the Western seats, one of the Asian seats and one of the Eastern European seats. Exceptions have been China not having a judge on the court from 1967 to 1985, during which time it did not put forward a candidate, and British judge Sir Christopher Greenwood being withdrawn as a candidate for election for a second nine-year term on the bench in 2017, leaving no judges from the United Kingdom on the court.[7] Greenwood had been supported by the UN Security Council but failed to get a majority in the UN General Assembly.[7] Indian judge Dalveer Bhandari instead took the seat.[7]
Article 6 of the Statute provides that all judges should be “elected regardless of their nationality among persons of high moral character” who are either qualified for the highest judicial office in their home states or known as lawyers with sufficient competence in international law. Judicial independence is dealt with specifically in Articles 16–18. Judges of the ICJ are not able to hold any other post or act as counsel. In practice, members of the court have their own interpretation of these rules and allow them to be involved in outside arbitration and hold professional posts as long as there is no conflict of interest. A judge can be dismissed only by a unanimous vote of the other members of the court.[8] Despite these provisions, the independence of ICJ judges has been questioned. For example, during the Nicaragua case, the United States issued a communiqué suggesting that it could not present sensitive material to the court because of the presence of judges from Eastern bloc states.[9]
Judges may deliver joint judgments or give their own separate opinions. Decisions and Advisory Opinions are by majority, and, in the event of an equal division, the President’s vote becomes decisive, which occurred in the Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict (Opinion requested by WHO), [1996] ICJ Reports 66. Judges may also deliver separate dissenting opinions.
Ad hoc judges[
Article 31 of the statute sets out a procedure whereby ad hoc judges sit on contentious cases before the court. The system allows any party to a contentious case (if it otherwise does not have one of that party’s nationals sitting on the court) to select one additional person to sit as a judge on that case only. It is thus possible that as many as seventeen judges may sit on one case.
The system may seem strange when compared with domestic court processes, but its purpose is to encourage states to submit cases. For example, if a state knows that it will have a judicial officer who can participate in deliberation and offer other judges local knowledge and an understanding of the state’s perspective, it may be more willing to submit to the jurisdiction of the court. Although this system does not sit well with the judicial nature of the body, it is usually of little practical consequence. Ad hoc judges usually (but not always) vote in favour of the state that appointed them and thus cancel each other out.[10]
Chambers
Generally, the court sits as full bench, but in the last fifteen years, it has on occasion sat as a chamber. Articles 26–29 of the statute allow the court to form smaller chambers, usually 3 or 5 judges, to hear cases. Two types of chambers are contemplated by Article 26: firstly, chambers for special categories of cases, and second, the formation of ad hoc chambers to hear particular disputes. In 1993, a special chamber was established, under Article 26(1) of the ICJ statute, to deal specifically with environmental matters (although it has never been used).
Ad hoc chambers are more frequently convened. For example, chambers were used to hear the Gulf of Maine Case (Canada/US).[11] In that case, the parties made clear they would withdraw the case unless the court appointed judges to the chamber acceptable to the parties. Judgments of chambers may either less authority than full Court judgments or diminish the proper interpretation of universal international law informed by a variety of cultural and legal perspectives. On the other hand, the use of chambers might encourage greater recourse to the court and thus enhance international dispute resolution.[12]
Current composition
As of 22 June 2018, the composition of the court is as follows:[13][14]
As stated in Article 93 of the UN Charter, all 193 UN members are automatically parties to the court’s statute.[15] Non-UN members may also become parties to the court’s statute under the Article 93(2) procedure. For example, before becoming a UN member state, Switzerland used this procedure in 1948 to become a party, and Nauru became a party in 1988.[16] Once a state is a party to the court’s statute, it is entitled to participate in cases before the court. However, being a party to the statute does not automatically give the court jurisdiction over disputes involving those parties. The issue of jurisdiction is considered in the three types of ICJ cases: contentious issues, incidental jurisdiction, and advisory opinions.[17]
Contentious issues
First gathering after Second World War, Dutch newsreel from 1946
In contentious cases (adversarial proceedings seeking to settle a dispute), the ICJ produces a binding ruling between states that agree to submit to the ruling of the court. Only states may be parties in contentious cases. Individuals, corporations, parts of a federal state, NGOs, UN organs and self-determination groups are excluded from direct participation in cases although the court may receive information from public international organizations. That does not preclude non-state interests from being the subject of proceedings if a state brings the case against another. For example, a state may, in cases of “diplomatic protection”, bring a case on behalf of one of its nationals or corporations.[18]
Jurisdiction is often a crucial question for the court in contentious cases. (See Procedure below.) The key principle is that the ICJ has jurisdiction only on the basis of consent. Article 36 outlines four bases on which the court’s jurisdiction may be founded:
First, 36(1) provides that parties may refer cases to the court (jurisdiction founded on “special agreement” or “compromis“). This method is based on explicit consent rather than true compulsory jurisdiction. It is, perhaps, the most effective basis for the court’s jurisdiction because the parties concerned have a desire for the dispute to be resolved by the court and are thus more likely to comply with the court’s judgment.
Second, 36(1) also gives the court jurisdiction over “matters specifically provided for… in treaties and conventions in force”. Most modern treaties contain a compromissory clause, providing for dispute resolution by the ICJ.[19]Cases founded on compromissory clauses have not been as effective as cases founded on special agreement since a state may have no interest in having the matter examined by the court and may refuse to comply with a judgment. For example, during the Iran hostage crisis, Iran refused to participate in a case brought by the US based on a compromissory clause contained in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and did not comply with the judgment.[20] Since the 1970s, the use of such clauses has declined. Many modern treaties set out their own dispute resolution regime, often based on forms of arbitration.[21]
Third, Article 36(2) allows states to make optional clause declarations accepting the court’s jurisdiction. The label “compulsory” sometimes placed on Article 36(2) jurisdiction is misleading since declarations by states are voluntary. Furthermore, many declarations contain reservations, such as exclusion from jurisdiction certain types of disputes (“ratione materia“).[22] The principle of reciprocity may further limit jurisdiction. As of February 2011, sixty-six states had a declaration in force.[23] Of the permanent Security Council members, only the United Kingdom has a declaration. In the court’s early years, most declarations were made by industrialized countries. Since the Nicaragua Case, declarations made by developing countries have increased, reflecting a growing confidence in the court since the 1980s.[citation needed] Industrialized countries, however, have sometimes increased exclusions or removed their declarations in recent years. Examples include the United States, as mentioned previously, and Australia, which modified its declaration in 2002 to exclude disputes on maritime boundaries (most likely to prevent an impending challenge from East Timor, which gained their independence two months later).[24]
Finally, 36(5) provides for jurisdiction on the basis of declarations made under the Permanent Court of International Justice‘s statute. Article 37 of the Statute similarly transfers jurisdiction under any compromissory clause in a treaty that gave jurisdiction to the PCIJ.
In addition, the court may have jurisdiction on the basis of tacit consent (forum prorogatum). In the absence of clear jurisdiction under Article 36, jurisdiction is established if the respondent accepts ICJ jurisdiction explicitly or simply pleads on the merits. The notion arose in the Corfu Channel Case (UK v Albania) (1949), in which the court held that a letter from Albania stating that it submitted to the jurisdiction of the ICJ was sufficient to grant the court jurisdiction.
Incidental jurisdiction
Until rendering a final judgment, the court has competence to order interim measures for the protection of the rights of a party to a dispute. One or both parties to a dispute may apply the ICJ for issuing interim measures. In the Frontier Dispute Case, both parties to the dispute, Burkina Faso and Mali submitted an application to the court to indicate interim measures.[25] Incidental jurisdiction of the court derives from the Article 41 of the Statute of it.[26] Such as the final judgment, the order for interim measures of the court are binding on state parties to the dispute. The ICJ has competence to indicate interim measures only if the prima facie jurisdiction is satisfied.
Advisory opinions
Audience of the “Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo”
An advisory opinion is a function of the court open only to specified United Nations bodies and agencies. The UN Charter grants the General Assembly or the Security Council a power to request the court to issue an advisory opinion on any legal question. Other organs of the UN rather than GA and SC may not request an advisory opinion of the ICJ unless the General Assembly authorizes them. Other organs of the UN only request an advisory opinion of the court regarding the matters falling into the scope of their activities.[27] On receiving a request, the court decides which states and organizations might provide useful information and gives them an opportunity to present written or oral statements. Advisory opinions were intended as a means by which UN agencies could seek the court’s help in deciding complex legal issues that might fall under their respective mandates.
In principle, the court’s advisory opinions are only consultative in character but they are influential and widely respected. Certain instruments or regulations can provide in advance that the advisory opinion shall be specifically binding on particular agencies or states, but inherently, they are non-binding under the Statute of the Court. This non-binding character does not mean that advisory opinions are without legal effect, because the legal reasoning embodied in them reflects the court’s authoritative views on important issues of international law. In arriving at them, the court follows essentially the same rules and procedures that govern its binding judgments delivered in contentious cases submitted to it by sovereign states.
An advisory opinion derives its status and authority from the fact that it is the official pronouncement of the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.[28]
Advisory opinions have often been controversial because the questions asked are controversial or the case was pursued as an indirect way of bringing what is really a contentious case before the court. Examples of advisory opinions can be found in the section advisory opinions in the List of International Court of Justice cases article. One such well-known advisory opinion is the Nuclear Weapons Case.
ICJ and the Security Council
Article 94 establishes the duty of all UN members to comply with decisions of the court involving them. If parties do not comply, the issue may be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action. There are obvious problems with such a method of enforcement. If the judgment is against one of the permanent five members of the Security Council or its allies, any resolution on enforcement would then be vetoed. That occurred, for example, after the Nicaragua case, when Nicaragua brought the issue of the United States’ noncompliance with the court’s decision before the Security Council.[9] Furthermore, if the Security Council refuses to enforce a judgment against any other state, there is no method of forcing the state to comply. Furthermore, the most effective form to take action for the Security Council, coercive action under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, can be justified only if international peace and security are at stake. The Security Council has never done that so far.
The relationship between the ICJ and the Security Council, and the separation of their powers, was considered by the court in 1992 in the Pan Am case. The court had to consider an application from Libya for the order of provisional measures to protect its rights, which, it alleged, were being infringed by the threat of economic sanctions by the United Kingdom and United States. The problem was that these sanctions had been authorized by the Security Council, which resulted in a potential conflict between the Chapter VII functions of the Security Council and the judicial function of the court. The court decided, by eleven votes to five, that it could not order the requested provisional measures because the rights claimed by Libya, even if legitimate under the Montreal Convention, could not be prima facieregarded as appropriate since the action was ordered by the Security Council. In accordance with Article 103 of the UN Charter, obligations under the Charter took precedence over other treaty obligations. Nevertheless, the court declared the application admissible in 1998.[29] A decision on the merits has not been given since the parties (United Kingdom, United States, and Libya) settled the case out of court in 2003.
There was a marked reluctance on the part of a majority of the court to become involved in a dispute in such a way as to bring it potentially into conflict with the Council. The court stated in the Nicaragua case that there is no necessary inconsistency between action by the Security Council and adjudication by the ICJ. However, when there is room for conflict, the balance appears to be in favour of the Security Council.
Should either party fail “to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court”, the Security Council may be called upon to “make recommendations or decide upon measures” if the Security Council deems such actions necessary. In practice, the court’s powers have been limited by the unwillingness of the losing party to abide by the court’s ruling and by the Security Council’s unwillingness to impose consequences. However, in theory, “so far as the parties to the case are concerned, a judgment of the Court is binding, final and without appeal”, and “by signing the Charter, a State Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with any decision of the International Court of Justice in a case to which it is a party.”
For example, the United States had previously accepted the court’s compulsory jurisdiction upon its creation in 1946 but in 1984, after Nicaragua v. United States, withdrew its acceptance following the court’s judgment that called on the US to “cease and to refrain” from the “unlawful use of force” against the government of Nicaragua. The court ruled (with only the American judge dissenting) that the United States was “in breach of its obligation under the Treaty of Friendship with Nicaragua not to use force against Nicaragua” and ordered the United States to pay war reparations.[9]
A dispute over the course of the maritime boundary dividing the U.S. and Canada in the Gulf of Maine area.[33]
A complaint by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia against the member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization regarding their actions in the Kosovo War. This was denied on 15 December 2004 because of lack of jurisdiction, the FRY not being a party to the ICJ statute at the time it made the application.[34]
A complaint by the Republic of Macedonia (former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) that Greece is, by vetoing its accession to NATO, in violation of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995[35] between the two countries. The complaint was decided in favour of Macedonia on 5 December 2011.[36]
A complaint by the Democratic Republic of the Congo that the DRC’s sovereignty had been violated by Uganda and that DRC had lost billions of dollars worth of resources,[37] was decided in favour of the DRC.[38]
A complaint by the Republic of India regarding death penalty awarded to Indian citizen by a Pakistani military court. [39] Pakistan arrested Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian citizen for alleged espionage and subversive activities.
When deciding cases, the court applies international law as summarized in Article 38 of the ICJ Statute, which provides that in arriving at its decisions the court shall apply international conventions, international custom and the “general principles of law recognized by civilized nations.” It may also refer to academic writing (“the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations”) and previous judicial decisions to help interpret the law although the court is not formally bound by its previous decisions under the doctrine of stare decisis. Article 59 makes clear that the common law notion of precedent or stare decisis does not apply to the decisions of the ICJ. The court’s decision binds only the parties to that particular controversy. Under 38(1)(d), however, the court may consider its own previous decisions.
If the parties agree, they may also grant the court the liberty to decide ex aequo et bono (“in justice and fairness”),[40] granting the ICJ the freedom to make an equitable decision based on what is fair under the circumstances. That provision has not been used in the court’s history. So far, the International Court of Justice has dealt with about 130 cases.
Procedure
The ICJ is vested with the power to make its own rules. Court procedure is set out in the Rules of Court of the International Court of Justice 1978 (as amended on 29 September 2005).[12]
Cases before the ICJ will follow a standard pattern. The case is lodged by the applicant, which files a written memorial setting out the basis of the court’s jurisdiction and the merits of its claim. The respondent may accept the court’s jurisdiction and file its own memorial on the merits of the case.
Preliminary objections
A respondent that does not wish to submit to the jurisdiction of the court may raise preliminary objections. Any such objections must be ruled upon before the court can address the merits of the applicant’s claim. Often, a separate public hearing is held on the preliminary objections and the court will render a judgment. Respondents normally file preliminary objections to the jurisdiction of the court and/or the admissibility of the case. Inadmissibility refers to a range of arguments about factors the court should take into account in deciding jurisdiction, such as the fact that the issue is not justiciable or that it is not a “legal dispute”.
In addition, objections may be made because all necessary parties are not before the court. If the case necessarily requires the court to rule on the rights and obligations of a state that has not consented to the court’s jurisdiction, the court does not proceed to issue a judgment on the merits.
If the court decides it has jurisdiction and the case is admissible, the respondent then is required to file a Memorial addressing the merits of the applicant’s claim. Once all written arguments are filed, the court holds a public hearing on the merits.
Once a case has been filed, any party (usually the applicant) may seek an order from the court to protect the status quo pending the hearing of the case. Such orders are known as Provisional (or Interim) Measures and are analogous to interlocutory injunctions in United States law. Article 41 of the statute allows the court to make such orders. The court must be satisfied to have prima facie jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case before it grants provisional measures.
Applications to intervene
In cases in which a third state’s interests are affected, that state may be permitted to intervene in the case and participate as a full party. Under Article 62, a state “with an interest of a legal nature” may apply; however, it is within the court’s discretion whether or not to allow the intervention. Intervention applications are rare, and the first successful application occurred only in 1991.
Judgment and remedies
Once deliberation has taken place, the court issues a majority opinion. Individual judges may issue concurring opinions (if they agree with the outcome reached in the judgment of the court but differ in their reasoning) or dissenting opinions (if they disagree with the majority). No appeal is possible, but any party may ask for the court to clarify if there is a dispute as to the meaning or scope of the court’s judgment.[41]
The International Court has been criticized with respect to its rulings, its procedures, and its authority. As with criticisms of the United Nations, many of these criticisms refer more to the general authority assigned to the body by member states through its charter than to specific problems with the composition of judges or their rulings. Major criticisms include the following:[42][43][44]
“Compulsory” jurisdiction is limited to cases where both parties have agreed to submit to its decision, and so instances of aggression tend to be automatically escalated to and adjudicated by the Security Council. According to the sovereignty principle of international law, no nation is superior or inferior against another. Therefore, there is no entity that could force the states into practice of the law or punish the states in case any violation of international law occurs. Therefore, the absence of binding force means that the 193 member states of the ICJ do not necessarily have to accept the jurisdiction. Moreover, membership in the UN and ICJ does not give the court automatic jurisdiction over the member states, but it is the consent of each state to follow the jurisdiction that matters.
Organizations, private enterprises, and individuals cannot have their cases taken to the International Court or appeal a national supreme court’s ruling. UN agencies likewise cannot bring up a case except in advisory opinions (a process initiated by the court and non-binding). Only states can bring the cases and become the defendants of the cases. This also means that the potential victims of crimes against humanity, such as minor ethnic groups or indigenous peoples, may not have appropriate backing by a state.
Other existing international thematic courts, such as the ICC, are not under the umbrella of the International Court. Unlike ICJ, international thematic courts like ICC work independently from United Nations. Such dualistic structure between various international courts sometimes makes it hard for the courts to engage in effective and collective jurisdiction.
The International Court does not enjoy a full separation of powers, with permanent members of the Security Council being able to veto enforcement of cases, even those to which they consented to be bound.[45] Because the jurisdiction does not have binding force itself, in many cases, the instances of aggression are adjudicated by Security Council by adopting a resolution, etc. There is, therefore, a likelihood for the permanent member states of Security Council to avoid the legal responsibility brought up by International Court of Justice, as shown in the example of Nicaragua v. United States.
Dunne, Michael. “Isolationism of a Kind: Two Generations of World Court Historiography in the United States,” Journal of American Studies (1987) 21#3 pp 327–351.
Rosenne S., “Rosenne’s the world court: what it is and how it works 6th ed (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2003).
Van Der Wolf W. & De Ruiter D., “The International Court of Justice: Facts and Documents About the History and Work of the Court” (International Courts Association, 2011)
Bowett, D W. The International court of justice : process, practice and procedure (British Institute of International and Comparative Law: London, 1997).
Sienho Yee, Article 38 of the ICJ Statute and Applicable Law: Selected Issues in Recent Cases, 7 Journal of International Dispute Settlement (2016), 472–498.
Andreas Zimmermann, Christian Tomuschat, Karin Oellers-Frahm & Christian J. Tams (eds.), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary (2d. ed. October 2012, Oxford University Press).
Hague Justice Portal: Academic gateway to The Hague organizations concerning international peace, justice and security.
International Criminal Court : See also, a tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression
Story 2: President Trump Mocks Kavanaugh Accuser At Rally and FBI Sends Supplemental Background on Judge Kavanaugh To White House and Senate — Expect Senate Confirmation Vote Saturday — Videos —
Trump mocks Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s Senate testimony
At a “Make America Great Again” rally Tuesday night in Mississippi, President Trump mocked testimony from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who is Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s most prominent accusers of sexual assault. Ford appeared Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee
Kavanaugh report could be finished tomorrow, FBI says
Tucker on claims made by Christine Ford’s ex-boyfriend
Kavanaugh hearings have energized our base: RNC Chair
Ronna McDaniel: Republicans are going on offense and defense
Can FBI be trusted in Kavanaugh investigation?
Dershowitz: Rules have been called off on Kavanaugh
Ingraham: Academic resistance to Kavanaugh
What the FBI might be looking for in the Brett Kavanaugh probe
Trump expands scope of FBI probe into Kavanaugh
Kavanaugh rejects classmate’s ‘belligerent’ characterization of college years
Republican Sen. Kennedy Wants Kavanaugh’s FBI Report Made Public
Exclusive: Ex-boyfriend of Kavanaugh accuser speaks out
RECAP: All 3 ‘Witnesses’ Named By Ford And Questioned By FBI Deny Knowledge Of Party
Trump governs from a centrist view: Tucker Carlson
The Vicious Treatment of Judge Kavanaugh Guarantees Red Wave Devastation in Midterms and Trump 2020
The FBI confidential Kavanaugh report: Who’s allowed to read it and where
All 100 senators will have secure access to the new information, but not their staffs. They can’t speak publicly about what’s in the file.
by Frank Thorp V and Garrett Haake /
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., leaves a closed meeting in the Capitol’s secure room on Russia sanctions on July 31, 2018.Bill Clark / CQ-Roll Call, Inc.
WASHINGTON — The FBI’s supplemental background investigation will be delivered soon to Capitol Hill and added to Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s current background investigation file.
What will be delivered, according to aides and senators, are the “302” forms of the FBI interviews, which summarize the contents of the interviews. The FBI will not be delivering findings or a conclusion as to who’s telling the truth in the case.
All 100 Senators will have access to the new information, but not their staffs. There also are 10 Judiciary Committee staffers who have access to the Kavanaugh file, which is a paper report — there are no pdf’s or emails of it. And it will not be made public.
OCT.03.201806:58
When the supplemental background investigation is delivered, it’s unclear how the information will be disseminated to all 100 Senators in a timely fashion considering that Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wants to vote this week.
There are not multiple copies of the background investigation file, and senators cannot go pick it up and bring it home with them. They need to either go to a secure area designated in the Judiciary Committee offices, or a designated staffer can bring it to a senator and then return it.
Republican senators said Wednesday that the file will be held in the Senate SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility), which is the classified area of the Capitol Visitor’s Center. The SCIF could be used so more senators can be accommodated than in the Judiciary Committee offices, which are fairly small.
According to committee aides and a document dictating how the file is to be handled, “The Security Manager shall maintain in a locked safe a log that reflects the date, time, and particular FBI background investigation report received by the Committee.”
The information in the background investigation file is not marked top secret or classified, but it is not to be leaked to even characterized. Senators are “not allowed to share any details whatsoever,” a committee aide said.
Trump’s Mocking of Kavanaugh Accusers Stuns Senators Before Vote
Shannon Pettypiece
(Bloomberg) — President Donald Trump mocked two of the women who have come forward with claims that Brett Kavanaugh engaged in sexual assault and other misconduct in the 1980s, earning bipartisan criticism from U.S. senators currently weighing the Supreme Court nominee’s confirmation.
Speaking Tuesday night at a rally in Southaven, Mississippi, Trump attacked the credibility of Christine Blasey Ford, who last week testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that Kavanaugh drunkenly assaulted her during a high school party more than 30 years ago.
The president, who days ago said Ford’s testimony was “very credible,” ridiculed her memory to cheers in the audience, suggesting certain details she didn’t recall were evidence that she wasn’t telling the truth.
“How did you get there? I don’t remember. Where was the place? I don’t remember,” Trump said, mocking Ford’s answers during last week’s hearing.
The remarks drew a rebuke Wednesday not just from Democrats but also Senator Jeff Flake, the Arizona Republican who forced an additional FBI investigation into the accusations against Kavanaugh by threatening to withhold his vote for confirmation.
Flake said Trump’s comments were “kind of appalling” in an interview with NBC News.
“There is no time and no place for remarks like that,” Flake said. “But to discuss something this sensitive at a political rally is just not right.”
Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican and key undecided vote in the Kavanaugh confirmation battle, was also critical of Trump.
“The president’s comments were just plain wrong,” Collins said in a statement.
A third undecided Republican, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, was asked whether Trump’s comments would affect her decision on whether to back Kavanaugh’s confirmation.
“I am taking everything into account and I think the comments by the president yesterday mocking Dr. Ford were wholly inappropriate,” Murkowski said.
Their remarks echoed those of Democrats, who condemned Trump as insensitive to Ford and women who had faced sexual harassment and assault. Ford, a California psychology professor, told the Senate that she is “100 percent” certain Kavanaugh was her attacker.
“President Trump’s outright mockery of a sexual assault survivor, riddled as it was with falsehoods, was reprehensible, beneath the office of the presidency and beneath common decency from one person to another,” Schumer said on the Senate floor. “He’s ruining the norms of America. He’s so degrading the way people treat each other.”
Beto O’Rourke, the party’s candidate for U.S. Senate in Texas, tweeted that Ford “should be treated with dignity and respect — not demeaned and belittled by the President of the United States.”
Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat, tweeted that the remarks were “sadly what we expect from the president.”
“For a brief moment this week, I respected his relatively good comments about having a full investigation,” Jayapal said. “That lasted for a nanosecond.”
And Angus King, an independent U.S. senator from Maine who caucuses with Democrats, said in an interview with CNN that Trump’s comments “made me feel sort of sick.” The senior senator from King’s state, Republican Susan Collins, is seen as a crucial swing vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination.
Ford’s attorney, Michael Bromwich, called the president’s comments “a vicious, vile and soulless attack.”
“Is it any wonder that she was terrified to come forward, and that other sexual assault survivors are as well?” he tweeted. “She is a remarkable profile in courage. He is a profile in cowardice.”
GOP Senator Lindsey Graham, a strong backer of Kavanaugh, offered a milder criticism of the president while speaking to the Atlantic Festival on Wednesday. “President Trump went through a factual rendition that I didn’t particularly like, and I would tell him, knock it off. You’re not helping,” the senator said.
‘Scary Time’
On Monday, Trump said Kavanaugh’s testimony last week — which immediately followed Ford’s — showed that the nominee had “a little bit of difficulty” with alcohol when he was younger, undercutting Kavanaugh’s own portrayal of his drinking habits in high school and college.
Earlier Tuesday, the president previewed his change in tone as he departed the White House, saying “it’s a very scary time for young men in America when you can be guilty of something you may not be guilty of.” When asked whether he had a message for American women, Trump said: “Women are doing great.”
At the Mississippi rally, where Trump was promoting the candidacy of Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, Trump also turned his ire toward Julie Swetnick, who claims Kavanaugh took part in efforts at parties during high school to get girls intoxicated so that groups of boys could have sex with them.
“This woman had no clue what was going on, and yet she made the most horrible charges,” Trump said, pointing out that Kavanaugh went to Yale as apparent evidence that the claims were spurious.
Kavanaugh has denied Swetnick and Ford’s claims.
Midterm Effect
The controversy around Kavanaugh’s nomination has erupted just a month before the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress. Trump is logging multiple trips each week to rally support for Republican candidates he needs to win, and on Tuesday showed he’s ready to stoke voters by vociferously fighting for his nominee amid an FBI investigation into the allegations.
It isn’t clear how Trump’s mockery of the women will play politically. The Kavanaugh hearing crystallized what has become a central divide in American politics. On one side: women who for decades have suffered as their stories of sexual assault and harassment went ignored or ridiculed. On the other: conservative men aggrieved by a system they see as rigged against them and rife with unfair and reputation-destroying accusations.
Opinions of Ford’s testimony — on social media and television networks — were that she was powerful and believable. Her vivid, specific and heartbreaking account invited contrast with the angry bickering over Senate rules and procedures by lawmakers, as well as Kavanaugh’s subsequent combative testimony.
Kavanaugh’s repeated references to liking beer — and initial attempts to avoid answering a question on whether he had ever blacked out from alcohol use — have been the subject of parody, including a skit on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live.” Yale University classmate Charles Ludington released a statement saying Kavanaugh’s testimony — in which he eventually said he’d never blacked out — was a “blatant mischaracterization.”
The White House agreed on Monday to let the Federal Bureau of Investigation question more people in connection with the allegations that Kavanaugh was sexually abusive toward women following growing criticism that the probe was too constrained. But the bureau isn’t doing its own deep dive into the nominee’s alcohol use or whether he gave false testimony to a Senate panel last week, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Senate Majority Mitch McConnell has said the Senate will hold a confirmation vote for Kavanaugh this week.
McConnell vows Republicans won’t be intimidated by Kavanaugh protesters
Published: Oct 3, 2018 1:07 p.m. ET
Senate majority leader cites harassment at airports, homes
By ROBERTSCHROEDER
WHITE HOUSE REPORTER
Reuters
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pushed back at protesters who are confronting Republicans over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, saying members of the GOP won’t be prevented from taking a vote on President Donald Trump’s pick.
‘I want to make it clear to these people who are chasing my members around the hall here, or harassing them at the airports, or going to their homes: we will not be intimidated.’
Kentucky Republican McConnell made his vow from the floor Wednesday as senators prepare to vote on the nomination of Kavanaugh this week. The judge has been accused of sexual assault, and the vote was delayed to allow for an FBI investigation. He has denied the charges.
The Hill reports McConnell and Sen. Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, were both confronted at Reagan National Airport outside Washington on Monday by women who said they were survivors of sexual assault. Protesters have also followed senators coming in and out of hearings this week.
Republicans hold a slim 51-seat majority in the Senate, so Kavanaugh’s nomination can afford no more than one GOP defection. In the event of a tie, Vice President Mike Pence would vote.
On Tuesday night, Trump mocked college professor Christine Blasey Ford, one of Kavanaugh’s accusers. Key GOP senators condemned the president’s comments.
Kaitlan Collins
✔@kaitlancollins
What the key senators think of President Trump ridiculing Christine Blasey Ford:
Flake: “Kind of appalling.”
Collins: “Just plain wrong.”
Murkowski: “Wholly inappropriate and unacceptable.”
But will it affect their votes on Kavanaugh? Flake says it won’t his.
PUBLISHED: 17:12 EDT, 3 October 2018 | UPDATED: 17:12 EDT, 3 October 2018
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell doesn’t get much sleep worrying about potential risks to the economy
Is inflation about to rise? Are interest rates too high? Or too low? Are economic risks lurking? These are the fears that keep US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell from getting a good night’s sleep.
While he was generally upbeat about the US economy, predicting that the good news could continue “effectively indefinitely,” when asked Wednesday what keeps him up at night, Powell said, “Basically everything.”
“Nobody wants a central banker who sleeps well. What good is that?” Powell told a forum hosted by The Atlantic.
Concerns about getting monetary policy right top the list but Powell said, “It’s a world full of risk. I probably lose sleep over different things every night.”
But even so, he noted that the US economy was seeing very low, and falling, unemployment along with moderate inflation.
“There is really no reason to think this cycle can’t continue for quite some time,” he said.
Whenever the next crisis comes, he predicted it will not look like the last one — and there are no signs of financial instability or banking issues — but would be something like a cyber-attack or global event.
Rising protectionism and slowing of an important economy like China would be “bad for American workers and the American economy,” he said.
But if President Donald Trump’s trade confrontations — which so far include cranking up tariffs on half of the goods imported from China — result in lower tariffs and better trade rules, “that will be good for us.”
From 1984 to 1990, Powell worked at Dillon, Read & Co., an investment bank, where he concentrated on financing, merchant banking, and mergers and acquisitions, rising to the position of vice president.[13][15]
In 1993, Powell began working as a managing director for Bankers Trust, but he quit in 1995 after the bank got into trouble when several customers suffered large losses due to derivatives. He then went back to work for Dillon, Read & Co.[15]
From 1997 to 2005, Powell was a partner at The Carlyle Group, where he founded and led the Industrial Group within the Carlyle U.S. Buyout Fund.[14][18]
After leaving Carlyle, Powell founded Severn Capital Partners, a private investment firm focused on specialty finance and opportunistic investments in the industrial sector.[19]
In December 2011, along with Jeremy C. Stein, Powell was nominated to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors by President Barack Obama. The nomination included two people to help garner bipartisan support for both nominees since Stein’s nomination had previously been filibustered. Powell’s nomination was the first time that a president nominated a member of the opposition party for such a position since 1988.[1] He took office on May 25, 2012, to fill the unexpired term of Frederic Mishkin, who resigned. In January 2014, he was nominated for another term, and, in June 2014, he was confirmed by the United States Senate in a 67-24 vote for a 14-year term ending January 31, 2028.[20]
On December 5, 2017, the Senate Banking Committee approved Powell’s nomination to be Chair in a 22–1 vote, with Senator Elizabeth Warren casting the lone dissenting vote.[24] His nomination was confirmed by the Senate on January 23, 2018 by a 84–13 vote.[25] Powell assumed office as Chair on February 5, 2018.
Economic philosophy
Monetary policy
A survey of 30 economists in March 2017 noted that Powell was slightly more of a monetary dove than the average member of the Board of Governors.[citation needed] However, The Bloomberg Intelligence Fed Spectrometer rated Powell as neutral (i.e. neither a hawk nor a dove). Powell has been a skeptic of round 3 of quantitative easing, initiated in 2012, although he did vote in favor of implementation.[26]
Financial regulation
Powell testifies before the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in 2018
Powell “appears to largely support” the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, although he has stated that “we can do it more efficiently”.[26] In an October 2017 speech, Powell stated that higher capital and liquidity requirements and stress tests have made the financial system safer and must be preserved. However, he also stated that the Volcker Rule should be re-written to exclude smaller banks.[26]
Housing finance reform
In a July 2017 speech, Powell said that, in regards to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the status quo is “unacceptable” and that the current situation “may feel comfortable, but it is also unsustainable”. He warned that “the next few years may present our last best chance” to “address the ultimate status of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac” and avoid “repeating the mistakes of the past”. Powell expressed concerns that, in the current situation, the government is responsible for mortgage defaults and that lending standards were too rigid, noting that these can be solved by encouraging “ample amounts of private capital to support housing finance activities”.[27]
Personal life
In 1985, Powell married Elissa Leonard.[9] They have three children[14] and live in Chevy Chase Village, Maryland, where Elissa is vice chair of the board of managers of the village.[28] In 2010, Powell was on the board of governors of Chevy Chase Club, a country club.[29]
Based on public filings, Powell’s net worth is estimated to be as much as $112 million.[2][3] He is the richest member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.[30]
Powell has served on the boards of charitable and educational institutions including DC Prep, a public charter school, the Bendheim Center for Finance at Princeton University, and The Nature Conservancy. He was also a founder of the Center City Consortium, a group of 16 parochial schools in the poorest areas of Washington, D.C.[18]
The ADP Research Institute® works in close collaboration with Moody’s Analytics and its experienced team of labor market researchers to publish monthly employment reports.
Job growth surged in September to its highest level in seven months as the economy put up another show of strength, according to a report Wednesday from ADP and Moody’s Analytics.
Private companies added 230,000 more positions for the month, the best level since the 241,000 jobs added in February and well ahead of the 168,000 jobs added in August.
The total was well ahead of the 185,000 jobs expected by economists surveyed by Refinitiv (formerly Thomson Reuters).
Construction grew by 34,000 as goods-producing industries overall contributed 46,000 to the final count.
“This labor market is rip-roaring hot,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, told CNBC. “The risk that this economy overheats is very high, and this is one more piece of evidence of that.”
If the current pace continues, Zandi said he expects the unemployment rate to fall near 3 percent over the next year. The headline jobless rate currently is at 3.9 percent.
The ADP/Moody’s count comes two days ahead of the Labor Department’s closely watched nonfarm payrolls report. Economists also expect that report to show job growth of 185,000.
The jump came despite the disruption of Hurricane Florence, which ravaged the Carolinas and was expected to dent the jobs count. The nature of ADP’s methodology is such that it doesn’t include the storm victims because it only counts employees on payroll and doesn’t account for those displaced by temporary events.
“This overstates the case a little bit,” Zandi said. He added that the actual count could come down about 25,000 once the storm impact is considered.
Job gains were spread across industries, as services led with 184,000. Professional and business services contributed 70,000, while education and health services was next with 44,000, and trade, transportation, and utilities added 30,000. Leisure and hospitality and financial services each saw growth of 16,000.
There were several weak notes, however. Manufacturing added just 7,000, its weakest reading in a year, while Zandi said retail and mortgage banking also were weak.
Businesses with between 51 and 499 employees added the most by size, with 99,000 new hires. Large businesses added 75,000 while small firms contributed 56,000.
The August private payrolls count was revised up by 5,000.
The report comes at a strong time for the economy, which is coming off 4.2 percent GDP growth in the second quarter a number that could be above 4 percent for the third quarter as well. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell in a speech Tuesday characterized the economy outlook among forecasters as “remarkably positive.”
Breaking News — Story 1: Hurricane Florence Downgraded To Category 1 and Now A Tropical Storm With Widespread Flooding From Storm Surge and Continuous Rain — Millions Without Electrical Power — Videos —
Mom and baby are killed in ‘biblical’ Hurricane Florence as ‘thousand-year’ rain batters North Carolina and is forecast to dump 18 TRILLION gallons of water over the next seven days
Warning from North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper came after a day of 11-feet storm surges and flash floods
Florence made landfall near Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, at 7.15 am – winds are now up to 80mph
Officials warned the storm will ‘get worse’ and 18 trillion gallons of rain is forecast over the next seven days
Storm is now tracking south-west at 6mph, lifting huge amounts of ocean moisture and dumping it on land
More than 60 people were rescued from a collapsing hotel in Jacksonville, North Carolina, early on Friday
Rescue teams are working to free those trapped in New Bern after the nearby Neuse River burst its banks
The Neuse River near the city is recording more than 10 feet of inundation, the National Hurricane Center said
In Jacksonville, more than 60 people rescued from a hotel as building’s structural integrity was threatened
Even before Florence hit land, life-threatening storm surge was reported along the coast of the Carolinas
Once a Category 4 hurricane with winds of 140 mph, Florence was downgraded to a Category 1 on Thursday
A mother and her baby were killed after a tree fell on their family home in Wilmington, North Carolina
PUBLISHED: 22:18 EDT, 13 September 2018 | UPDATED: 15:18 EDT, 14 September 2018
A mother and her baby have died as Hurricane Florence continues to batter North Carolina, with 18 trillion gallons of rain expected to fall in what one top official called a ‘thousand-year’ event.
The pair were trapped inside their home in Wilmington after a tree fell onto the roof at around 9.30am (ET). Firefighters frantically tried to lift the tree so they could escape, but were unable to do so.
The baby’s father was rescued and stretchered into an ambulance but police declared the mother and baby dead at 2.30pm (ET). National Guard were called into remove the shattered tree.
Florence is currently stalled over southeastern North Carolina, but is expected to drift further inland across the Carolinas on the weekend before turning toward the central Appalachian Mountains early next week.
Beyond Friday’s 11-feet storm surges and flash floods stands days more destruction and human suffering, warned North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper. ‘The sun rose this morning on an extremely dangerous situation and it’s getting worse,’ he told a press conference on Friday morning, branding the storm a ‘thousand-year rain event.’
The dire warnings were echoed by Wilmington Police Chief Ralph Evangelous, who told ABC News: ‘I see a biblical proportion flood event that’s going to occur. I see the beach communities being inundated with water and destruction that will be pretty, pretty epic in nature.’
The eye of the storm smashed into North Carolina just after 7am, with three inches of rain falling every hour and 80mph winds sparking an 11-foot storm surge.
Over seven days, 18 trillion gallons of rain is expected to fall across the Carolinas and Virginia, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky and Maryland. The wind speed has dropped slightly from 90mph when it made landfall to 75mph as of 2pm ET.
A mother and her baby died after being trapped inside their home in Wilmington when a tree fell onto the roof at around 9.30am (ET). Firefighters frantically tried to lift the tree (pictured) so they could escape, but were unable to do so
Fire firefighters use a boat to rescue three people from their flooded home during the Hurricane Florence in New Bern, North Carolina, on Friday
Residents look at downed trees as Hurricane Florence passes over Wilmington, North Carolina, on Friday
Rescue workers rush a man to an ambulance after a giant tree toppled onto a house in Wilmington. The man was injured and taken to hospital
Members of the FEMA Urban Search and Rescue Task Force 4 from Oakland, California, and soldiers from the North Carolina National Guard 105th Military Police Battalion from Asheville search homes for evacuees on Friday
This satellite map, captured on Friday at 8am (ET) shows Florence making landfall on the east coast. The outline of the shoreline has been drawn over the image to show the storm’s location
Video playing bottom right…
Florence made landfall near Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, at 7.15am. At least 26,000 people sought refuge in shelters in the state and 625,000 homes and businesses were reported to be without power.
More than 60 people including children had to be pulled from a collapsing motel in Jacksonville at the height of the storm, and many more who defied evacuation orders were waiting to be rescued.
The hurricane knocked a basketball-sized hole in the wall of the Triangle Motor causing cinder blocks to crumble and the roof to fall down – while residents were still in their rooms. Fire crews had to force their way in and evacuate the guests to a shelter. None were hurt.
Rescue teams were also working to free around 150 to 200 people trapped in homes in New Bern as city spokeswoman Colleen Roberts warned that the storm surge will increase further as Florence passes over the area.
Some 150 to 200 people have already been rescued after the nearby Neuse River rose by 10 feet high since bursting its banks on Thursday.
The city warned that people ‘may need to move up to the second story’ but told them to stay put as ‘we are coming to get you.’ Some 9,700 National Guard troops and civilians have been deployed, with high-water vehicles, helicopters and boats.
In the besieged North Carolina city of New Bern alone, rescuers by midmorning Friday had plucked more than 200 people from rising waters, but about 150 more had to wait as conditions worsened and a storm surge reached 10 feet, officials said.
Florence’s rain will reach 40 inches in some parts of the Carolinas, forecasters said. Rainfall totals will be similar to those in hurricanes Dennis and Floyd in 1999, Chris Wamsley of the National Weather Service said Friday morning.
‘The only difference is, back then it was within 14 days,’ he said. With Florence, ‘we’re looking at the same amount of rainfall in three days.’
By midday Friday, airlines had canceled more than 2,100 U.S. flights from the storm’s approach on Wednesday through Sunday, according to tracking service FlightAware.
The region’s two largest airports, in Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, had more than 200 cancellations on Friday. That’s about half the flights in Raleigh and one in eight at Charlotte.
Rescue workers pray on the quiet residential street in Wilmington, North Carolina, where a mother and her baby died on Friday
A before and after image of a scene in New Bern on Thursday shows the violent impacts of the storm, which deluged the area with flood waters
A before and after image of a scene in New Bern. Rescue teams were also working to free around 150 people trapped in homes in New Bern
Firefighters were unable to remove the tree from the house in Wilmington on Friday and had to call in the National Guard (pictured)
Volunteers from the Civilian Crisis Response Team help rescue three children from their flooded home in James City on Friday
The volunteers moved the James City children to safety on Friday along a flooded highway. Hundreds of other people have had to call for emergency rescues in the area, officials said
Rescue workers pass the dog back to her owner after they were both rescued from their flooded James City property on Friday
Rescue workers from Township No. 7 Fire Department and volunteers from the Civilian Crisis Response Team use a boat to rescue a woman and her dog from their flooded home in James City on Friday
The members of Township No. 7 Fire Department and the civilian volunteers had a busy night on Thursday after the hurricane hit the area
Residents in this North Carolina town woke up on Friday morning to find a tree had fallen on the roof of a house. The storm is expected to cause $170 billion worth of damage, according to one prediction
The awning of a BP gas station in Top Sall, North Carolina, is blown off as Hurricane Florence makes landfall on Thursday night
Winds from Hurricane Florence are pounding Radio Island, NC
Even before Florence hit land, the National Hurricane Center in Miami reported ‘life-threatening storm surge and hurricane-force winds’ along the coast of the Carolinas leaving coastal streets inundated with ocean water.
Like an out of control freight train, Florence entered into Wilmington, a port city of 120,000 people on the North Carolina coast, and started pummeling the city.
The city was plunged into darkness after losing its power grid shortly after 5am during some of the fiercest wind bursts.
Damages are starting to appear as large swaths of the roof of Hotel Ballast, a downtown tourism staple, are being peeled off one by one and sucked out into the sky.
The Cape Fear River, which usually lazies from east to west through the city’s historic district, has been transformed into rapids.
As the day rose on Wilmington, residents discovered extensive damages. There are thousands of trees down in the city’s historic district. Most streets are unpassable as uprooted large oak trees lie across the road.
At this point, the entire city is without electricity as electric lines have been cut off by falling trees and ripped up gutters from homes litter the streets.
Trees bend in the heavy winds as they are enveloped by surging waters after Hurricane Florence hit Swansboro in North Carolina on Friday
People were urged to avoid going out in their vehicles in Swansboro in North Carolina (pictured on Friday) over fears they could be swept away
A resident in New Bern, North Carolina, filmed the inside of their flooded home showing ocean water lapping at their feet as Hurricane Florence made landfall on Friday
Mitchell Floor, left, holds a flashlight as Comfort Suites general manager Beth Bratz, center, and employee Dee Branch go to make coffee as Hurricane Florence rages in Wilmington Friday. 620,000 homes and businesses were reported to be without power as the outer band of the storm approached
John Van Pelt @JVPStorm
Sad to see this damage in Morehead City. There’ll be much more to see when the sun comes up. We have you covered through the night on @WeatherNation#Florence
Footage from television stations and social media showed raging waters hitting piers and jettys and rushing across coastal roads in seaside communities, including Topsail Beach, north of Wilmington, where storm surge waters damaged beachfront homes
Forecasters say the combination of a life-threatening storm surge and the tide will cause normally dry areas near the coast to be flooded by rising waters moving inland from the shoreline. The hurricane could cause $170 billion of property damage, according to one prediction.
Forecasters say ‘catastrophic’ freshwater flooding is expected over parts of the Carolinas.
But that, combined with the storm’s slowing forward movement and heavy rains, had North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper warning of an impending disaster.
‘The worst of the storm is not yet here but these are early warnings of the days to come,’ he said. ‘Surviving this storm will be a test of endurance, teamwork, common sense and patience.’
Forecasters said conditions will deteriorate as the storm pushes ashore early Friday near the North Carolina-South Carolina line and makes its way slowly inland.
Its surge could cover all but a sliver of the Carolina coast under as much as 11 feet of ocean water, and days of downpours could unload more than 3 feet of rain, touching off severe flooding.
Once a Category 4 hurricane with winds of 140 mph (225 kph), the hurricane was downgraded to a Category 1 on Thursday night.
This graph shows wind speeds in mph at 9am (ET), from the eye of Hurricane Florence near the North Carolina coast to further inland
A map from the National Hurricane center shows the probable path of Hurricane Florence from Friday to Wednesday next week
A map broadcast at 10am ET shows the expected progress of Hurricane Florence from Saturday to early on Monday morning
This National Weather Service map shows the probably wind speeds of the hurricane from Friday to 2am on Wednesday
Wind-whipped waves lash the coast at Wilmington, North Carolina, on Friday. Nearly all residents had evacuated following warnings from officials
Florence’s fiercest winds will linger around the coast for hours since the storm was moving forward at only 6 mph. Pictured: The hurricane arriving at Wilmington on Friday
Visibility is poor around the eye of the storm, as water and other debris are pulled up into the air by the wind, as seen in this image of Swansboro on Friday
Trees sway in the wind as Hurricane Florence moves through Wilmington on Friday, as captured in a video taken by local journalist Raphael Grand
Photos show the South Carolina National Guard readying for the storm. Once a Category 4 hurricane with winds of 140 mph (225 kph), the hurricane was downgraded to a Category 1 on Thursday night
Forecasters say ‘catastrophic’ freshwater flooding is expected over parts of the Carolinas. Disaster relief teams are seen above
Michael Nelson uses a boat made from a metal tub and fishing floats after the Neuse River burst its banks on Thursday
Rescuers head out into floodwaters in New Bern, North Carolina on Thursday night as the area starts to feel the full wrath of the storm
Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital in Jacksonville has a full hallway dedicated for animals of the staff working during Hurricane Florence. It is pictured on Friday
Flamingos are evacuated as a part of Storm Florence preparations at Riverbanks Zoo and Garden in South Carolina
Dolphins were spotted swimming close to the shore in Wilmington, North Carolina, during the storm on Friday
CBS News
✔@CBSNews
Dolphins are swimming near the shore in North Carolina, as Hurricane Florence pounds the coast with intense wind and rain. https://cbsn.ws/2p6nJBJ
Cooper requested additional federal disaster assistance in anticipation of what his office called ‘historic major damage’ across the state.
Officials said some 1.7 million people in the Carolinas and Virginia were warned to evacuate, but it’s unclear how many did.
The homes of about 10 million were under watches or warnings for the hurricane or tropical storm conditions.
Coastal towns in the Carolinas were largely empty, and schools and businesses closed as far south as Georgia.
The top counties affected were Beaufort, Carteret, Craven, Onslow, Pamlico and Pender. Officials fear power losses could affect up to three million people.
In South Carolina, more than 400,000 people have evacuated the state’s coast and more than 4,000 people have taken refuge in shelters, officials said.
Another 400 people were in shelters in Virginia, where forecasts were less dire.
Cooper previously warned: ‘Don’t relax, don’t get complacent. Stay on guard. This is a powerful storm that can kill. Today the threat becomes a reality.’
A wind-damaged roof of the house in the town of Wilson on Friday morning after the hurricane passed over the previous night
A damaged awning at a restaurant in Myrtle Beach on Friday morning after heavy winds ravished the town during Hurricane Florence
Roads and verges in New Bern were strewn with damage trees on Friday morning after they were ripped from the ground by high winds
Several parts of North Carolina lost power after trees fell on power lines. Pictured is damaged vegetation in New Bern on Friday
This tree in Wilmington was left splayed across a road on Friday morning, blocking traffic, after Hurricane Florence ravaged the area the previous night
Wilmington residents had to walk around the uprooted tree on Friday as they waited for workers to come and cut it up
Part of the roof of Tidewater Brewing Co. lies on the ground in Wilmington on Friday morning. Owner Ethan Hall arrived later with team to inspect the damage
Flood waters rage inside the living room of a house in Belhaven, North Carolina, in a photo obtained from social media on Friday
Children sit and play games in a hotel lobby in Wilmington that has lost its power on Friday after damage to infrastructure caused by high winds
Donald Trump speaks during a hurricane meeting on Friday with the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the Oval Office
Prisoners were affected, too. North Carolina corrections officials said more than 3,000 people were relocated from adult prisons and juvenile centers in the path of Florence, and more than 300 county prisoners were transferred to state facilities.
At Frying Pan Tower, an observation post 32 miles off of the coast of North Carolina, a live video feed showed the storm’s 100mph sustained winds ripping an American flag to shreds.
Police have suspended their services in Morehead City and other coastal cities, warning any residents who remain in the evacuation zone that they will be without emergency services until the storm passes.
The storm surge was expected to reach far inland along North Carolina’s flat coastal plain.
‘Storm surge is not just an ‘ocean’ problem tonight. Significant surge is expected to occur in the NC inlets and rivers, some areas in excess of 9 feet!’ the National Weather Service said in a tweet.
At Frying Pan Tower, an observation post 32 miles off of the coast of North Carolina, a live video feed showed the Category 2 storm’s 100mph sustained winds ripping an American flag to shreds on Thursday
Portions of a boat dock and boardwalk were destroyed by powerful wind and waves in Atlantic Beach, North Carolina, on Thursday
Waves slam the Oceana Pier & Pier House Restaurant in Atlantic Beach as Hurricane Florence approaches the area on Thursday
Huge waves lashed the beaches of North Carolina on Thursday as the hurricane rolling in bringing heavy rain and dangerous winds
Early storm surges in New Bern caused the Neuse River to flood its banks on Thursday, nearly sixteen hours before Florence arrived
A work truck drives on Hwy 24 as the wind from Hurricane Florence blows palm trees in Swansboro on Thursday
A pick-up truck pulls a trailer along a rainy road in Washington, North Carolina, nearly 16 hours before the hurricane struck the area
A truck drives through deep water after the Neuse River flooded the street in River Bend on Thursday. Officials in some areas urged people not to go out in their car as they could be swept away
Flooding is seen New Bern, North Carolina, after early storm surges caused the Neuse River to burst its banks as Hurricane Florence inched closer to the East Coast on Thursday
A sign warns people away from Union Point Park after it was flooded by the Neuse River in New Bern, North Carolina
The Hotel Ballast on the Cape Fear River was starting to show signs of structural damage (see ceiling) during the hurricane on Friday
In Wilmington, before it took a direct hit from Florence, wind gusts were stirring up frothy white caps into the Cape Fear River.
‘We’re a little worried about the storm surge so we came down to see what the river is doing now,’ said Linda Smith, 67, a retired nonprofit director. ‘I am frightened about what’s coming. We just want prayers from everyone.’
Near the beach in Wilmington, a Waffle House restaurant, part of a chain with a reputation for staying open during disasters, had no plans to close, even if power is lost. It had long lines on Thursday.
In the tiny community of Sea Breeze near Wilmington, Roslyn Fleming, 56, made a video of the inlet where her granddaughter was baptized because ‘I just don’t think a lot of this is going to be here’ later.
Will Epperson, a 36-year-old golf course assistant superintendent, said he and his wife had planned to ride out the storm at their home in Hampstead, North Carolina, but reconsidered due to its ferocity. Instead, they drove 150 miles inland to his mother’s house in Durham.
‘The anxiety level has dropped substantially,’ Epperson said. ‘I’ve never been one to leave for a storm but this one kind of had me spooked.’
In a flash bulletin at 11pm on Thursday, the National Hurricane Center said that Florence was 50 miles south of Morehead City, North Carolina, and 60 miles southeast of Wilmington.
A child sits on a mattress at a Hurricane Florence evacuation shelter on Thursday at Conway High School in Conway, South Carolina
Avair Vereen (left, with her fiance and one of her seven children) and her family took shelter at an evacuation shelter at Conway High School on Thursday. ‘We live in a mobile home so we were just like ‘No way.’ If we lose the house, oh well, we can get housing. But we can’t replace us so we decided to come here’
An American Red Cross aid worker walks through the cafeteria at Conway High School which is being used as a Hurricane Florence evacuation shelter on Thursday
Shianne Coleman (left) and Austin Gremmel walk in flooded streets as the Neuse River begins to flood its banks in New Bern, North Carolina, on Thursday
Linda Stephens checks out the weather as the force of Hurricane Florence is beginning to be felt on Friday in Myrtle Beach
Joyce Lilly, Marshall McNeil and Holly Tindall sit on the porch of their home in Myrtle Beach on Friday as they watch high winds caused by Hurricane Florence
The storm had maximum sustained winds of 90mph and was moving northwest at six miles per hour.
A buoy off the North Carolina coast recorded waves nearly 30 feet high as Florence churned toward shore.
As the storm has slowed upon approach, official landfall – when the eye of the storm reaches the shore – is forecast to occur sometime overnight on Friday.
Winds and rain were arriving later in South Carolina, and a few people were still walking on the sand at Myrtle Beach while North Carolina was getting pounded on Thursday. Heavy rainfall began after dark.
By Thursday night, the window to evacuate much of the North Carolina coast had closed, with officials saying that anyone who had not moved inland would have to shelter in place.
Forecasters said that given the storm’s size and sluggish track, it could cause epic damage akin to what the Houston area saw during Hurricane Harvey just over a year ago, with floodwaters swamping homes and businesses and washing over industrial waste sites and hog-manure ponds.
Men pack their belongings after evacuating their house in New Bern, North Carolina after the Neuse River went over its banks and flooded their street during Hurricane Florence on Thursday
Residents rush to escape as the water rises in New Bern on Thursday after storm surges pushed the Neuse River over its bank
Residents wade through deep floodwater to retrieve belongings from the Trent Court public housing apartments after the Neuse River went over its banks during in New Bern on Thursday
Russ Lewis looks for shells at Myrtle Beach, where conditions were fairly calm before the approach of Florence on Friday morning
Water from Neuse River starts flooding houses on Thursday as the Hurricane Florence comes ashore in New Bern, North Carolina
As Florence drew near, President Donald Trump tweeted that FEMA and first responders are ‘supplied and ready,’ and he disputed the official conclusion that nearly 3,000 people died in Puerto Rico, claiming the figure was a Democratic plot to make him look bad.
‘This was done by the Democrats in order to make me look as bad as possible when I was successfully raising Billions of Dollars to help rebuild Puerto Rico,’ Trump wrote.
‘If a person died for any reason, like old age, just add them onto the list. Bad politics. I love Puerto Rico!’
Schools and businesses closed as far south as Georgia, airlines canceled more than 1,500 flights, and coastal towns in the Carolinas were largely emptied out.
Around midday, Spanish moss blew sideways in the trees as the winds increased in Wilmington, and floating docks bounced atop swells at Morehead City. Some of the few people still left in Nags Head on the Outer Banks took photos of angry waves topped with white froth.
Wilmington resident Julie Terrell was plenty concerned after walking to breakfast past a row of shops fortified with boards, sandbags and hurricane shutters.
‘It truly is really about the whole size of this storm,’ National Hurricane Center Director Ken Graham said. ‘The larger and the slower the storm is, the greater the threat and the impact – and we have that.’
The hurricane was seen as a major test for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which was heavily criticized as sluggish and unprepared for Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico last year.
Residents in Wilmington wait for a table at Waffle House. Though boarded up, the restaurant remained open on Thursday
Diners are seen in the Wilmington Waffle House on Thursday. The restaurant chain is famous for remaining open through severe storms
FEMA even uses a ‘Waffle House Index’ to determine how severe a storm is, based on whether the chain shuts down locations or limits its menu. Waffle House pre-stages supplies and relies on generators to remain open during storms
Hurricane Florence evacuees try to sleep in a Red Cross shelter in Grantsboro, North Carolina on Thursday
People are seen inside a shelter run by Red Cross on Thursday before Hurricane Florence comes ashore in Grantsboro, North Carolina
HURRICANE FLORENCE IN NUMBERS
The outer bands of wind and rain from a weakened but still deadly Hurricane Florence began lashing North Carolina on Thursday.
As the monster storm moves in for an extended stay, here is a breakdown by numbers:
Florence clocked 90mph winds on Thursday after it was downgraded to a Category 1
The storm was already generating 83-foot waves at sea on Wednesday
Life-threatening storm surges of up to 13 feet were also forecast in some areas
Florence is forecast to dump up to 40 inches of rain in some areas after it makes landfall in North and South Carolina
Potentially 10 trillion gallons of rain is expected in southern states in the next week
An estimated 10 million people live in areas expected to be placed under a hurricane or storm advisory
Up to 1.7 million people were ordered to evacuated ahead of the hurricane
‘On a scale of 1 to 10, I’m probably a 7’ in terms of worry, she said. ‘Because it’s Mother Nature. You can’t predict.’
Forecasters’ European climate model is predicting 2 trillion to 11 trillion gallons of rain will fall on North Carolina over the next week, according to meteorologist Ryan Maue of weathermodels.com. That’s enough water to fill the Empire State Building nearly 40,000 times.
More than 1.7 million people in the Carolinas and Virginia were warned to evacuate over the past few days, and the homes of about 10 million were under watches or warnings for the hurricane or tropical storm conditions.
Among those to shrug off evacuation orders in South Carolina was legendary singer Jimmy Buffet, who led a score of adrenaline-junkies waiting for the storm to hit as he headed to Folly Beach to surf the surges.
Posing with a surfboard and a thumbs-up the 71-year-old musician quoted his own lyrics writing: ‘I ain’t afraid of dying, I got no need to explain, I feel like going surfing in a hurricane.’
‘On a serious note – respect mother nature, please be safe and listen to your local authorities,’ he added in a Instagrampost from Wednesday.
Homeless after losing her job at Walmart three months ago, 25-year-old Brittany Jones went to a storm shelter at a high school near Raleigh. She said a hurricane has a way of bringing everyone to the same level.
‘It doesn’t matter how much money you have or how many generators you have if you can’t get gas,’ she said. ‘Whether you have a house or not, when the storm comes it will bring everyone together. A storm can come and wipe your house out overnight.’
Duke Energy Co. said Florence could knock out electricity to three-quarters of its four million customers in the Carolinas, and outages could last for weeks. Workers are being brought in from the Midwest and Florida to help in the storm’s aftermath, it said.
As Hurricane Florence barreled towards the East Coast musician Jimmy Buffett and other surfers headed to the water, the musician gave a thumbs up with his surfboard at Folly Beach in South Carolina on Wednesday
Scientists said it is too soon to say what role, if any, global warming played in the storm. But previous research has shown that the strongest hurricanes are getting wetter, more intense and intensifying faster because of human-caused climate change.
Florence’s weakening as it neared the coast created tension between some who left home and authorities who worried that the storm could still be deadly.
Frustrated after evacuating his beach home for a storm that was later downgraded, retired nurse Frederick Fisher grumbled in the lobby of a Wilmington hotel several miles inland.
‘Against my better judgment, due to emotionalism, I evacuated,’ said Fisher, 74. ‘I’ve got four cats inside the house. If I can’t get back in a week, after a while they might turn on each other or trash the place.’
Authorities pushed back against any suggestion the storm’s threat was exaggerated.
The police chief of a barrier island in Florence’s bulls’-eye said he was asking for next-of-kin contact information from the few residents who refused to leave.
‘I’m not going to put our personnel in harm’s way, especially for people that we’ve already told to evacuate,’ Wrightsville Beach Police Chief Dan House said.
But not everyone was taking Florence too seriously – about two dozen locals gathered on Thursday night behind the boarded-up windows of The Barbary Coast bar as Florence blew into Wilmington.
‘We’ll operate without power; we have candles. And you don’t need power to sling booze,’ said owner Eli Ellsworth.
Others were at home hoping for the best.
‘This is our only home. We have two boats and all our worldly possessions,’ said Susan Patchkofsky, who refused her family’s pleas to evacuate and stayed at Emerald Isle with her husband.
‘We have a safe basement and generator that comes on automatically. We chose to hunker down.’
What Hurricane Florence storm surges could look like
A simulation weather video is showing what the life-threatening Hurricane Florence storm surge might look like if it reaches a frightening nine feet.
Life-threatening storm surges of up to 13 feet have been forecast in some areas in North and South Carolina.
The Weather Channel‘s forecast video shows the potential damage such surges could inflict on the southern states.
Dr Greg Postel, the network’s hurricane specialist, said three feet of water was enough to knock people off their feet, potentially carry cars away and flood lower levels of buildings.
Six feet of storm surge could carry large objects like cars underwater and leave lower levels structures submerged in water, according to Dr Postel.
The video also gives a frightening indication of what nine feet of water looks like – completely submerging lower buildings.
‘Uninvited brute’: 2 dead as Florence drenches the Carolinas
Hurricane Florence rolled ashore in North Carolina with howling 90 mph winds and terrifying storm surge early Friday, killing at least two people and trapping hundreds more in high water as it settled in for what could be a long and extraordinarily destructive drenching.
More than 60 people had to be pulled from a collapsing cinderblock motel. Hundreds more were rescued elsewhere from rising water. Others could only wait and hope someone would come for them.
“WE ARE COMING TO GET YOU,” the city of New Bern tweeted around 2 a.m. “You may need to move up to the second story, or to your attic, but WE ARE COMING TO GET YOU.”
Story 2: Lying Lunatic Left Blame Trump For Hurricanes Florence and Believe Climate Change Is Making Hurricanes Worse — Really — Weather Is Always Changing Over Hours and Days and Climate is Always Changing Over Billions of Years — Trump Derangement Syndrome Goes Hysterical — Videos —
“As of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country”
~President Donald J. Trump, June 1, 2017
The left blaming Trump for Hurricane Florence?
Democrats, media blaming Trump for Hurricane Florence is a new low: RNC spokesperson
Hannity: ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome Reaches New Heights’ With WaPo Headline on Trump & Hurricanes
Washington Post Blames Hurricane Florence on Trump
The left blaming Trump for Hurricane Florence?
Weather vs. Climate: Crash Course Kids #28.1
Climate Change: What Do Scientists Say?
Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?
What They Haven’t Told You about Climate Change
Climate Change: What’s So Alarming?
Why Are Hurricanes Getting Stronger? | Hot Mess
Rush Limbaugh keeps conflating weather with climate change
Is Trump God????
Washington Post calls Trump ‘complicit’ in Hurricane Florence
President Trump Leaves Paris Agreement Climate Deal FULL Speech 6/1/17
Trump Withdraws U.S. From Paris Climate Agreement Choosing Pittsburgh Over Paris
LAURA INGRAHAM FULL ONE ON ONE EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW WITH SEAN HANNITY 5 31 2017
Tucker: Trump gets US out of bad deal and left melts down
Rand Paul Slams Jake Tapper and Climate Alarmists on Doomsday Predictions
The Paris Climate Agreement Won’t Change the Climate
Climate Change: What Do Scientists Say?
What They Haven’t Told You about Climate Change
Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?
Trump ready to pull out of Paris climate deal
Climate Deal in Paris: Everything You Need to Know
Global Warming / Climate Change Hoax – Dr. Roy Spencer (1)
Climate Change in 12 Minutes – The Skeptic’s Case
Dr David Evans: Global Warming is Manmade? (1 of 2)
Dr David Evans: Global Warming is Manmade? (2 of 2)
Dr Easterbrook Global Warming HOAX & Facts
The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie
Another hurricane is about to batter our coast. Trump is complicit.
Hurricane Florence is one of many signs of climate change, and those who deny it are complicit in the destruction, meteorologist Eric Holthaus says.(Gillian Brockell, Kate Woodsome, Adriana Usero/The Washington Post)
YET AGAIN, a massive hurricane feeding off unusually warm ocean water has the potential to stall over heavily populated areas, menacing millions of people. Last year Hurricane Harvey battered Houston. Now, Hurricane Florence threatens to drench already waterlogged swaths of the East Coast, including the nation’s capital . If the Category 4 hurricane does, indeed, hit the Carolinas this week, it will be the strongest storm on record to land so far north.
President Trump issued severalwarnings on his Twitter feed Monday, counseling those in Florence’s projected path to prepare and listen to local officials. That was good advice.
Yet when it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit. He plays down humans’ role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks. It is hard to attribute any single weather event to climate change. But there is no reasonable doubt that humans are priming the Earth’s systems to produce disasters
Kevin Trenberth, a climate researcher at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, co-wrote a May papershowing that Harvey’s cataclysmic wetness came from the unusually hot Gulf of Mexico water that fed the hurricane before it slammed into Texas. “Harvey could not have produced so much rain without human-induced climate change,” he and his colleagues concluded. Now Florence is feasting on warm Atlantic Ocean water. “The ocean is warming up systematically,” Mr. Trenberth said, explaining that, though natural variation can turn surface temperatures up or down a bit, the oceans’ energy content is inexorably rising. “It is the strongest signal of global warming,” Mr. Trenberth added.
Scientists also warn that climate change may be slowing the wind currents that guide hurricanes, making storms more sluggish and, therefore, apt to linger longer over disaster zones. Tropical cyclone movement has slowed all over the planet. Harvey’s stubborn refusal to leave the Houston area was a decisive factor in its destructiveness. Florence may behave similarly.
And human-caused sea-level rise encourages higher storm surges and fewer natural barriers between water and people.
With depressingly ironic timing, the Trump administration announced Tuesday a plan to roll back federal rules on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that is the main component in natural gas. Drillers and transporters of the fuel were supposed to be more careful about letting it waft into the atmosphere, which is nothing more than rank resource waste that also harms the environment. The Trump administration has now attacked all three pillars of President Barack Obama’s climate-change plan.
The president has cemented the GOP’s legacy as one of reaction and reality denial. Sadly, few in his party appear to care.
MEDIA POLITICIZE FLORENCE, BLAME TRUMP FOR STORMS, PREDICT MASS DEATH
Trump is ‘actively making the problem worse’
Sep 14, 2018
On CNN, political analyst John Avlon, in a segment titled “Reality Check,” suggested Trump is at fault for Hurricane Florence, and that his climate policies could kill up to 80,000 people per decade.
Is Trump “complicit in this storm?” asked Alisyn Camerota in the segment introduction.
“His policies have been tearing down our defenses to climate change, which is often a blame for extreme weather,” Avlon answered. “On the same day Trump was discussing Florence, his EPA proposed rolling back restrictions on emissions of methane. That’s just the latest environmental policy targeted by the Trump Administration.”
Avlon rattled off a series of Obama-era environmental regulations the Trump Administration is rolling back — including pulling out of the Paris climate accord — and then boldly predicted a death toll in the thousands.
“It is so bad according to two Harvard scientists, it could lead to 80,000 unnecessary deaths every decade,” Avlon said. “Warmer water means more intense storms. When President Trump called Hurricane Florence tremendously wet, he was on to something.”
“This isn’t rocket science, it is climate science,” he concluded. “As long as we continue to aggressively ignore it, the cost in lives and dollars will escalate. That’s your reality check.”
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
In the Washington Post, the paper editorialized that Trump is “complicit” in Hurricane Florence’s anticipated destruction.
“When it comes to extreme weather, Mr. Trump is complicit,” the editors wrote. “He plays down humans’ role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks. It is hard to attribute any single weather event to climate change. But there is no reasonable doubt that humans are priming the Earth’s systems to produce disasters.”
The paper concluded:
With depressingly ironic timing, the Trump administration announced Tuesday a plan to roll back federal rules on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that is the main component in natural gas. Drillers and transporters of the fuel were supposed to be more careful about letting it waft into the atmosphere, which is nothing more than rank resource waste that also harms the environment. The Trump administration has now attacked all three pillars of President Barack Obama’s climate-change plan.
The president has cemented the GOP’s legacy as one of reaction and reality denial. Sadly, few in his party appear to care.
Back on MSNBC, host Katy Tur invited on media personality Bill Nye and former director of communications for President Obama’s White House Climate Change Task Force, Paul Bledsoe, to setup Trump as the fall guy for Florence.
Tur introduced the segment claiming “climate deniers” in the Trump Administration make it “incredibly difficult to deal with this disaster.”
“President Trump says FEMA is ready for Hurricane Florence but mounting evidence suggests it could be incredibly difficult to deal with this disaster if climate change deniers are on the front lines,” Tur said. “A new study from the Princeton University is echoing the findings of previous research showing climate change as the cause of ocean conditions that produce fast storms like Hurricane Harvey. NOAA is suggesting it’s 3 degrees Fahrenheit above average. Where does the Trump Administration stand on climate change? President Trump rolled back Obama era mandates for leaks and oil and gas wells. These rules were part of Obama’s three part strategy for combating climate change.”
After Nye attacked anyone who “continue[s] to deny climate change” for undermining America’s ability to respond to extreme weather, Bledsoe leveled an even sharper political attack against the Trump Administration.
“Donald Trump and other Republicans are denying climate change are on the wrong side of public safety, of economics and of history,” Bledsoe intoned. “This is not an environmental issue fundamentally. It’s one of public safety and economics and unfortunately, we’re going to see more and more of these extreme, costly and threatening-to-public-health-and-safety events until we begin to reduce our emissions.”
Atlantic tropical storm and hurricane frequency (by month, based on data from 1851-2017)[1]
Hurricane tracks from 1980 through 2014. Green tracks did not make landfall in US; yellow tracks made landfall but were not major hurricanes at the time; red tracks made landfall and were major hurricanes.
The Atlantic hurricane season is the period in a year when hurricanes usually form in the Atlantic Ocean. Tropical cyclones in the North Atlantic are called hurricanes, tropical storms, or tropical depressions. In addition, there have been several storms over the years that have not been fully tropical and are categorized as subtropical depressions and subtropical storms. Even though subtropical storms and subtropical depressions are not technically as strong as tropical cyclones, the damages can still be devastating.
Worldwide, tropical cyclone activity peaks in late summer, when the difference between temperatures aloft and sea surface temperatures is the greatest. However, each particular basin has its own seasonal patterns. On a worldwide scale, May is the least active month, while September is the most active.[2] In the Northern Atlantic Ocean, a distinct hurricane season occurs from June 1 to November 30, sharply peaking from late August through September;[2] the season’s climatological peak of activity occurs around September 10 each season.[3] This is the norm, but in 1938, the Atlantic hurricane season started as early as January 3.
Tropical disturbances that reach tropical storm intensity are named from a pre-determined list. On average, 10.1 named storms occur each season, with an average of 5.9 becoming hurricanes and 2.5 becoming major hurricanes (Category 3 or greater). The most active season was 2005, during which 28 tropical cyclones formed, of which a record 15 became hurricanes. The least active season was 1914, with only one known tropical cyclone developing during that year.[4] The Atlantic hurricane season is a time when most tropical cyclones are expected to develop across the northern Atlantic Ocean. It is currently defined as the time frame from June 1 through November 30, though in the past the season was defined as a shorter time frame. During the season, regular tropical weather outlooks are issued by the National Hurricane Center, and coordination between the Weather Prediction Center and National Hurricane Center occurs for systems which have not formed yet, but could develop during the next three to seven days.
The basic concept of a hurricane season began during 1935,[5] when dedicated wire circuits known as hurricane circuits began to be set up along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts,[6] a process completed by 1955.[7] It was originally the time frame when the tropics were monitored routinely for tropical cyclone activity, and was originally defined as from June 15 through October 31.[8] Over the years, the beginning date was shifted back to June 1, while the end date was shifted to November 15,[6] before settling at November 30 by 1965.[9][10] This was when hurricane reconnaissance planes were sent out to fly across the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico on a routine basis to look for potential tropical cyclones, in the years before the continuous weather satellite era.[8] Since regular satellite surveillance began, hurricane hunter aircraft fly only into storm areas which are first spotted by satellite imagery.[11]
During the hurricane season, the National Hurricane Center routinely issues their Tropical Weather Outlook product, which identifies areas of concern within the tropics which could develop into tropical cyclones. If systems occur outside the defined hurricane season, special Tropical Weather Outlooks will be issued.[12] Routine coordination occurs at 1700 UTC each day between the Weather Prediction Center and National Hurricane Center to identify systems for the pressure maps three to seven days into the future within the tropics, and points for existing tropical cyclones six to seven days into the future.[13] Possible tropical cyclones are depicted with a closed isobar, while systems with less certainty to develop are depicted as “spot lows” with no isobar surrounding them.
The North Atlantic hurricane database, or HURDAT, is the database for all tropical storms and hurricanes for the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea, including those that have made landfall in the United States. The original database of six-hourly positions and intensities were put together in the 1960s in support of the Apollo space program to help provide statistical track forecast guidance. In the intervening years, this database — which is now freely and easily accessible on the Internet from the National Hurricane Center’s (NHC) webpage — has been utilized for a wide variety of uses: climatic change studies, seasonal forecasting, risk assessment for county emergency managers, analysis of potential losses for insurance and business interests, intensity forecasting techniques and verification of official and various model predictions of track and intensity.
HURDAT was not designed with all of these uses in mind when it was first put together and not all of them may be appropriate given its original motivation. HURDAT contains numerous systematic as well as some random errors in the database. Additionally, analysis techniques have changed over the years at NHC as their understanding of tropical cyclones has developed, leading to biases in the historical database. Another difficulty in applying the hurricane database to studies concerned with landfalling events is the lack of exact location, time and intensity at hurricane landfall.
HURDAT is regularly updated annually to reflect the previous season’s activity. The older portion of the database has been regularly revised since 2001. The first time in 2001 led to the addition of tropical cyclone tracks for the years 1851 to 1885. The second time was August 2002 when Hurricane Andrew was upgraded to a Category 5. Recent efforts into uncovering undocumented historical hurricanes in the late 19th and 20th centuries by various researchers have greatly increased our knowledge of these past events. Possible changes for the years 1951 onward are not yet incorporated into the HURDAT database. Because of all of these issues, a re-analysis of the Atlantic hurricane database is being attempted that will be completed in three years.
In addition to the groundbreaking work by Partagas[context?], additional analyses, digitization and quality control of the data was carried out by researchers at the NOAA Hurricane Research Division funded by the NOAA Office of Global Programs. This re-analysis will continue to progress through the remainder of the 20th century.[14]
The National Hurricane Center’s Best Track Change Committee has approved changes for a few recent cyclones, such as Hurricane Andrew. Official changes to the Atlantic hurricane database are approved by the National Hurricane Center Best Track Change Committee. Thus research conducted by Chris Landsea and colleagues as part of the Atlantic hurricane database reanalysis project are submitted through this review process. Not all Landsea’s recommendations are accepted by the Committee.
This bar chart shows the number of named storms and hurricanes per year from 1851–2018.
A 2011 study analyzing one of the main sources of hurricanes – the African easterly wave (AEW) – found that the change in AEWs is closely linked to increased activity of intense hurricanes in the North Atlantic. The synoptic concurrence of AEWs in driving the dynamics of the Sahel greening also appears to increase tropical cyclogenesis over the North Atlantic.[18]
Don’t Believe The Global Warmists, Major Hurricanes Are Less Frequent
Sep 5, 2012, 12:21pm
James Taylor Contributor
I am president of the Spark of Freedom Foundation.
When Hurricane Isaac made landfall in southern Louisiana last week, the storm provided a rare break in one of the longest periods of hurricane inactivity in U.S. history. Seeking to deflect attention away from this comforting trend, global warming alarmists attempted a high-profile head fake, making public statements that the decline in recent hurricane activity masked an increase in strong, damaging hurricanes.
“The hurricanes that really matter, that cause damage, are increasing,” John Abraham, a mechanical engineer on the staff of little-known University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota, told Discovery News.
Normally, of course, the subjective global climate opinions of a mechanical engineer at an obscure Minnesota university wouldn’t be national news. However, global warming alarmists put Abraham forward as the point man for their self-proclaimed Climate Science Rapid Response Team. But hey, if Abraham is the best they can do, so be it.
Abraham says major hurricanes are the only ones that really matter, and that major hurricanes are increasing. If that is indeed so, then we might have a cause for concern. Let’s go straight to the data to find out if major hurricanes are indeed increasing.
The National Hurricane Center (NHC) provides information on major U.S. hurricanes during the past 100-plus years.According to the NHC, 70 major hurricanes struck the United States in the 100 years between 1911 and 2010. That is an average of 7 major hurricane strikes per decade. What are the trends within this 100-year span? Let’s take a look.
Let’s split the 100-year hurricane record in half, starting with major hurricane strikes during the most recent 50 years.
During the most recent decade, 2001-2010, 7 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is exactly the 100-year average.
During the preceding decade, 1991-2000, 6 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is below the 100-year average.
During the decade 1981-1990, 4 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is substantially below the 100-year average, and ties the least number of major hurricanes on record.
During the decade 1971-1980, 4 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is substantially below the 100-year average, and ties 1981-1990 as the two decades with the least number of major hurricanes.
During the decade 1961-1970, 7 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is exactly the 100-year average.
Incredibly, not a single decade during the past 50 years saw an above-average number of major hurricanes – not a single decade!
Now let’s look at the preceding 50 years in the hurricane record, before the alleged human-induced global warming crisis.
During the decade 1951-1960, 9 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is above the 100-year average.
During the decade 1941-1950, 11 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is substantially above the 100-year average.
During the decade 1931-1940, 8 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is above the 100-year average.
During the decade 1921-1930, 6 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is slightly below the 100-year average.
During the decade 1911-1920, 8 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is above the 100-year average.
Global warming alarmists and mechanical engineers at obscure Minnesota universities may lie, but the objective data do not lie. During the past 5 decades, an average of 5.6 major hurricanes struck the United States. During the preceding 5 decades, and average of 8.4 major hurricanes struck the United States.
“The hurricanes that really matter, that cause damage” are not increasing. Hard, objective data show exactly the opposite. Indeed, during the past 4 decades, the time period during which global warming alarmists claim human-induced global warming accelerated rapidly and became incontrovertible, the fewest number of major hurricanes struck during any 40-year period since at least the 1800s.
Oh, and during the first two years of this current decade exactly zero major hurricanes struck the United States.
Global warming alarmists better hope we start seeing a rash of major hurricanes pretty soon if this is not going to be the quietest decade on record. Until and unless that happens, the objective data show the Climate Science Rapid Response Team is actually the Climate Science Rapid Propaganda Team.
But hey, if that’s the best they can do, so be it.
Story 3: Federal Bureau of Investigation Engages In Criminal Activity in Leaking and Spying on Carter Page — The Dirty Cops and Corrupt Lawyers Are Going Down — Videos
Strzok-Page texts reveal others were ‘leaking like mad’
Dershowitz on Strzok, Page ‘media leaking strategy’
New Strzok texts indicate more gov’t leaks amid Russia probe
Peter Strzok Facing 10 Years – New Texts Reveal Secret Criminal Leaks with CIA “Our Sisters”
Joe diGenova: Walls closing in on Obama DOJ officials
TUCKER CARLSON FOX NEWS TONIGHT SEP 13, 2018 I FOX NEWS 9/13/18
Tucker: Rot is at the highest levels of law enforcement
Graham STEAM ROLLS Sessions and Renews Calls for a Second Special Counsel
Strzok denies allegations he coordinated media leak strategy
Rep. Jordan: Strzok’s argument doesn’t hold water
Fitton on New Strzok-Page Texts: ‘Corrupted’ Mueller Probe Needs to Be Shut Down
New Strzok-Page texts reveal ‘media leak strategy’
Story 1: U-3 Unemployment Rate 3.9 Percent and Labor Participation Rate 62.7 Percent with 201,000 Jobs Created in August 2018 — Well Below 66-67 Percent Labor Participation Rate in Clinton and Bush Administration — Boom Lite — Videos
Job growth surges in August
NEC’s Kudlow on Jobs Report, China Trade, White House Op-Ed
U.S. adds 201,000 jobs in August
Defining the Unemployment Rate
Frictional Unemployment
Cyclical Unemployment
Structural Unemployment
Labor Force Participation
Information and Incentives
For millions, underemployment is a new normal
US job growth surges with largest wage growth since 2009 – 247 news
What to expect from the monthly U.S. jobs report
Unemployment rate and labor force participation rate
Unemployment and the Unemployment Rate
John Williams – Fed Flirting With Massive Sell-off in Dollar
John Williams – 2007 Crisis: The Fed Saved the Banks, Not the Economy
Unemployment Game Show – Are you Officially Unemployed? | Mint Personal Finance Software
Generations X, Y, and Z: Which One Are You?
Millennials in the Workforce, A Generation of Weakness – Simon Sinek
After Skool
Published on Jan 5, 2017
Why Can’t Young People Find Jobs?
Why Millennials Aren’t Getting Jobs | Archives | CNBC
Baby Boomers have long been the generation that defined how Americans spend, save and borrow money. Now Millennials have taken over as the largest living generational group. Will the selfie generation redefine America’s relationship with money?
Baby Boomers vs. Millennials
Jordan Peterson’s Most Shocking Message!
Jordan Peterson’s Warning to America! (2018)
A Shocking Revelation for America!
Not In Labor Force
96,290,000
Series Id: LNS15000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Not in Labor Force
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
69142
69120
69338
69267
69853
69876
70398
70401
70645
70782
70579
70488
2001
70088
70409
70381
70956
71414
71592
71526
72136
71676
71817
71876
72010
2002
72623
72010
72343
72281
72260
72600
72827
72856
72554
73026
73508
73675
2003
73960
74015
74295
74066
74268
73958
74767
75062
75249
75324
75280
75780
2004
75319
75648
75606
75907
75903
75735
75730
76113
76526
76399
76259
76581
2005
76808
76677
76846
76514
76409
76673
76721
76642
76739
76958
77138
77394
2006
77339
77122
77161
77318
77359
77317
77535
77451
77757
77634
77499
77376
2007
77506
77851
77982
78818
78810
78671
78904
79461
79047
79532
79105
79238
2008
78554
79156
79087
79429
79102
79314
79395
79466
79790
79736
80189
80380
2009
80529
80374
80953
80762
80705
80938
81367
81780
82495
82766
82865
83813
2010
83349
83304
83206
82707
83409
84075
84199
84014
84347
84895
84590
85240
2011
85441
85637
85623
85603
85834
86144
86383
86111
85940
86308
86312
86589
2012
87888
87765
87855
88239
88100
88073
88405
88803
88613
88429
88836
88722
2013
88900
89516
89990
89780
89827
89803
90156
90355
90481
91708
91302
91563
2014
91557
91559
91150
92036
92058
92072
92012
92105
92428
92274
92390
92726
2015
92660
93165
93326
93214
93006
93592
93841
93963
94625
94403
94312
93893
2016
94010
93766
93515
94049
94662
94421
94413
94340
94357
94621
94996
95006
2017
94364
94248
94179
94407
95038
94743
94684
94759
94480
95395
95416
95512
2018
95665
95012
95335
95745
95915
95502
95598
96290
Civilian Labor Force Level
161,776,000
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Series Id: LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status: Civilian labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Download:
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
142267(1)
142456
142434
142751
142388
142591
142278
142514
142518
142622
142962
143248
2001
143800
143701
143924
143569
143318
143357
143654
143284
143989
144086
144240
144305
2002
143883
144653
144481
144725
144938
144808
144803
145009
145552
145314
145041
145066
2003
145937(1)
146100
146022
146474
146500
147056
146485
146445
146530
146716
147000
146729
2004
146842(1)
146709
146944
146850
147065
147460
147692
147564
147415
147793
148162
148059
2005
148029(1)
148364
148391
148926
149261
149238
149432
149779
149954
150001
150065
150030
2006
150214(1)
150641
150813
150881
151069
151354
151377
151716
151662
152041
152406
152732
2007
153144(1)
152983
153051
152435
152670
153041
153054
152749
153414
153183
153835
153918
2008
154063(1)
153653
153908
153769
154303
154313
154469
154641
154570
154876
154639
154655
2009
154210(1)
154538
154133
154509
154747
154716
154502
154307
153827
153784
153878
153111
2010
153484(1)
153694
153954
154622
154091
153616
153691
154086
153975
153635
154125
153650
2011
153263(1)
153214
153376
153543
153479
153346
153288
153760
154131
153961
154128
153995
2012
154381(1)
154671
154749
154545
154866
155083
154948
154763
155160
155554
155338
155628
2013
155763(1)
155312
155005
155394
155536
155749
155599
155605
155687
154673
155265
155182
2014
155357(1)
155526
156108
155404
155564
155742
156011
156124
156019
156383
156455
156301
2015
157063(1)
156734
156754
157051
157449
157071
157035
157132
156700
157138
157435
158043
2016
158387(1)
158811
159253
158919
158512
158976
159207
159514
159734
159700
159544
159736
2017
159718(1)
159997
160235
160181
159729
160214
160467
160598
161082
160371
160533
160597
2018
161115(1)
161921
161763
161527
161539
162140
162245
161776
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.
Employment Level
155,542,000
Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
136559(1)
136598
136701
137270
136630
136940
136531
136662
136893
137088
137322
137614
2001
137778
137612
137783
137299
137092
136873
137071
136241
136846
136392
136238
136047
2002
135701
136438
136177
136126
136539
136415
136413
136705
137302
137008
136521
136426
2003
137417(1)
137482
137434
137633
137544
137790
137474
137549
137609
137984
138424
138411
2004
138472(1)
138542
138453
138680
138852
139174
139556
139573
139487
139732
140231
140125
2005
140245(1)
140385
140654
141254
141609
141714
142026
142434
142401
142548
142499
142752
2006
143150(1)
143457
143741
143761
144089
144353
144202
144625
144815
145314
145534
145970
2007
146028(1)
146057
146320
145586
145903
146063
145905
145682
146244
145946
146595
146273
2008
146378(1)
146156
146086
146132
145908
145737
145532
145203
145076
144802
144100
143369
2009
142152(1)
141640
140707
140656
140248
140009
139901
139492
138818
138432
138659
138013
2010
138438(1)
138581
138751
139297
139241
139141
139179
139438
139396
139119
139044
139301
2011
139250(1)
139394
139639
139586
139624
139384
139524
139942
140183
140368
140826
140902
2012
141584(1)
141858
142036
141899
142206
142391
142292
142291
143044
143431
143333
143330
2013
143292(1)
143362
143316
143635
143882
143999
144264
144326
144418
143537
144479
144778
2014
145122(1)
145161
145673
145680
145825
146267
146401
146522
146752
147411
147391
147597
2015
148113(1)
148100
148175
148505
148788
148806
148830
149136
148810
149254
149486
150135
2016
150576(1)
151005
151229
150978
151048
151164
151484
151687
151815
151939
152126
152233
2017
152076(1)
152511
153064
153161
152892
153250
153511
153471
154324
153846
153917
154021
2018
154430(1)
155215
155178
155181
155474
155576
155965
155542
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.
Employment Population Ratio
60.3%
Series Id: LNS12300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment-Population Ratio
Labor force status: Employment-population ratio
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
64.6
64.6
64.6
64.7
64.4
64.5
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.3
64.4
2001
64.4
64.3
64.3
64.0
63.8
63.7
63.7
63.2
63.5
63.2
63.0
62.9
2002
62.7
63.0
62.8
62.7
62.9
62.7
62.7
62.7
63.0
62.7
62.5
62.4
2003
62.5
62.5
62.4
62.4
62.3
62.3
62.1
62.1
62.0
62.1
62.3
62.2
2004
62.3
62.3
62.2
62.3
62.3
62.4
62.5
62.4
62.3
62.3
62.5
62.4
2005
62.4
62.4
62.4
62.7
62.8
62.7
62.8
62.9
62.8
62.8
62.7
62.8
2006
62.9
63.0
63.1
63.0
63.1
63.1
63.0
63.1
63.1
63.3
63.3
63.4
2007
63.3
63.3
63.3
63.0
63.0
63.0
62.9
62.7
62.9
62.7
62.9
62.7
2008
62.9
62.8
62.7
62.7
62.5
62.4
62.2
62.0
61.9
61.7
61.4
61.0
2009
60.6
60.3
59.9
59.8
59.6
59.4
59.3
59.1
58.7
58.5
58.6
58.3
2010
58.5
58.5
58.5
58.7
58.6
58.5
58.5
58.6
58.5
58.3
58.2
58.3
2011
58.3
58.4
58.4
58.4
58.3
58.2
58.2
58.3
58.4
58.4
58.6
58.6
2012
58.4
58.5
58.5
58.4
58.5
58.6
58.5
58.4
58.7
58.8
58.7
58.7
2013
58.6
58.6
58.5
58.6
58.6
58.6
58.7
58.7
58.7
58.3
58.6
58.7
2014
58.8
58.7
58.9
58.9
58.9
59.0
59.0
59.0
59.1
59.3
59.2
59.3
2015
59.3
59.3
59.3
59.3
59.4
59.4
59.3
59.4
59.2
59.3
59.4
59.6
2016
59.7
59.8
59.8
59.7
59.7
59.7
59.7
59.8
59.7
59.7
59.8
59.8
2017
59.9
60.0
60.2
60.2
60.0
60.1
60.2
60.1
60.4
60.2
60.1
60.1
2018
60.1
60.4
60.4
60.3
60.4
60.4
60.5
60.3
Unemployment Level
6,234,000
Series Id: LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Download:
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
5708
5858
5733
5481
5758
5651
5747
5853
5625
5534
5639
5634
2001
6023
6089
6141
6271
6226
6484
6583
7042
7142
7694
8003
8258
2002
8182
8215
8304
8599
8399
8393
8390
8304
8251
8307
8520
8640
2003
8520
8618
8588
8842
8957
9266
9011
8896
8921
8732
8576
8317
2004
8370
8167
8491
8170
8212
8286
8136
7990
7927
8061
7932
7934
2005
7784
7980
7737
7672
7651
7524
7406
7345
7553
7453
7566
7279
2006
7064
7184
7072
7120
6980
7001
7175
7091
6847
6727
6872
6762
2007
7116
6927
6731
6850
6766
6979
7149
7067
7170
7237
7240
7645
2008
7685
7497
7822
7637
8395
8575
8937
9438
9494
10074
10538
11286
2009
12058
12898
13426
13853
14499
14707
14601
14814
15009
15352
15219
15098
2010
15046
15113
15202
15325
14849
14474
14512
14648
14579
14516
15081
14348
2011
14013
13820
13737
13957
13855
13962
13763
13818
13948
13594
13302
13093
2012
12797
12813
12713
12646
12660
12692
12656
12471
12115
12124
12005
12298
2013
12471
11950
11689
11760
11654
11751
11335
11279
11270
11136
10787
10404
2014
10235
10365
10435
9724
9740
9474
9610
9602
9266
8972
9064
8704
2015
8951
8634
8578
8546
8662
8265
8206
7996
7891
7884
7948
7907
2016
7811
7806
8024
7942
7465
7812
7723
7827
7919
7761
7419
7502
2017
7642
7486
7171
7021
6837
6964
6956
7127
6759
6524
6616
6576
2018
6684
6706
6585
6346
6065
6564
6280
6234
U-3 Unemployment Rate
3.9%
Series Id: LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Download:
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
4.0
4.1
4.0
3.8
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.1
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
2001
4.2
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.3
4.5
4.6
4.9
5.0
5.3
5.5
5.7
2002
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.9
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.9
6.0
2003
5.8
5.9
5.9
6.0
6.1
6.3
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.0
5.8
5.7
2004
5.7
5.6
5.8
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.5
5.4
5.4
5.5
5.4
5.4
2005
5.3
5.4
5.2
5.2
5.1
5.0
5.0
4.9
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.9
2006
4.7
4.8
4.7
4.7
4.6
4.6
4.7
4.7
4.5
4.4
4.5
4.4
2007
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.5
4.4
4.6
4.7
4.6
4.7
4.7
4.7
5.0
2008
5.0
4.9
5.1
5.0
5.4
5.6
5.8
6.1
6.1
6.5
6.8
7.3
2009
7.8
8.3
8.7
9.0
9.4
9.5
9.5
9.6
9.8
10.0
9.9
9.9
2010
9.8
9.8
9.9
9.9
9.6
9.4
9.4
9.5
9.5
9.4
9.8
9.3
2011
9.1
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.0
9.1
9.0
9.0
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.5
2012
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.1
7.8
7.8
7.7
7.9
2013
8.0
7.7
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.2
6.9
6.7
2014
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.3
6.3
6.1
6.2
6.2
5.9
5.7
5.8
5.6
2015
5.7
5.5
5.5
5.4
5.5
5.3
5.2
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2016
4.9
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.7
4.9
4.9
4.9
5.0
4.9
4.6
4.7
2017
4.8
4.7
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.2
4.1
4.1
4.1
2018
4.1
4.1
4.1
3.9
3.8
4.0
3.9
3.9
Not in Labor Force
96,290,000
Series Id: LNS15000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Not in Labor Force
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
69142
69120
69338
69267
69853
69876
70398
70401
70645
70782
70579
70488
2001
70088
70409
70381
70956
71414
71592
71526
72136
71676
71817
71876
72010
2002
72623
72010
72343
72281
72260
72600
72827
72856
72554
73026
73508
73675
2003
73960
74015
74295
74066
74268
73958
74767
75062
75249
75324
75280
75780
2004
75319
75648
75606
75907
75903
75735
75730
76113
76526
76399
76259
76581
2005
76808
76677
76846
76514
76409
76673
76721
76642
76739
76958
77138
77394
2006
77339
77122
77161
77318
77359
77317
77535
77451
77757
77634
77499
77376
2007
77506
77851
77982
78818
78810
78671
78904
79461
79047
79532
79105
79238
2008
78554
79156
79087
79429
79102
79314
79395
79466
79790
79736
80189
80380
2009
80529
80374
80953
80762
80705
80938
81367
81780
82495
82766
82865
83813
2010
83349
83304
83206
82707
83409
84075
84199
84014
84347
84895
84590
85240
2011
85441
85637
85623
85603
85834
86144
86383
86111
85940
86308
86312
86589
2012
87888
87765
87855
88239
88100
88073
88405
88803
88613
88429
88836
88722
2013
88900
89516
89990
89780
89827
89803
90156
90355
90481
91708
91302
91563
2014
91557
91559
91150
92036
92058
92072
92012
92105
92428
92274
92390
92726
2015
92660
93165
93326
93214
93006
93592
93841
93963
94625
94403
94312
93893
2016
94010
93766
93515
94049
94662
94421
94413
94340
94357
94621
94996
95006
2017
94364
94248
94179
94407
95038
94743
94684
94759
94480
95395
95416
95512
2018
95665
95012
95335
95745
95915
95502
95598
96290
U-6 Unemployment Rate
7.4%
Series Id: LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status: Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Percent/rates: Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
2000
7.1
7.2
7.1
6.9
7.1
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.0
6.8
7.1
6.9
2001
7.3
7.4
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.9
7.8
8.1
8.7
9.3
9.4
9.6
2002
9.5
9.5
9.4
9.7
9.5
9.5
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.7
9.8
2003
10.0
10.2
10.0
10.2
10.1
10.3
10.3
10.1
10.4
10.2
10.0
9.8
2004
9.9
9.7
10.0
9.6
9.6
9.5
9.5
9.4
9.4
9.7
9.4
9.2
2005
9.3
9.3
9.1
8.9
8.9
9.0
8.8
8.9
9.0
8.7
8.7
8.6
2006
8.4
8.4
8.2
8.1
8.2
8.4
8.5
8.4
8.0
8.2
8.1
7.9
2007
8.4
8.2
8.0
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.8
2008
9.2
9.0
9.1
9.2
9.7
10.1
10.5
10.8
11.0
11.8
12.6
13.6
2009
14.2
15.2
15.8
15.9
16.5
16.5
16.4
16.7
16.7
17.1
17.1
17.1
2010
16.7
17.0
17.1
17.1
16.6
16.4
16.4
16.5
16.8
16.6
16.9
16.6
2011
16.2
16.0
15.9
16.1
15.8
16.1
15.9
16.1
16.4
15.8
15.5
15.2
2012
15.2
15.0
14.5
14.6
14.7
14.8
14.8
14.6
14.8
14.4
14.4
14.4
2013
14.6
14.4
13.8
14.0
13.8
14.2
13.8
13.6
13.5
13.6
13.1
13.1
2014
12.7
12.7
12.7
12.3
12.1
12.0
12.1
11.9
11.7
11.5
11.4
11.2
2015
11.3
11.0
10.9
10.9
10.8
10.4
10.3
10.2
10.0
9.8
9.9
9.9
2016
9.9
9.7
9.8
9.8
9.8
9.5
9.7
9.6
9.7
9.6
9.3
9.1
2017
9.4
9.2
8.8
8.6
8.4
8.5
8.5
8.6
8.3
8.0
8.0
8.1
2018
8.2
8.2
8.0
7.8
7.6
7.8
7.5
7.4
Unemployment Rate by Year Since 1929 Compared to Inflation and GDP
The unemployment rate by year is the percent of unemployed in the labor force. It tracks the health of the country’s economy. Unemployment rises during recessions and falls during prosperity. It also declined during the five U.S. wars, especially World War II. It rose again in the recessions that follow wars.
The highest rate of U.S. unemployment was 24.9 percent in 1933. That was during the Great Depression.
Unemployment was more than 14 percent from 1931 to 1940. Unemployment remained in the single digits until 1982 when it reached 10.8 percent. The annual unemployment rate reached 9.9 percent in 2009, during the Great Recession.
The lowest unemployment rate was 1.2 percent in 1944. You may think that unemployment can’t get too low, but it can. Even in a healthy economy, there should always be a natural rate of unemployment. That’s because people move before they get a new job, they are getting retrained for a better job, or they have just started looking for work and are waiting until they find just the right job. Even when the unemployment rate is 4 percent, it’s difficult for companies to expand because they have a hard time finding good workers.
In return, jobless workers have less to spend. Lower consumer spending reduces business revenue. That forces companies to cut more payroll to reduce their costs. This downward cycle is devastating.
Keep in mind that the unemployment rate is a lagging indicator. This means it continues to worsen even after economic growth improves.
Companies hesitant about hiring workers back until they are sure growth is on a stable upward trend.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has measured unemployment since 1929. That’s why the table below shows the unemployment rate for every year since the stock market crash of 1929. Comparing unemployment by year to fiscal and monetary policies provides a complete picture of what works and what doesn’t.
U.S. Unemployment Rate by Year Compared to GDP Growth Rate, Inflation, and Major Events
The natural rate of unemployment is a combination of frictional, structural, and surplus unemployment. Even a healthy economy will have this level of unemployment because workers are always coming and going, looking for better jobs. This jobless status, until they find that new job, is the natural rate of unemployment.
The Federal Reserve estimates this rate to be between 4.5 percent and 5.0 percent. Both fiscal and monetary policymakers use that rate as the goal of full employment. They use 2 percent as the target inflation rate. They also consider the ideal GDP growth rate to be between 2 percent and 3 percent. They must try to balance these three goals when setting interest rates. The Fed encourages Congress to consider all three goals when setting tax rates or spending levels.
Three Components of the Natural Rate of Unemployment
Even in a healthy economy, there is some level of unemployment for three reasons.
Frictional Unemployment – Some workers are in between jobs. Examples are new graduates looking for their first job. Others are workers who move to a new town without lining up another position. Some people quit abruptly, knowing they’ll get a better job shortly. Still, others might decide to leave the workforce for personal reasons such as retirement, pregnancy or sickness. They drop out of the labor force. When they return and start looking again, the BEA counts them as unemployed.
Structural Unemployment – As the economy evolves, there is an unavoidable mismatch between workers’ job skills and employers’ needs. It happens when workers are displaced by technology, as when robots take over manufacturing jobs. It also occurs when factories move to cheaper locations. That’s what happened after the North American Free Trade Agreement was signed. When baby boomers reached their 30s and had fewer children, there was less need for daycare workers. Structural unemployment remains until workers receive new training.
Surplus Unemployment – This occurs whenever the government intervenes with minimum wage laws or wage/price controls. It can also happen with unions. Why? Employers must pay the mandated wage while keeping within their payroll budget. The only way to do this is to let some workers go. It’s the consequence of an unfunded mandate.
The only way an economy could have a zero percent unemployment rate is if it is severely overheated. Even then, wages would probably rise before unemployment fell to absolute zero.
The United States has never experienced zero unemployment. The lowest rate was 2.5 percent in May and June 1953. It occurred because the economy overheated during to the Korean War. When this bubble burst, it kicked off the recession of 1953.
Why the Recession Didn’t Raise the Natural Unemployment Rate
The financial crisis of 2008 wiped out a staggering 8.3 million jobs. The unemployment rate rose from 4.7 percent to 10.1 percent at its peak in 2009. This considerable loss meant that many of the unemployed stayed that way for six months or more. Long-term unemployment made it even more difficult for them to get back to work. Their skills and experience became outdated, leading to structural unemployment.
Does this mean that the recession would leave, as its legacy, a higher natural rate of unemployment? Research done by the Cleveland Federal Reserve said yes, this could be the case. That’s because job turnover slowed. Throughout the recession, those with jobs were less likely to leave them. In fact, by 2011, the separation rate was as low as it was during the boom before the recession.
The reasons were different though. During the boom, people didn’t leave jobs because they liked them and received good wages. Employers had a difficult time finding new employees, so they made sure the workers were happy. During the recession, workers were afraid to leave and look for better employment. They put up with long hours and no raises to keep their jobs.
The natural rate of unemployment typically rises after a recession. Frictional unemployment increases since workers can finally quit their jobs, confident they can find a better one now that the recession is over. Structural unemployment rises when workers have been unemployed for so long their skills no longer match the needs of businesses.
Between 2009 and 2012, the natural rate of unemployment rose from 4.9 percent to 5.5 percent. That was higher than during the recession itself. Researchers grew concerned that the length and depth of the recession meant the natural rate would remain elevated. But by 2014, it had fallen to 4.8 percent. (Source: “Natural Rate of Unemployment,” St. Louis Federal Reserve, March 22, 2017.)
The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.
The U-3 unemployment rate is the monthly headline number. The U-6 unemployment rate is the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) broadest unemployment measure, including short-term discouraged and other marginally-attached workers as well as those forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment.
Transmission of material in this news release is embargoed until USDL-18-1412
8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, September 7, 2018
Technical information:
Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/ces
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- AUGUST 2018
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 201,000 in August, and the unemployment
rate was unchanged at 3.9 percent,the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Job gains occurred in professional and business services, health care, wholesale trade,
transportation and warehousing, and mining.
Household Survey Data
The unemployment rate remained at 3.9 percent in August, and the number of unemployed
persons, at 6.2 million, changed little. (See table A-1.)
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (3.5 percent),
adult women (3.6 percent), teenagers (12.8 percent), Whites (3.4 percent), Blacks
(6.3 percent), Asians (3.0 percent), and Hispanics (4.7 percent) showed little or no
change in August. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little
changed in August at 1.3 million and accounted for 21.5 percent of the unemployed.
Over the year, the number of long-term unemployed has declined by 403,000. (See
table A-12.)
Both the labor force participation rate, at 62.7 percent, and the employment-population
ratio, at 60.3 percent, declined by 0.2 percentage point in August. (See table A-1.)
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as
involuntary part-time workers), at 4.4 million, changed little over the month but was
down by 830,000 over the year. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time
employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were
unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.)
In August, 1.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, little
different from a year earlier. (Data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals
were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a
job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they
had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)
Among the marginally attached, there were 434,000 discouraged workers in August,
essentially unchanged from a year earlier. (Data are not seasonally adjusted.)
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe
no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.0 million persons marginally attached
to the labor force in August had not searched for work for reasons such as school
attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)
Establishment Survey Data
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 201,000 in August, in line with the
average monthly gain of 196,000 over the prior 12 months. Over the month, employment
increased in professional and business services, health care, wholesale trade,
transportation and warehousing, and mining. (See table B-1.)
Professional and business services added 53,000 jobs in August and 519,000 jobs over
the year.
In August, health care employment rose by 33,000, with job gains in ambulatory health
care services (+21,000) and hospitals (+8,000). Health care has added 301,000 jobs over
the year.
Wholesale trade employment increased by 22,000 in August and by 99,000 over the year.
Durable goods wholesalers added 14,000 jobs over the month and accounted for about
two-thirds of the over-the-year job gain in wholesale trade.
Employment in transportation and warehousing rose by 20,000 in August and by 173,000
over the past 12 months. Within the industry, couriers and messengers added 4,000 jobs
in August.
Mining employment increased by 6,000 in August, after showing little change in July.
Since a recent trough in October 2016, the industry has added 104,000 jobs, almost
entirely in support activities for mining.
Employment in construction continued to trend up in August (+23,000) and has increased
by 297,000 over the year.
Manufacturing employment changed little in August (-3,000). Over the year, employment
in the industry was up by 254,000, with more than three-fourths of the gain in the
durable goods component.
Employment showed little change over the month in other major industries, including
retail trade, information, financial activities, leisure and hospitality, and
government.
The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at
34.5 hours in August. In manufacturing, the workweek held steady at 41.0 hours, and
overtime was unchanged at 3.5 hours. The average workweek for production and
nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls was 33.8 hours for the fifth
consecutive month. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)
In August, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose
by 10 cents to $27.16. Over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 77
cents, or 2.9 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and
nonsupervisory employees increased by 7 cents to $22.73 in August. (See tables B-3
and B-8.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for June was revised down from +248,000
to +208,000, and the change for July was revised down from +157,000 to +147,000. With
these revisions, employment gains in June and July combined were 50,000 less than
previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from
businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the
recalculation of seasonal factors.) After revisions, job gains have averaged 185,000
per month over the last 3 months.
_____________
The Employment Situation for September is scheduled to be released on Friday,
October 5, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
HOUSEHOLD DATA
Summary table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted[Numbers in thousands]
Category
Aug.
2017
June
2018
July
2018
Aug.
2018
Change from:
July
2018-
Aug.
2018
Employment status
Civilian noninstitutional population
255,357
257,642
257,843
258,066
223
Civilian labor force
160,598
162,140
162,245
161,776
-469
Participation rate
62.9
62.9
62.9
62.7
-0.2
Employed
153,471
155,576
155,965
155,542
-423
Employment-population ratio
60.1
60.4
60.5
60.3
-0.2
Unemployed
7,127
6,564
6,280
6,234
-46
Unemployment rate
4.4
4.0
3.9
3.9
0.0
Not in labor force
94,759
95,502
95,598
96,290
692
Unemployment rates
Total, 16 years and over
4.4
4.0
3.9
3.9
0.0
Adult men (20 years and over)
4.1
3.7
3.4
3.5
0.1
Adult women (20 years and over)
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.6
-0.1
Teenagers (16 to 19 years)
13.8
12.6
13.1
12.8
-0.3
White
3.8
3.5
3.4
3.4
0.0
Black or African American
7.6
6.5
6.6
6.3
-0.3
Asian
3.9
3.2
3.1
3.0
-0.1
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity
5.1
4.6
4.5
4.7
0.2
Total, 25 years and over
3.7
3.3
3.2
3.2
0.0
Less than a high school diploma
6.2
5.5
5.1
5.7
0.6
High school graduates, no college
5.0
4.2
4.0
3.9
-0.1
Some college or associate degree
3.8
3.3
3.2
3.5
0.3
Bachelor’s degree and higher
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.1
-0.1
Reason for unemployment
Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs
3,497
3,065
3,017
2,875
-142
Job leavers
790
811
844
862
18
Reentrants
2,137
2,086
1,799
1,846
47
New entrants
653
578
591
584
-7
Duration of unemployment
Less than 5 weeks
2,221
2,227
2,091
2,208
117
5 to 14 weeks
1,996
1,882
1,820
1,720
-100
15 to 26 weeks
1,067
836
971
923
-48
27 weeks and over
1,735
1,478
1,435
1,332
-103
Employed persons at work part time
Part time for economic reasons
5,209
4,743
4,567
4,379
-188
Slack work or business conditions
3,232
3,042
2,877
2,551
-326
Could only find part-time work
1,631
1,447
1,431
1,365
-66
Part time for noneconomic reasons
21,468
21,304
21,532
21,781
249
Persons not in the labor force (not seasonally adjusted)
Marginally attached to the labor force
1,548
1,437
1,498
1,443
–
Discouraged workers
448
359
512
434
–
– Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.
Footnotes (1) Includes other industries, not shown separately.
(2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries.
(3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours.
(4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls.
(5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment.
(P) Preliminary
NOTE: Data have been revised to reflect March 2017 benchmark levels and updated seasonal adjustment factors.
Dr. Jill Novak, University of Phoenix, Texas A&M University.
In America, there are six living generations, which are six fairly distinct groups of people. As a generalization each generation has different likes, dislikes, and attributes. They have had collective experiences as they aged and therefore have similar ideals. A person’s birth date may not always be indicative of their generational characteristics, but as a common group they have similarities.
The six living generations
GI Generation.
Born 1901-1926.
Children of the WWI generation & fighters in WWII & young in the Great Depression…all leading to strong models of teamwork to overcome and progress.
Their Depression was The Great One; their war was The Big One; their prosperity was the legendary Happy Days.
They saved the world and then built a nation.
They are the assertive and energetic do’ers.
Excellent team players.
Community-minded.
Strongly interested in personal morality and near-absolute standards of right and wrong.
Strong sense of personal civic duty, which means they vote.
Marriage is for life, divorce and having children out of wedlock were not accepted.
Strong loyalty to jobs, groups, schools, etc.
There was no “retirement” you worked until your died or couldn’t work anymore.
The labor-union-spawning generation.
“Use it up, fix it up, make it do, or do without.”
Avoid debt…save and buy with cash.
Age of radio and air flight; they were the generation that remembers life without airplanes, radio, and TV.
Most of them grew up without modern conveniences like refrigerators, electricity and air conditioning.
Sometimes called The Greatest Generation.
Mature/Silents.
Born 1927- 1945.
Went through their formative years during an era of suffocating conformity, but also during the postwar happiness: Peace! Jobs! Suburbs! Television! Rock ‘n Roll! Cars! Playboy Magazine!
Korean and Vietnam War generation.
The First Hopeful Drumbeats of Civil Rights!
Pre-feminism women; women stayed home generally to raise children, if they worked it was only certain jobs like teacher, nurse or secretary.
Men pledged loyalty to the corporation, once you got a job, you generally kept it for life.
The richest, most free-spending retirees in history.
Marriage is for life, divorce and having children out of wedlock were not accepted.
In grade school, the gravest teacher complaints were about passing notes and chewing gum in class.
They are avid readers, especially newspapers.
“Retirement” means to sit in a rocking chair and live your final days in peace.
The Big-Band/Swing music generation.
Strong sense of trans-generational common values and near-absolute truths.
Disciplined, self-sacrificing, & cautious.
Baby Boomers
Baby boomers are the demographic of people who were born just after the Second World War; this would give the baby boomer generation an approximate date of between 1946 and 1964 . World war two ended in a 1945, and as a rule of thumb baby boomers are the children who are born as the war ended, as families settled down again. More >>
Born between 1946 and 1964. Two sub-sets:
1. the save-the-world revolutionaries of the ’60s and ’70s;
and 2. the party-hardy career climbers (Yuppies) of the ’70s/’80s.
The “me” generation.
“Rock and roll” music generation.
Ushered in the free love and societal “non-violent” protests which triggered violence.
Self righteous & self-centered.
Buy it now and use credit.
Too busy for much neighborly involvement yet strong desires to reset or change the common values for the good of all.
Even though their mothers were generally housewives, responsible for all child rearing, women of this generation began working outside the home in record numbers, thereby changing the entire nation as this was the first generation to have their own children raised in a two-income household where mom was not omnipresent.
The first TV generation.
The first divorce generation, where divorce was beginning to be accepted as a tolerable reality.
Began accepting homosexuals.
Optimistic, driven, team-oriented.
Envision technology and innovation as requiring a learning process.
Tend to be more positive about authority, hierarchal structure and tradition.
One of the largest generations in history with 77 million people.
Their aging will change America almost incomprehensibly; they are the first generation to use the word “retirement” to mean being able to enjoy life after the children have left home. Instead of sitting in a rocking chair, they go skydiving, exercise and take up hobbies, which increases their longevity.
The American Youth Culture that began with them is now ending with them and their activism is beginning to re-emerge.
Generation X.
Born between 1965 and 1980*
The “latch-key kids” grew up street-smart but isolated, often with divorced or career-driven parents. Latch-Key came from the house key kids wore around their neck, because they would go home from school to an empty house.
Entrepreneurial.
Very individualistic.
Government and big business mean little to them.
Want to save the neighborhood, not the world
Feel misunderstood by other generations
Cynical of many major institutions, which failed their parents, or them, during their formative years and are therefore eager to make marriage work and “be there” for their children
Don’t “feel” like a generation, but they are
Raised in the transition phase of written based knowledge to digital knowledge archives; most remember being in school without computers and then after the introduction of computers in middle school or high school
Desire a chance to learn, explore and make a contribution
Tend to commit to self rather than an organization or specific career. This generation averages 7 career changes in their lifetime, it was not normal to work for a company for life, unlike previous generations.
Society and thus individuals are envisioned as disposable.
AIDS begins to spread and is first lethal infectious disease in the history of any culture on earth which was not subjected to any quarantine.
Beginning obsession of individual rights prevailing over the common good, especially if it is applicable to any type of minority group.
Raised by the career and money conscious Boomers amidst the societal disappointment over governmental authority and the Vietnam war.
School problems were about drugs.
Late to marry (after cohabitation) and quick to divorce…many single parents.
Into labels and brand names.
Want what they want and want it now but struggling to buy, and most are deeply in credit card debt.
It is has been researched that they may be conversationally shallow because relating consists of shared time watching video movies, instead of previous generations.
Short on loyalty & wary of commitment; all values are relative…must tolerate all peoples.
Self-absorbed and suspicious of all organization.
Survivors as individuals.
Cautious, skeptical, unimpressed with authority, self-reliant.
Generation Y/Millennium.
Born between 1981* and 2000*.
Aka “The 9/11 Generation” “Echo Boomers” America’s next great generation brings a sharp departure from Generation X.
They are nurtured by omnipresent parents, optimistic, and focused.
Respect authority.
Falling crime rates. Falling teen pregnancy rates. But with school safety problems; they have to live with the thought that they could be shot at school, they learned early that the world is not a safe place.
They schedule everything.
They feel enormous academic pressure.
They feel like a generation and have great expectations for themselves.
Prefer digital literacy as they grew up in a digital environment. Have never known a world without computers! They get all their information and most of their socialization from the Internet.
Prefer to work in teams.
With unlimited access to information tend to be assertive with strong views.
Envision the world as a 24/7 place; want fast and immediate processing.
They have been told over and over again that they are special, and they expect the world to treat them that way.
They do not live to work, they prefer a more relaxed work environment with a lot of hand holding and accolades.
Generation Z/Boomlets.
Born after 2001*
In 2006 there were a record number of births in the US and 49% of those born were Hispanic, this will change the American melting pot in terms of behavior and culture. The number of births in 2006 far outnumbered the start of the baby boom generation, and they will easily be a larger generation.
Since the early 1700’s the most common last name in the US was ‘Smith’ but not anymore, now it is Rodriguez.
There are two age groups right now:
(a) Tweens.
(a1) Age 8-12 years old.
(a2) There will be an estimated 29 million tweens by 2009.
(a3) $51 billion is spent by tweens every year with an additional $170 billion spent by their parents and family members directly for them.
(b)Toddler/Elementary school age.
61 percent of children 8-17 have televisions in their rooms.
35 percent have video games.
14 percent have a DVD player.
4 million will have their own cell phones. They have never known a world without computers and cell phones.
Have Eco-fatigue: they are actually tired of hearing about the environment and the many ways we have to save it.
With the advent of computers and web based learning, children leave behind toys at younger and younger age. It’s called KGOY-kids growing older younger, and many companies have suffered because of it, most recognizable is Mattel, the maker of Barbie dolls. In the 1990’s the average age of a child in their target market was 10 years old, and in 2000 it dropped to 3 years old. As children reach the age of four and five, old enough to play on the computer, they become less interested in toys and begin to desire electronics such as cell phones and video games.
They are Savvy consumers and they know what they want and how to get it and they are over saturated with brands.
Marketing Vox. (2008). Generation Z. Retrieved on February 14, 2008.
Parents. (December 2007). Check out this news. Parents Magazine, p.166.
This is only a guideline, remember that everyone is different and not everyone fits into this analysis, but for the most part you can generalize their behavior. As a marketer, it is important to know how to effectively communicate and market to these diverse generations. In understanding consumer behavior, you can create the right promotion, tailoring it specifically for each group’s needs and therefore effectively sell products and services.
The dates for GI, Mature, and Baby Boomer and the beginning of Gen X are set and do not change, the dates for the end of Gen X, Gen Y and Gen Z fluctuate depending on what source you are using.
Story 2: President Trump’s Plan B for Building U.S./Mexican Wall By Military with Defense Appropriations — Plan B for Betrayal of Trump Voters Expecting The Wall To Be Built By 2020 — Requires At Least $25 Billion In Congressional Appropriations To Complete Wall By 2020 — Completion Date is The Twelfth of Never — You Have Been Conned — Videos —
Trump Rolls Out a BRILLIANT Plan – The Military Will Build His Wall!
Should the military help build the border wall?
Should We Build the Wall? We Asked Trump Supporters.
Trump’s Budget: Builds Up Military, Builds Wall
Johnny Mathis – The Twelfth Of Never
Trump says he could use the MILITARY to build his wall if Congress won’t fund it through Homeland Security’s budget – and he won’t rule out another government shutdown to get his way
DailyMail.com asked the president on Air Force One if he was considering using the Army Corps of Engineers to build his border wall
Congress has been stingy with a Homeland Security budget for the project, providing barely $3 billion and leaving another $25 billion unfunded
Pentagon officials say the Corps of Engineers is suited to perform the work and Trump has boasted about budget increases he has won for the Pentagon
Trump says: ‘We have two options: We have military, we have homeland security’
He also said he won’t take a government shutdown off the table if Democrats on Capitol Hill keep playing hardball because of immigration politics
He believes a shutdown would be strategically and politically smart
But many Republican lawmakers are counseling patience because they fear being blamed for a shutdown in the final month of re-elecion campaigns
PUBLISHED: 19:36 EDT, 7 September 2018 | UPDATED: 23:51 EDT, 7 September 2018
President Donald Trump said Friday that he’s considering using military resources to finish construction of his long-promised border wall instead of relying on Congress to fund the project through the Homeland Security Department’s budget.
He also wouldn’t eliminate the possibility of a government shutdown if Democrats continue to confound his efforts to appropriate money for the project on the U.S.-Mexico border.
‘We have two options,’ he told DailyMail.com aboard Air Force One as he flew from Billings, Montana to Fargo, North Dakota. ‘We have military, we have homeland security.’
He was asked specifically about using the Army Corps of Engineers as a taxpayer-funded construction crew.
President Donald Trump said Friday that he’s considering using military resources to finish construction of his long-promised border wall, as he spoke to the press on Air Force One, above on Friday
‘We have two options,’ he told DailyMail.com aboard Air Force One as he flew from Billings, Montana to Fargo, North Dakota. ‘We have military, we have homeland security’
Trump said he would prefer to fund the ambitious construction ‘the old-fashioned way – get it from Congress – but I have other options if I have to.’
He’s seeking about $25 billion.
The possibility of diverting Pentagon funding and assets to build a border wall is a hole card the president is holding but has never directly acknowledged before.
Two Defense Department officials told DailyMail.com in August that the Army Corps of Engineers could take on the task.
‘They build levees that hold back massive walls of water,’ one said of the agency. ‘They can build one to hold back drugs and human traffickers.’
The White House appears headed for another confrontation with Congress over an increase in funding for the project after securing $1.6 billion for 2007 and the same amount for this year.
A senior White House official said Thursday that the money was ‘basically a down-payment on the thing’.
The possibility looms that the president will refuse to sign the next federal budget, due September 30, if lawmakers don’t go along with more installments. That would trigger a government shutdown.
‘If it were up – I don’t want to say “up to me,” because it is up to me – I would do it,’ he said aboard Air Force One, ‘because I think it’s a great political issue.’
But he said some Republicans in Congress, facing tough re-election fights, have counseled more patience.
‘They have races, they’re doing well, they’re up,’ Trump explained. ‘And you know, the way they look at it: might be good, might be bad.’
Typically the party in power, in this case the GOP, would shoulder most of the blame for interrupted government services. National security and military operations wouldn’t be affected.
Trump said he would prefer to fund the ambitious construction ‘the old-fashioned way – get it from Congress – but I have other options if I have to.’ he is pictured above speaking with the press on Air Force One on Friday
The Army Corps of Engineers are seen above in this file photo repairing damage to the middle breakwater caused by Hurricane Marie in Long Beach, California, in January 2015
Thursday night in Billings, he told a Fox News Channel interviewer that ‘we need Republicans elected in the midterms’.
‘We are getting the wall done. But I’ve had so many people, good people, great people – they would rather not do [it] before [November]. They’d rather do it right after the election.’
Trump said he still wants to persuade Congress – preferably one reinforced with more Republicans – to write the checks he wants.
‘Politically speaking, I’d rather get it through Congress. If we don’t, I’m looking at that option very seriously,’ he said aboard Air Force One on Friday, referring to the Defense Department.
In Sioux Falls, South Dakota on Friday evening the president assured a crowd of about 600 supporters that ‘we’re building the wall!’
‘It works so easily!’ he said. ‘They say walls don’t work? Tell Israel.’
Border Patrol agents confer next to the U.S-Mexico border fence, as seen from a helicopter on May 11, 2017 in San Diego, California
PUBLISHED: 09:29 EDT, 5 September 2018 | UPDATED: 11:37 EDT, 5 September 2018
The Latest on the Senate hearings on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh (all times local):
11:20 a.m.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is refusing to say whether a president can be forced to testify in a criminal case, calling it a hypothetical.
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 5, 2018, for the second day of his confirmation to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
The topic is front-and-center at Kavanaugh’s hearing because the man who nominated him, President Donald Trump, could face a subpoena in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, asked Kavanaugh whether he thinks a sitting president can “be required to respond to a subpoena.”
Kavanaugh responded: “I can’t give you an answer on that hypothetical question.”
The Supreme Court has never ruled on a presidential subpoena.
President Bill Clinton was subpoenaed by independent counsel Kenneth Starr in 1998. Clinton eventually agreed to testify voluntarily and the subpoena was withdrawn.
Kavanaugh worked for Starr.
___
11 a.m.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh says a 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to an abortion is an “important precedent” that has “been reaffirmed many times.”
Kavanaugh was asked about the Roe v. Wade ruling by Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California. He said the decision has “been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years.” And he noted that a 1992 decision of the court called Planned Parenthood v. Casey didn’t just reaffirm Roe v. Wade in passing. He said that decision becomes “precedent on precedent.”
Kavanaugh compared the Roe decision to another case, Miranda v. Arizona, which requires law enforcement to tell suspects their rights. Kavanaugh noted that former Chief Justice William Rehnquist had been a critic of the Miranda decision but later upheld it as precedent.
___
10:30 a.m.
Republicans are invoking Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to make the case that Brett Kavanaugh should decline to say how he might vote on any particular case.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley referred to the so-called “Ginsburg standard” Wednesday during the second day of Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings.
Ginsburg said during her 1993 confirmation hearing that it would be wrong for her to “preview in this legislative chamber how I would cast my vote on questions the Supreme Court may be called upon to decide.”
As Kavanaugh put it, quoting Ginsburg, that means “no hints, no forecasts, no previews.”
Despite her statement, Ginsburg was questioned extensively about abortion during her hearing. She told lawmakers, “It is essential to woman’s equality with man that she be the decision maker.”
___
10:20 a.m.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is pointing to a decision where he ruled for an associate of Osama bin Laden as evidence of his independence as judge.
Asked by Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley to discuss what judicial independence means to him, Kavanaugh pointed to his opinion in a case involving Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who was bin Laden’s former chauffeur. Hamdan challenged his detention at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Kavanaugh told senators that “you’ll never have a nominee who’s ruled for a more unpopular defendant.” Kavanaugh says judges don’t make decisions based on who people are, but “whether they have the law on their side.”
Hamdan was released from Guantanamo before the appeals court ruling that vacated his conviction.
___
9:55 a.m.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh says he believes the first thing that makes a good judge is “independence.”
Kavanaugh is answering questions Wednesday in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It’s his first day answering questions from lawmakers.
Committee chairman Chuck Grassley began the day by asking Kavanaugh to explain what he thinks makes a good judge.
Kavanaugh responded that he thinks “the first quality of a good judge in our constitutional system is independence.” He said being a good judge also requires paying attention to the words of the Constitution and the words of laws, “not doing what I want to do.”
The judge said he wants parties to leave oral arguments in his cases believing he had an “open mind, he gave me a fair shake.”
9:50 a.m.
Demonstrators are again disrupting the hearings for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley attempted to gavel in the second day of hearings on Wednesday when shouting protesters began disrupting the hearings. Grassley said 70 people were arrested during the first day of hearings the day before.
Kavanaugh will be answering questions from senators all day. Democratic senators are expected to press for his views on issues like abortion, guns and executive power.
President Donald Trump nominated the 53-year-old appellate judge in July to fill the seat of retired Justice Anthony Kennedy.
___
9:20 a.m.
Liberal and progressive groups are pressuring Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to unify Democrats against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
A letter sent to Schumer on the second day of hearings for President Donald Trump’s court pick says bluntly: “You are failing us.”
Democrats face a difficult climb trying to block Kavanaugh’s confirmation. If nearly all Republicans back Kavanaugh, as is expected, several Democrats facing tough re-election races may vote to confirm him.
But the groups say Democrats in states like West Virginia, North Dakota, Indiana, Missouri, Montana and Alabama have nothing to fear from voting against Kavanaugh. They say voters in those states “care deeply” about the issues before the court and “will reward a principled vote.”
The Senate’s questioning of Kavanaugh is set to begin Wednesday morning.
___
4:20 a.m.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh touted the importance of an independent judiciary as his confirmation hearings began with strident Democratic criticism that he would be President Donald Trump’s man on the high court.
On Wednesday, Kavanaugh can expect to spend most of the day in the hot seat, sparring with Democratic senators over abortion, guns, executive power and other high-profile issues.
A long day of questioning awaits the 53-year-old appellate judge, whom Trump nominated in July to fill the seat of retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. The change could make the court more conservative on a range of issues.
Barring a surprise, Republicans appear on track to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, perhaps in time for the first day of the new term on Oct. 1.
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge, arrives before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 5, 2018, for the second day of his confirmation to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
A protester against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is removed from his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, with daughter Liza, departs his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2018. They are followed by his wife Ashley and older daughter Margaret. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, with daughter Liza, departs his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2018. They are followed by his wife Ashley and older daughter Margaret. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh’s wife Ashley, left, watches as Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge, right, becomes emotional as he gives his opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2018, to begin his confirmation to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 5, 2018, for the second day of his confirmation to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
A protester against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is removed from his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Story 2: Woodward New Blistering Bombshell Book — Fear: Trump in The White House — Progressive Propaganda Attacking Trump — “A Work of Fiction” — Videos
Trump on Woodward book: A work of fiction
Trump denies bombshell claims in Bob Woodward’s new book
Sarah Sanders discredits Woodward book on Trump
Trump fires back at claims in Bob Woodward’s book
Mike Huckabee reacts to Bob Woodward’s book about Trump
Bob Woodward Book A ‘Devastating’ Portrait Of President Donald Trump WH | Morning Joe | MSNBC
Story 3: “Gutless” Arrogant Anonymous New York Times Op-Ed — Videos
President Donald Trump Reacts To Anonymous New York Times Op-Ed | NBC News
Mitch McConnell on ‘resistance’ op-ed, Kavanaugh hearings
Brit Hume: Op-ed may be disloyal, but is in no way treason
Graham defends Trump: In my world, most don’t listen to the NYT
Senior administration official blasts Trump in op-ed
Trump’s own officials see him as ‘detrimental,’ explosive but anonymous essay claims
Anonymous Trump official claims to be part of ‘resistance’
11 Warning Signs of Gaslighting
Gaslighting is a manipulation tactic used to gain power. And it works too well.
Posted Jan 22, 2017
Stephanie A. Sarkis Ph.D.
Gaslighting is a tactic in which a person or entity, in order to gain more power, makes a victim question their reality. It works much better than you may think. Anyone is susceptible to gaslighting, and it is a common technique of abusers, dictators, narcissists, and cult leaders. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn’t realize how much they’ve been brainwashed. For example, in the movie Gaslight(1944), a man manipulates his wife to the point where she thinks she is losing her mind.
People who gaslight typically use the following techniques:
1. They tell blatant lies.
You know it’s an outright lie. Yet they are telling you this lie with a straight face. Why are they so blatant? Because they’re setting up a precedent. Once they tell you a huge lie, you’re not sure if anything they say is true. Keeping you unsteady and off-kilter is the goal.
2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.
You know they said they would do something; you know you heard it. But they out and out deny it. It makes you start questioning your reality—maybe they never said that thing. And the more they do this, the more you question your reality and start accepting theirs.
3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.
They know how important your kids are to you, and they know how important your identity is to you. So those may be one of the first things they attack. If you have kids, they tell you that you should not have had those children. They will tell you’d be a worthy person if only you didn’t have a long list of negative traits. They attack the foundation of your being.
4. They wear you down over time.
This is one of the insidious things about gaslighting—it is done gradually, over time. A lie here, a lie there, a snide comment every so often…and then it starts ramping up. Even the brightest, most self-aware people can be sucked into gaslighting—it is that effective. It’s the “frog in the frying pan” analogy: The heat is turned up slowly, so the frog never realizes what’s happening to it.
5. Their actions do not match their words.
When dealing with a person or entity that gaslights, look at what they are doing rather than what they are saying. What they are saying means nothing; it is just talk. What they are doing is the issue.
6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.
This person or entity that is cutting you down, telling you that you don’t have value, is now praising you for something you did. This adds an additional sense of uneasiness. You think, “Well maybe they aren’t so bad.” Yes, they are. This is a calculated attempt to keep you off-kilter—and again, to question your reality. Also look at what you were praised for; it is probably something that served the gaslighter.
7. They know confusion weakens people.
Gaslighters know that people like having a sense of stability and normalcy. Their goal is to uproot this and make you constantly question everything. And humans’ natural tendency is to look to the person or entity that will help you feel more stable—and that happens to be the gaslighter.
8. They project.
They are a drug user or a cheater, yet they are constantly accusing you of that. This is done so often that you start trying to defend yourself, and are distracted from the gaslighter’s own behavior.
9. They try to align people against you.
Gaslighters are masters at manipulating and finding the people they know will stand by them no matter what—and they use these people against you. They will make comments such as, “This person knows that you’re not right,” or “This person knows you’re useless too.” Keep in mind it does not mean that these people actually said these things. A gaslighter is a constant liar. When the gaslighter uses this tactic it makes you feel like you don’t know who to trust or turn to—and that leads you right back to the gaslighter. And that’s exactly what they want: Isolation gives them more control.
10. They tell you or others that you are crazy.
This is one of the most effective tools of the gaslighter, because it’s dismissive. The gaslighter knows if they question your sanity, people will not believe you when you tell them the gaslighter is abusive or out-of-control. It’s a master technique.
11. They tell you everyone else is a liar.
By telling you that everyone else (your family, the media) is a liar, it again makes you question your reality. You’ve never known someone with the audacity to do this, so they must be telling the truth, right? No. It’s a manipulation technique. It makes people turn to the gaslighter for the “correct” information—which isn’t correct information at all.
The more you are aware of these techniques, the quicker you can identify them and avoid falling into the gaslighter’s trap.
Do gaslighters know they’re manipulative, or do they do it without realizing it?
Posted Jan 30, 2017
Stephanie A. Sarkis Ph.D.
Since posting my article Gaslighting: Know It to Identify It and Protect Yourself, I’ve received emails asking whether people who gaslight actually know that they are doing it. To review: Gaslighting is a pattern of manipulation tactics used by abusers, narcissists, dictators, and cult leaders to gain control over a person or people. The goal is to make the victim or victims question their own reality and depend on the gaslighter. So, do gaslighters know they’re doing it?
It depends on the gaslighter.
Some people or entities that gaslight do, in fact, realize they are doing it: It is a strategy they have studied—and their sources may surprise you. Cult leader Charles Manson read How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie (2010) to learn how to manipulate his followers (Guinn, 2014). Guinn writes that Manson particularly focused on Chapter 7, which included this advice: “Let the other fellow feel that the idea is his.” And herein lies one difference between people who pathologically gaslight and the general population—the vast majority of the thousands who have read Carnegie’s book have not led lives of violence, abuse, and destruction.
One way to protect yourself from being gaslighted, therefore, is to educate yourself about gaslighters’ behaviors. The book 48 Laws of Power(Greene, 2000) details the characteristics and tactics some historical figures have practiced, including steps they have taken to manipulate others. And Robert Cialdini’s Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2006) explains through research how easily people can be manipulated.
Some gaslighters may have learned it from others—in many cases, their own parents. If a parent lives with addiction or other mental health issues, gaslighting may be used to manipulate a child into keeping quiet about abuse and/or addiction. Gaslighting may be used by a parent in order to alienate the child from the other parent. For example, in parental alienation, one parent may depict the other as a “deadbeat” and tell a child about the other parent’s “transgressions” in order for the child to align with the “reporting” parent and see him or her as the hero. But in order to look like the hero, the gaslighter must create a distinct enemy. This doesn’t mean that people who are children of gaslighters will adopt gaslighting behavior—for many, in fact, such an upbringing teaches them exactly what not to do when raising their own children.
Others gaslight in order to feel some sense of control in their own lives by making others depend on them. Gaslighting can also be part of an authoritarian personality. A person with an authoritarian personality tends to think in absolutes: Things are 100 percent right or 100 percent wrong. When a gaslighter thinks that they are not the problem and everyone else is, this is called having an ego-syntonic personality. It can be very difficult to get ego-syntonic gaslighters into treatment; they believe nothing is wrong with them. A gaslighting spouse or partner may either refuse to go to therapy, or if they do attend with you, they may tell the therapist that you are the problem. If the therapist recommends that the gaslighter changes a behavior, the gaslighter will label the therapist as incompetent. Even in therapy, a gaslighter may not truly be aware of, or may refuse to acknowledge that their behavior is the problem.
Even if a person is practicing gaslighting behavior without being consciously aware of it, they may get a “payoff” when their victim becomes more dependent on them. And then the cycle continues. The gaslighter also gets a “boost” when there are no checks and balances in place—no one holding them accountable for their behavior. For example, a cult leader may exile or kill anyone who tells others that the leader is not treating followers fairly. Subsequently, further followers may not speak out for fear of their lives. Keep in mind that dependency is one of the goals of gaslighters.
If a gaslighter is not aware of their manipulative behavior, that does not make it acceptable—it is still pathological, and it is still their responsibility. For gaslighters who have read up on this behavior or were taught it, of course, the same rule applies.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
President Trump should probably call off the hunt for the “senior official in the…administration” who the New York Times is claiming wrote a damning op-ed for the newspaper.
Apparently the “senior official” claims to be part of a group of White House staff trying to thwart the president’s agenda from within. He also claims they seriously considered trying to depose the president using the 25th amendment of the Constitution.
Serious stuff. But President Trump should relax and remember it is the New York Times after all. The paper has a scandalous history of lying about the seniority of officials it quotes anonymously – especially when that source parrots their agenda.
A few years back they were caught red-handed deceiving their readers in such a way.
In a lengthy anti-fracking article they claimed that senior industry experts and insiders believed the industry to be little more than a “Ponzi scheme” … “set up for failure”.
They even had the emails from a series of senior insiders where these doubts were expressed.
According to the New York Times, one “energy analyst” wrote, “Am I just totally crazy, or does it seem like everyone and their mothers are endorsing shale gas without getting a really good understanding of the economics at the business level?”
Another “federal analyst” said in an industry email, “It seems that science is pointing in one direction and industry PR is pointing in another.”
Well unfortunately for the New York Times, the emails were from the Energy Information Agency – a government organization – so this meant Senate investigators were able to find the original emails and work out the identity of all these different senior experts. It turns out the federal analyst, the energy analyst and the officer turned out to be the same person who was actually an intern when he wrote the first email and in an entry level position when he wrote the other comments. Yes, that’s right, the “Paper of Record” misrepresented an intern/junior employee as a senior official to push an agenda.
Was the New York Times embarrassed when their deception was uncovered? The Senate investigation did attract the attention of the New York Times Public Editor Arthur S Brisbane. “Can an intern be an “official”? It doesn’t sound right to me,” he stated.
Well it sounded fine to the New York Times editorial board. They stood by their mislabelling of the intern/low level employees as a senior official. They later decided they didn’t want their stories to be second guessed in their own newspaper so they ended the role of public editor in the newspaper. And the reporter who misrepresented the intern, well, he was promoted. Ian Urbina is now a New York Times “investigative reporter based in Washington.” Maybe part of that investigation involved finding someone to write anti-Trump anonymous op/eds posing as a “senior official in the Trump administration.” President Trump is probably wondering who the anonymous official is. Perhaps given the New York Times’s history of dissembling in this regard he should take his eyes off the cabinet table and wander down to whatever part of the White House holds the interns.
Phelim McAleer is a journalist and film maker. He produced the movie Gosnell – The Trial of America’s Most Prolific Serial Killer which opens nationwide on October 12th. www.GosnellMovie.com
I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration
I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
The Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers. We invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process here.
President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.
It’s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump’s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.
The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
I would know. I am one of them.
To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.
But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.
That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.
The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.
Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.
In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.
Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.
But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.
From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.
Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.
“There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.
The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.
It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.
The result is a two-track presidency.
Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.
Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.
On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.
This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.
Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.
The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.
Senator John McCain put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.
We may no longer have Senator McCain. But we will always have his example — a lodestar for restoring honor to public life and our national dialogue. Mr. Trump may fear such honorable men, but we should revere them.
There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans.
The writer is a senior official in the Trump administration.
Trump blasts critical op-ed from anonymous senior official
By The Associated PressSeptember 5, 2018 6:59 pm
President Donald Trump listens to Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Sabah Al Ahmad Al Sabah during a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, Sept. 5, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a striking anonymous broadside, a senior Trump administration official wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times on Wednesday claiming to be part of a group of people “working diligently from within” to impede President Donald Trump’s “worst inclinations” and ill-conceived parts of his agenda.
Trump said it was a “gutless editorial” and “really a disgrace,” and his press secretary called on the official to resign.
Later, Trump tweeted: “TREASON?”
The writer, claiming to be part of the “resistance” to Trump but not from the left, said, “Many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.” The newspaper described the author of the column only as a senior official in the Trump administration.
“It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room,” the author continued. “We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.”
A defiant Trump, appearing at an unrelated event at the White House, lashed out at the Times for publishing the op-ed.
“They don’t like Donald Trump and I don’t like them,” he said of the newspaper. The op-ed pages of the newspaper are managed separately from its news department.
The essay immediately triggered a wild guessing game as to the author’s identity on social media, in newsrooms and inside the West Wing, where officials were blindsided by its publication.
And in a blistering statement, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders accused the author of choosing to “deceive” the president by remaining in the administration.
“He is not putting country first, but putting himself and his ego ahead of the will of the American people,” she said. “The coward should do the right thing and resign.”
Sanders also called on the Times to “issue an apology” for publishing the piece, calling it a “pathetic, reckless, and selfish op-ed.”
A “House of Cards”-style plot twist in an already over-the-top administration, Trump allies and political insiders scrambled late Wednesday to unmask the writer.
The text was pulled apart for clues: The writer is identified as an “administration official”; does that mean a person who works outside the White House? The references to Russia and the late Sen. John McCain — do they suggest someone working in national security? Does the writing style sound like someone who worked at a think tank? In a tweet, the Times used the pronoun “he” to refer to the writer; does that rule out all women?
The newspaper later said the tweet referring to “he” had been “drafted by someone who is not aware of the author’s identity, including the gender, so the use of ‘he’ was an error.”
Hotly debated on Twitter was the author’s use of the word “lodestar,” which pops up frequently in speeches by Vice President Mike Pence. Could the anonymous figure be someone in Pence’s orbit? Others argued that the word “lodestar” could have been included to throw people off.
Showing her trademark ability to attract attention, former administration official Omarosa Manigault Newman tweeted that clues about the writer’s identity were in her recently released tell-all book, offering a page number: 330. The reality star writes on that page: “many in this silent army are in his party, his administration, and even in his own family.”
The anonymous author wrote in the Times that where Trump has had successes, they have come “despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.”
The assertions in the column were largely in line with complaints about Trump’s behavior that have repeatedly been raised by various administration officials, often speaking on condition of anonymity. And they were published a day after the release of details from an explosive new book by longtime journalist Bob Woodward that laid bare concerns among the highest echelon of Trump aides about the president’s judgment.
The writer of the Times op-ed said Trump aides are aware of the president’s faults and “many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations. I would know. I am one of them.”
The writer also alleged “there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment” because of the “instability” witnessed in the president. The 25th Amendment allows the vice president to take over if the commander in chief is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” It requires that the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet back relieving the president.
The writer added: “This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.”
he self-styled Saviors of the Country need to step forward, identify themselves, and speak plainly, honestly, and loudly about the menace in the White House.
Instead, they continue to hide in the shadows, chirping from the darkness that they’ve got our backs.
As but the latest example: On Wednesday afternoon, The New York Timesmade the highly unorthodox decision of publishing an anonymous essay from “a senior official in the Trump administration,” titling the piece “I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration.”
[Trump’s] erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.
It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t. [The New York Times]
Cold comfort indeed. This just isn’t good enough. Resister, reveal yourself.
This same dynamic is at play in the debate over veteran journalist Bob Woodward’s explosive forthcoming book Fear: Trump in the White House. In his surreal conversation with Woodward, the president asked the author if he was “naming names” or “just saying sources” or “people have said.” Woodward replied, “I say, at 2:00 on this day, the following happened, and everyone who’s there, including yourself, is quoted.”
Bob Woodward’s reporting — in terms of raw documentation if not interpretive sophistication — is about as unassailable a product as you’re likely to find in 21st-century media. There is no reason to doubt that current and former senior aides to President Trump have belittled the man’s intelligence, character, and fitness for office.
Additionally, it’s reasonable to believe that everyone quoted in Fear, along with this anonymous op-ed author, came forward with the expectation that their account would be accepted one day as the part of the settled historical record of the Trump presidency. These unidentified officials are speaking to the Bleachers of History, pleading for their good names and reputations, even as they presently assure the mad emperor that he is fully clothed.
Be it through anonymous op-eds, “deep background” interviews, or well-intentioned whispering in journalists’ ears, these resisters within the Trump administration seem intent on delivering a message to the public: Don’t worry. We won’t let President Trump ruin everything. And hopefully history will remember our quiet heroism.
But this isn’t heroism. It’s the sort of cowardly behavior that has produced a cottage industry of Washington sages who declare that it’s a “good thing” that Trump is surrounded by advisers who restrain “his most reckless impulses.”
The following scenario captured by Woodward gives the lie to this self-serving tripe:
[Trump lawyer John] Dowd then explained to [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller and [Mueller deputy attorney James] Quarles why he was trying to keep the president from testifying: “I’m not going to sit there and let him look like an idiot. And you publish that transcript, because everything leaks in Washington, and the guys overseas are going to say, ‘I told you he was an idiot. I told you he was a goddamn dumbbell. What are we dealing with this idiot for?'” [Fear, via The Washington Post]
As Vanity Fair‘s Tina Nguyen notes, “Dowd is practically pleading with Mueller to think of the greater good: If foreign leaders read Trump’s testimony, he suggests, it would be impossible for them not to conclude that he is unfit for office.” If we did not live in a democratic republic; if our constitutional system did not include safety valves for unfit executives; if, indeed, Trump were a Mad King, Dowd’s concerns would be understandable. But we do not. The only plausible explanation for concealing the truth about Trump from the public is that it would cause embarrassment to the president himself and the Republican Party.
America, full stop, would continue along just fine.
If America is indeed being led by a “goddamn dumbbell” who, left to his own devices, would start World War III, then we should hear about it — directly from the mouths of those who uttered the words and believe them to be true. At the very least, if they’re not going to resign on principle from this chaotic joke of an administration, men like John Kelly, James Mattis, and John Dowd should loudly acknowledge the truth that’s in front of everyone’s noses.
To do otherwise is not to “save” the country. It is to save the reputation of Donald J. Trump.
The country does not require the discretion of James Mattis or John Kelly in order to survive.
Trump does.
History will damn them for refusing to recognize the difference.
Breaking News, Story 1: Democrats Distracting Destruction Derby at Senate Judiciary Committee For Nomination Hearing of Judge Brett Kavanaugh For Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States — — Kavanuagh Will Be Confirmed — Resistance Is Futile Lying Lunatic Leftist Losers — Video
Democrats interrupt start of Kavanaugh confirmation hearing
Ted Cruz: Dems Delaying Kavanaugh Confirmation Because They Want to ‘Re-Litigate’ 2016 Election
“I Call This The Hypocrisy Hearing” Lindsey Graham DISMANTLES Every Democrat Over Brett Kavanaugh
Ingraham: The party of stunts strikes again
Trump announces Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court pick
Judge Brett Kavanaugh complete remarks (C-SPAN)
Confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh
MUST WATCH: Ted Cruz Grills Democrats On “Hypocritical” Views On Brett Kavanaugh
Sen. Ben Sasse unloads on Congress at Kavanaugh hearing
Democrats look to stonewall Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings
Democrats resistance of Brett Kavanaugh just a show?
Expect ‘Boiling Mad Democrats’ At Hearing: Senator | Morning Joe | MSNBC
Democrats Demand Postponement Of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Hearing | TIME
The Mindless Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing Torture Makes Waterboarding Look Pleasant In Comparison
We are The Borg
CHAOS: KAVANAUGH HEARINGS KICK OFF WITH BELLIGERENT, SHRIEKING DEMOCRATIC HECKLERS, CALLS TO ADJOURN
Grassley: ‘We will continue as planned’
As the chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa), attempted to call the hearings to order, hecklers almost immediately began heckling the lawmakers.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) promptly interrupted Grassley, demanding a delay to the hearings. Sen. Klobuchar (D-Minn.) then followed up with another call to delay the hearings. The Democratic lawmakers were upset over documents the White House released last night, which they said came too late.
“We cannot possibly move forward,” Sen. Kamala Harris said. Sen. Blumenthal then moved to adjourn the meeting, a call which received a roaring ovation from the hecklers.
Watch above to witness the circus in full swing.
Below is a transcript:
GRASSLEY: “Good morning. I welcome everyone to this confirmation hearing on the nomination of —“
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman.”
GRASSLEY: “— Brett Kavanaugh –”
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman.”
GRASSLEY: “— to serve as associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.”
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized for a question before we proceed. Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized to ask a question before we proceed. The committee received just last night less than 15 hours ago —“
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman, regular order.”
HARRIS: “— 42.000 pages of documents that we have not had an opportunity to review or read or analyze.”
GRASSLEY: “You are out of order. I will proceed.”
HARRIS: “We cannot possibly move forward, Mr. Chairman. We have not been given the opportunity to have a meaningful hearing with Congress nominee–“[cross-talk]
GRASSLEY: “I extend a very warm welcome to Judge Kavanaugh, to his wife Ashley, their two daughters –[cross-talk]
UNKNOWN: “Mr. Chairman, I agree with my colleague, senator Harris. Mr. Chairman, we received 42.000 documents tat we haven’t been able to review —”
GRASSLEY: “— And everyone else joining us today.”
UNKNOWN: ” and we believe this hearing should be postponed —”
GRASSLEY: “I know this is an exciting day for all of you here and your you’re rightly proud —”
UNKNOWN: “Mr. Chairman, if we cannot be recognized I move to adjourn. Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn.”
GRASSLEY: “— From Judge Kavanaugh —”
UNKNOWN: “Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn. Mr. Chairman, we have been denied real access to the documents we need to advise —” (Audience cheering)
BLUMENTHAL: “Mr. Chairman, we have been denied the real access to the documents we need —[cross-talk] which turns this hearing into a charade and a mockery of our norms and, Mr. Cha
As the chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa), attempted to call the hearings to order, hecklers almost immediately began heckling the lawmakers.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) promptly interrupted Grassley, demanding a delay to the hearings. Sen. Klobuchar (D-Minn.) then followed up with another call to delay the hearings. The Democratic lawmakers were upset over documents the White House released last night, which they said came too late.
“We cannot possibly move forward,” Sen. Kamala Harris said. Sen. Blumenthal then moved to adjourn the meeting, a call which received a roaring ovation from the hecklers.
Watch above to witness the circus in full swing.
Below is a transcript:
GRASSLEY: “Good morning. I welcome everyone to this confirmation hearing on the nomination of —“
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman.”
GRASSLEY: “— Brett Kavanaugh –”
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman.”
GRASSLEY: “— to serve as associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.”
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized for a question before we proceed. Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized to ask a question before we proceed. The committee received just last night less than 15 hours ago —“
HARRIS: “Mr. Chairman, regular order.”
HARRIS: “— 42.000 pages of documents that we have not had an opportunity to review or read or analyze.”
GRASSLEY: “You are out of order. I will proceed.”
HARRIS: “We cannot possibly move forward, Mr. Chairman. We have not been given the opportunity to have a meaningful hearing with Congress nominee–“[cross-talk]
GRASSLEY: “I extend a very warm welcome to Judge Kavanaugh, to his wife Ashley, their two daughters –[cross-talk]
UNKNOWN: “Mr. Chairman, I agree with my colleague, senator Harris. Mr. Chairman, we received 42.000 documents tat we haven’t been able to review —”
GRASSLEY: “— And everyone else joining us today.”
UNKNOWN: ” and we believe this hearing should be postponed —”
GRASSLEY: “I know this is an exciting day for all of you here and your you’re rightly proud —”
UNKNOWN: “Mr. Chairman, if we cannot be recognized I move to adjourn. Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn.”
GRASSLEY: “— From Judge Kavanaugh —”
UNKNOWN: “Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn. Mr. Chairman, we have been denied real access to the documents we need to advise —” (Audience cheering)
BLUMENTHAL: “Mr. Chairman, we have been denied the real access to the documents we need —[cross-talk] which turns this hearing into a charade and a mockery of our norms and, Mr. Chairman, I therefore move to adjourn this hearing.”
AUDIENCE: “This is a mockery. This is a travesty of justice. Cancel Brett Kavanaugh, adjourn the hearing. [ indecipherable].”
BLUMENTHAL: “Mr. Chairman, I ask for a roll call vote on my motion to adjourn.”
AUDIENCE MEMBER: “‘[indecipherable]'”
GRASSLEY: “Okay.”
BLUMENTHAL: “Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn. I ask for a roll call vote.”
GRASSLEY: “We are not in executive session. We will continue as planned.”
As an attorney working for Ken Starr, Kavanaugh played a lead role in drafting the Starr Report, which urged the impeachment of President Bill Clinton.[2] Kavanaugh led the investigation into the suicide of Clinton aide Vince Foster. After the 2000 U.S. presidential election (in which Kavanaugh worked for the George W. Bush campaign in the Florida recount), Kavanaugh joined Bush’s staff, where he led the administration’s effort to identify and confirm judicial nominees.[3]
Kavanaugh was first nominated to the Court of Appeals by Bush in 2003. His confirmation hearings were contentious and stalled for three years over charges of partisanship. Kavanaugh was ultimately confirmed in May 2006 after a series of negotiations between Democratic and Republican U.S. Senators.[4][5][6]
Kavanaugh with PresidentGeorge W. Bush and other White House staffers in 2001. Kavanaugh is seated directly to the left of Bush.
After his Supreme Court clerkship, Kavanaugh worked for Ken Starr again as an Associate Counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel, where his colleagues included Rod Rosenstein and Alex Azar.[21] In that capacity, he handled a number of the novel constitutional and legal issues presented during the Vincent Foster investigation.[21][22][23] In Swidler & Berlin v. United States (1998), Kavanaugh argued his first and only case before the Supreme Court when he asked it to disregard attorney–client privilege in relation to the investigation of Foster’s death.[24] The Supreme Court rejected Kavanaugh’s arguments by a vote of 6–3.[25]
Kavanaugh was a principal author of the Starr Report to Congress on the Monica Lewinsky–Bill Clintonsex scandal.[21] He urged Starr to ask the president sexually graphic questions and argued on broad grounds for the impeachment of Bill Clinton,[26][27] describing Clinton as being involved in “a conspiracy to obstruct justice”, having “disgraced his office” and “lied to the American people”.[28]
Kavanaugh was later a partner at the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis.[20] While there in 2000, he was pro bono counsel of record for relatives of Elián González, a six-year-old rescued Cuban boy while Jeffery M. Leving spearheaded the amicus brief for the boy. After the boy’s mother’s death at sea, members of the extended family in the U.S. wanted to keep him from returning to the care of his sole surviving parent, his father in Cuba. The district court, the Circuit Court and the Supreme Court all followed precedent, refusing to block the boy’s return to his home.[29] In addition, Kavanaugh authored two amicus briefs supporting religious activities and expressions in public places.[29]
The United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary recommended confirmation on a 10–8 party-line vote on May 11, 2006,[33] and Kavanaugh was thereafter confirmed to the court by the U.S. Senate on May 26, 2006, by a vote of 57–36.[34][35] On June 1, 2006, he was sworn in by Justice Anthony Kennedy, for whom he had previously clerked, during a special Rose Garden ceremony at the White House.[36] Kavanaugh was the fourth judge nominated to the D.C. Circuit by Bush and confirmed by the United States Senate. Kavanaugh began hearing cases on September 11, 2006, and had his formal investiture on September 27, at the Prettyman Courthouse. His first published opinion was released on November 17, 2006.[37]
In July 2007, Democratic Senators Patrick Leahy and Dick Durbin accused Kavanaugh of “misleading” the Senate Judiciary Committee during his nomination. Durbin and Leahy accused Kavanaugh of lying to them in his confirmation hearing when he denied being involved in formulating the Bush administration’s detention and interrogation policies in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks. In 2002, Kavanaugh had met with other White House lawyers, and talked about whether or not the Supreme Court would approve of denying lawyers to prisoners detained as enemy combatants. Kavanaugh had previously been a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, and predicted in that meeting that Kennedy would not approve of denying legal counsel to those prisoners.[38] Durbin said, “It appears that you misled me, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the nation.” [39] This issue re-emerged in July 2018, as Kavanaugh was under consideration for a nomination to the Supreme Court[40], which Kavanaugh received.
During his confirmation hearing in 2006 for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, Kavanaugh stated that he considered Roe v. Wade binding under the principle of stare decisis and would follow the ruling of the higher court.[43] The prevalence of abortion regulations both historically and at the time, Rehnquist said he could not reach such a conclusion about abortion.”[44]
In October 2017, Kavanaugh joined an unsigned divided panel opinion which found that the Office of Refugee Resettlement could temporarily prevent an unaccompanied alien minor in its custody from traveling to obtain an abortion.[45] Days later, the en banc D.C. Circuit reversed that judgment, with Kavanaugh dissenting.[45][46] The girl then obtained an abortion.[45] In his dissent, Linda Greenhouse says Kavanaugh criticized the majority for creating “a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand”.[47] In Azar v. Garza (2018), the girl’s claim was ultimately dismissed as moot after the en banc D.C. Circuit’s judgment was vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court.[48]
In 2015, Kavanaugh found that those directly regulated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) could challenge the constitutionality of its design.[60][61] In October 2016, Kavanaugh wrote for a divided panel finding that the CFPB’s design was unconstitutional, and made the CFPB Director removable by the President of the United States.[62][63] In January 2018, the en banc D.C. Circuit reversed that judgment by a vote of 7-3, over the dissent of Kavanaugh.[64][65]
Kavanaugh wrote for unanimous three-judge district courts when they held that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act could restrict soft money donations to political parties and could forbid campaign contributions by foreign citizens.[80][81] Those judgments were both summarily affirmed on direct appeal by the Supreme Court.[82]
In 2014, Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment when the en banc D.C. Circuit found that the Free Speech Clause did not forbid the government from requiring meatpackers to include a country of origin label on their products.[83][84] In United States Telecom Ass’n v. FCC (2016), Kavanaugh dissented when the en banc circuit refused to rehear a rejected challenge to the net neutrality rule, writing that “Congress did not clearly authorize the FCC to issue the net neutrality rule”.[20][85][86]
Fourth Amendment and civil liberties
In November 2010, Kavanaugh dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc after the circuit found that attaching a Global Positioning System tracking device to a vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[87][88] The circuit’s judgment was then affirmed by the Supreme Court in United States v. Jones (2012).[89] In February 2016, Kavanaugh dissented when the en banc circuit refused to rehear police officers’ rejected claims of qualified immunity for arresting partygoers in a vacant house.[20][90] In District of Columbia v. Wesby (2018), the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the circuit’s judgment.[91]
In Klayman v. Obama (2015), Kavanaugh concurred when the circuit court denied an en banc rehearing of its decision to vacate a district court order blocking the National Security Agency‘s warrantless bulk collection of telephony metadata.[92][93] In his concurrence, Kavanaugh wrote that the metadata collection was not a search, and, even if it were, no reasonable suspicion would be required because of the government’s special need to prevent terrorist attacks.[94]
In August 2010, Kavanaugh wrote a lengthy concurrence when the en banc circuit refused to rehear Ghaleb Nassar Al Bihani’s rejected claims that the international law of war limits the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists.[20][102] In 2014, Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment when the en banc circuit found that Ali al-Bahlul could be retroactively convicted of war crimes, provided existing statute already made it a crime “because it does not alter the definition of the crime, the defenses or the punishment”.[103][104] In October 2016, Kavanaugh wrote the plurality opinion when the en banc circuit found al-Bahlul could be convicted by a military commission even if his offenses are not internationally recognized as war crimes under the law of war.[105][106]
In Meshal v. Higgenbotham (2016), Kavanaugh concurred when the divided panel threw out a claim by an American that he had been disappeared by the FBI in a Kenyan black site.[107][108]
More than half of Kavanaugh’s law clerks have been women (25 of 48) and more than a quarter have been people of color (13 of 48).[111] A number of Kavanaugh’s law clerks are the children of other judges and high profile legal figures, including Clayton Kozinski (son of former federal Judge Alex Kozinski), Porter Wilkinson (daughter of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III), Philip Alito (son of Justice Samuel Alito), Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld (daughter of Yale Law Professor and “Tiger Mom” Amy Chua), and Emily Chertoff (daughter of former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff).[112][113]
Nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States (2018)
On July 2, 2018, Kavanaugh was one of four U.S. Court of Appeals judges to receive a personal 45-minute interview by President Donald Trump as a potential replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy.[114] On July 9, Trump announced his intent to nominate Kavanaugh for a seat on the Supreme Court.[115][116]
Legal philosophy and approach
The Washington Post‘s statistical analysis estimated that the ideologies of most of Trump’s announced candidates were “statistically indistinguishable” and placed Kavanaugh between Justices Gorsuch and Alito.[117] Brian Bennett writing for Time magazine in July 2018 reported that Trump and his advisors viewed Kavanaugh as “a stalwart originalist“.[118] Jonathan Turley of George Washington University has stated that among the judges considered by Trump, “Kavanaugh has the most robust view of presidential powers and immunities.[119] Brian Bennett writing for TIME magazine cites Kavanaugh’s 2009 Minnesota Law Review article as defending the privilege of the President to immunity from prosecution during tenure in office.[120] In a 2017 speech at the American Enterprise Institute about former Chief Justice, William Rehnquist, he praised his opinions in Roe v. Wade and Furman v. Georgia, where Rehnquist dissented in rulings that overturned the ban against abortion and the statutes which supported the death penalty.[121][122]
According to the Judicial Common Space scores, a score based on the ideology scores of the home state senators and president who nominated the judge to the federal bench, Clarence Thomas is the only justice more conservative than Kavanaugh. According to this metric, Kavanaugh’s confirmation would mean the composition of the court would shift to the right.[123] Had Merrick Garland been confirmed, Stephen Breyer would have become the median swing vote when Justice Kennedy retired. However, since Scalia was replaced by another conservative (Gorsuch), it is expected that Chief Justice John Roberts will become the median swing vote on the Supreme Court if Kavanaugh is confirmed.[124]
Teaching and scholarship
Since joining the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Kavanaugh taught full-term courses on Separation of Powers at Harvard Law School from 2008 to 2015, on the Supreme Court at Harvard Law School between 2014 and 2018, on National Security and Foreign Relations Law at Yale Law School in 2011, and on Constitutional Interpretation at Georgetown University Law Center in 2007. Kavanaugh has also been named the Samuel Williston Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School since 2009.[125] Kavanaugh was hired as a visiting professor by Elena Kagan, who was then the dean of Harvard Law School in 2008 and according to The Boston Globe, quickly became a student favorite professor who was generous with his time and accessible. He would often dine in Cambridge with students and offer references and career advice.[126][127] Kavanaugh received high evaluations from his students, including J. D. Vance.[128]
In 2009, Kavanaugh wrote an article for the Minnesota Law Review in which he argued that Congress should exempt U.S. presidents from civil lawsuits while in office[129] because, among other things, such lawsuits could be “time-consuming and distracting” for the president and would thus “ill serve the public interest, especially in times of financial or national security crisis.”[130] Kavanaugh argued that if a president “does something dastardly”, that president may be impeached by the House of Representatives, convicted by the Senate, and criminally prosecuted after leaving office.[129] The US would have been better off if president Clinton “could have focused on Osama bin Laden without being distracted by the Paula Jones sexual harassment case and its criminal investigation offshoots”.[129]This article garnered attention in 2018 when Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Donald Trump, whose 2016 presidential campaign is the subject of an ongoing federal probe by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.[130]
When reviewing a book on statutory interpretation by Second Circuit Chief Judge Robert Katzmann, Kavanaugh observed that judges often cannot agree on a statute if its text is ambiguous.[131] To remedy this, Kavanaugh encouraged judges to first seek the “best reading” of the statute, through “interpreting the words of the statute” as well as the context of the statute as a whole, and only then apply other interpretive techniques that may justify an interpretation that differs from the “best meaning” such as constitutional avoidance, legislative history, and Chevron deference.[131]
Personal life
Kavanaugh had his first date with his future wife Ashley Estes, then–personal secretary to President George W. Bush, on September 10, 2001. They were among the occupants of the White House evacuated during the September 11 attacks.[132]
In early 2006, Kavanaugh and his wife bought a $1.2-million home in Chevy Chase Section Five, Maryland.[18] In 2018, Kavanaugh reported that he earned a $220,000 salary as a federal judge and $27,000 as a lecturer at Harvard Law School during the previous year.[133]
Kavanaugh is an avid runner who has run the Boston Marathon twice. In 2010, at 45 years of age, he finished the course in 3:59:45, 1:53:53 behind the winner, and in 2015 he finished the race in 4:08:36.[134]
Kavanaugh is a Catholic[135] and serves as a regular lector at his Washington, D.C. church, the Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament. He has helped serve meals to the homeless as part of church programs, and has tutored at the Washington Jesuit Academy, a Catholic private school in the District of Columbia.[136][137]
Story 2: Betraying Your Loyal Customers with Quitter Colin Kaepernick — Nike Nuts — Finding — Videos
Everyone Is Doing It (Banned TV Commercial)
Whitlock: Kaepernick is a Nike PR ploy, will backfire
Colin Kaepernick timeline: From protests to a Nike campaign
Colin Kaepernick stars in new Nike ad campaign
Brand expert: Nike-Kaepernick deal a win for both
Colin Kaepernick featured in Nike ‘Just Do It’ ad
How should NFL feel about Nike’s new ad campaign? | Speak For Yourself 9/4/2018
Colin Kaepernick Nike ad sparks support and outrage
Gianno Caldwell to Kaepernick, Anthem Protesters: ‘You’re Not Taking a Real Action’
Social media responds to Colin Kaepernick’s Nike ad
Tucker Blasts Nike for Profiting From Kaepernick’s ‘Attacks on the United States’
Colin Kaepernick timeline: From protests to a Nike campaign
Colin Kaepernick To Be The Face Of Nike’s ‘Just Do It’ Campaign
Colin Kaepernick And Nike Release ‘Just Do It’ Ad
TrumpTV NFL meltdown over Colin Kaepernick Nike #Same#Hate as last season
Ben Shapiro on NIKE’S Latest Campaign: “COLIN KAEPERNICK Sacrificed Nothing”
Kaepernick featured in Nike’s 30th Anniversary “Just Do It” ad campaign | UNDISPUTED 9/4/2018
Americans Launch Boycott Against Nike After Colin Kaepernick Named as Face of 30th Anniversary
49ers Quarterback Colin Kaepernick Refused to Stand for National Anthem
Colin Kaepernick named the face of Nike’s 30th anniversity of ” Just Do It” | FIRST THINGS FIRST
Spot Nike 1988
All The Best Nike Unlimited Just Do It Awesome Commercials
Nike: Find Your Greatness
Will Nike regret Colin Kaepernick deal?
top 10 best commercials of all time
The Lost Ball Parks: Ebbets Field
Brooklyn Dodgers Documentary
The Brooklyn Dodgers: the original America’s team
Fan reaction to dodgers leaving Brooklyn
Colin Kaepernick’s new ‘Just Do it’ Nike ad puts pressure on NFL to take a stand
Nancy Armour, USA TODAYPublished 10:26 p.m. ET Sept. 3, 2018 | Updated 4:29 p.m. ET Sept. 4, 2018
Decades from now, when Americans look back at the NFL player protests and wonder how anyone could have seen them for anything but the plea for equality they are, Colin Kaepernick’s new Nike ad will be one of the enduring images.
For two years now, the NFL and its owners have desperately tried to silence Kaepernick and the movement he began. They blackballed the former San Francisco 49ers quarterback and teammate Eric Reid. They threatened to fine or cut the players who joined them in protest. They created a ridiculous policy that only served to confuse matters more.
And for what? To go down on the wrong side of history? Because that’s how future generations will see it, as the Nike ad released Monday made clear.
“Believe in something,” the tagline reads. “Even if it means sacrificing everything.”
This is not some small, left-leaning company that has decided Kaepernick is on the side of angels in this fight. It is one of the world’s largest conglomerates, a setter of trends and arbiter of what’s cool.
And it is one of the NFL’s biggest partners, the official apparel company of the league.
For Nike to choose Kaepernick sends a message even Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones cannot ignore. This is bigger than a hot-button issue in an election season, bigger than a segment of fans who choose to be angrier at the method of protest than the message behind it.
While the NFL and its owners have been trying to contain the issue, Kaepernick and the other players have been playing the long game. The civil rights protests were wildly unpopular when they were occurring — go back and research the polls and opinions of the time — but are now viewed as righteous and essential to our ongoing struggle for equality. The NFL protests will be viewed much the same way through the lens of history.
Nike has recognized as much, betting a very large and prominent endorsement deal that Kaepernick will one day be seen much like Muhammad Ali. A rabble rouser who outraged the establishment in his heyday, Ali eventually became a widely admired and influential figure once society caught up.
Cynics will say this is simply a marketing ploy for Nike, a way to capitalize on an issue everyone is already talking about. Perhaps. But that doesn’t lessen the burden on the NFL.
Or the stakes.
The league can continue to dither, trying to appease everyone while pleasing no one, and be remembered as an organization that put expedience ahead of equality. Or it can be bold.
By signing Kaepernick — and I mean a team giving him a legitimate chance to compete, not hiding him on the depth chart as a No. 3 quarterback — the NFL can tell the entire country that fighting for a truly equal society is a fight worth having. That while it recognizes the passions the player protests have produced, there is nothing dishonorable about holding our country to account.
There will be some backlash, sure. Just as some folks angered by Nike’s stance will no doubt express their outrage with their wallets, refusing to buy shoes, shirts or anything else with a swoosh on it.
So be it.
Doing the right thing isn’t always easy, especially in the moment. But this moment, and who stood for what during it, will be remembered for generations to come.
It’s time to take a stand, NFL. Go ahead and do it.
Follow USA TODAY Sports’ Nancy Armour on Twitter @nrarmour.
Nike took a calculated risk with Colin Kaepernick ad, experts say
Former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick is featured in this new Nike ad for the 30th anniversary of the company’s “Just Do It” campaign. (Nike Inc.)
Nike Inc.’s decision to feature Colin Kaepernick in its latest “Just Do It” advertising campaign predictably blew up the internet.
In one video, Nike shoes were set on fire. John Rich, half of the country music duo Big & Rich, showed that his soundman had cut Nike’s iconic swoosh off his socks. #NikeBoycott quickly began trending on Twitter.
At the same time, tennis star Serena Williams tweeted that she was “especially proud to be a part of the Nike family today.” Others said their children planned to wear Nike from head to toe in support of Kaepernick.
None of that should have been a surprise — least of all to Nike.
The athletic shoe and apparel company took a calculated risk in featuring Kaepernick, the former San Francisco 49er quarterback who is now far better known for kneeling during the pregame national anthem to protest police shootings of black men, marketing experts said. Though the move was sure to be seen by many as provocative, the Beaverton, Ore., company is betting that more customers will support it — particularly the younger demographic that Nike is courting.
“Companies increasingly realize that it’s important for them to be purpose-driven,” said Joshua Beck, an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Oregon who has conducted research on corporate brand activism. “Nike’s very careful in the way it makes decisions about its brand. This is something Nike thought would be consistent with who they are as a company.”
Nike isn’t the only apparel brand fighting for younger consumers. Baltimore-based Under Armour Inc. also caters to a younger demographic and has signed a number of elite athletes, including Golden State Warriors point guard Steph Curry and Misty Copeland, the first African American female principal dancer with the American Ballet Theatre.
Nike reportedly had competition for Kaepernick — Yahoo Sports reported Monday that Adidas and Puma were among “multiple” brands that had talked about signing him if Nike did not renew his sponsorship deal, which began in 2011.
Kaepernick is just one of several athletes, including Williams and New York Giants wide receiver Odell Beckham Jr., featured in the 30th anniversary of Nike’s “Just Do It” ad campaign. A Nike spokeswoman said in a statement Tuesday that the campaign “celebrates some of the most inspirational athletes who have chased dreams no matter the obstacle or outcome.”
Kaepernick’s new Nike deal is expected to feature the athlete on billboards, TV commercials and in online ads, as well as a clothing line. In the first ad, an image of Kaepernick appears with these words: “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.”
Kaepernick has not played for a team since he left the 49ers in 2016 and became a free agent; last year he filed a grievance with the National Football League, alleging that owners colluded to keep him out of the NFL because of his protests. An arbitrator recently sent the case to trial.
Nike’s decision to feature Kaepernick is in keeping with the rebellious image the company has sought in past campaigns. Last month, Nike tweeted an image of Williams with the words, “You can take the superhero out of her costume, but you can never take away her superpowers” after the French tennis federation ruled that she would not be allowed to wear a black catsuit at the French Open next year.
The decision also reflects the company’s long-standing tradition of standing behind its athletes. Nike stood by Kobe Bryant after the Lakers star was charged with sexual assault in 2003. Prosecutors later dropped the criminal charges against Bryant and a civil lawsuit was settled out of court in 2005.
“If you think about Nike as a marketing company, they’ve always been provocative,” said Matt Powell, sports industry analyst for NPD Group, a market research firm. “They tend to stick with their athletes through thick and thin.”
The Kaepernick decision appears to have initially produced a public relations boost for Nike. A majority of the media sentiment expressed about Nike since the announcement was positive, according to an analysis done Tuesday morning by Apex Marketing Group — resulting in what the firm estimated to be the equivalent of $19.01 million of paid advertisements taken out in television, radio, web and social media. That compares with $13.76 million worth of neutral sentiment and $10.91 million in negative sentiment, said Eric Smallwood, Apex president.
Wall Street was less positive; Nike’s stock closed at $79.60 Tuesday, down 3.2%, slightly worse than the market as a whole.
Nike’s campaign could pay off in the long term. Boycotts tend to be short-lived and consumers who support brands’ actions typically persist. That can lead to sales growth, Beck said.
Corporate brand activism is one way to achieve that loyalty, he said.
“It’s not enough to just say that you’re for the environment or for fair labor practices,” Beck said. “Most companies now believe that. So the question is what can we do as a brand and stand out and differentiate from other competing brands.”
Millennial consumers, in particular, want brands to be transparent about their stances on social issues, said Powell of NPD Group, whose research found that two-thirds of the people who wear Nike in the U.S. are under 35 years old. And 45% of that group is under 25.
“In many ways, I think this campaign aligns very much in line with a younger consumer,” Powell said. “The older consumer is clearly not what Nike is focused on.”
But in the era of President Trump, the consequences of taking sides can be unpredictable, even for an edgy name like Nike.
“People have viewed them as this lifestyle brand, as this compelling brand that empowers athletes,” said David Carter, executive director of the USC Sports Business Institute. “But if they veer too far toward social activism, that may alienate a certain part of their consumer base.”
The backlash started just hours after Colin Kaepernick, the former San Francisco 49ers quarterback who sparked controversy for kneeling during the national anthem, tweeted that he’s starring in Nike Inc.’s iconic “Just Do It” ad campaign.
Following the announcement, the hashtags #BoycottNike and #JustBurnIt started trending on Twitter and shares started falling. Some angry consumers even posted photos and videos of themselves burning their Nike shoes and other gear to protest the company using the divisive figure in its 30th anniversary ad campaign.
Nike shares slipped as much as 3.9 percent to $79 as of 9:31 a.m. Tuesday in New York — the biggest intraday slide in five months. They had climbed 31 percent this year through Friday’s close.
The fallout was no surprise but Nike may be betting that the upside of a Kaepernick endorsement is worth angering conservative Americans and supporters of President Donald Trump. Kaepernick — who sparked a movement among professional athletes when he began taking a knee in 2016 during the anthem to protest police brutality against African Americans — is embroiled in a lawsuit against the National Football League and accuses it of blacklisting him.
Still, with the former 49er one of the most popular football players in the U.S. the shoe giant is likely counting on passions to cool.
“The long-term relationship and a contract that benefits both parties over the next 10 years will likely outweigh any current controversy,” said Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Chen Grazutis.
Kaepernick tweeted an image from the campaign with the caption, “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.”
Nike is in a fierce battle with rival Adidas AG to sign star athletes. The combined marketing spending of the two companies may reach as much as $10 billion by fiscal 2020.
Nike has also shown its willingness to wade into America’s culture wars. Just a few weeks after Trump’s inauguration last year, the company launched a high-profile “Equality” campaign featuring LeBron James and Serena Williams. The campaign’s ambassadors included Ibtihaj Muhammad, a Muslim American fencer who wears a hijab when competing, and transgender triathlete Chris Mosier.
Despite criticism from Trump and calls by both conservatives and liberals to boycott the league, the NFL is still pulling in billions of dollars. The world’s richest sports league, the NFL distributed a record $8.1 billion to its teams last season and posted an estimated overall revenue of $14 billion.
There is a risk of Nike upsetting its relationship with the NFL, which last week lost an attempt to dismiss Kaepernick’s lawsuit alleging collusion by the league to prevent him from signing with a team.
Still, the league approved a new 10-year agreement in May that will make Nike and Fanatics Inc. the primary suppliers of apparel to teams and fans. As of 2020, Nike will continue to make all on-field NFL apparel, while all adult fan gear will have the Nike logo, but be made and distributed by Fanatics. Until this deal, Nike had been making everything.
Tom Brady Likes Colin Kaepernick Nike Advertisement On Instagram
Nike’s latest advertisement featuring Colin Kaepernick has sparked a lot of debate and controversy around the sports world and the country at large. And while seemingly everybody has an opinion one way or another, the quarterback of the Patriots is apparently backing the message behind Kaepernick.
An active Instagram user, Brady double-tapped the screen when he saw the account for GQ Magazine share the Nike ad, which features Kaepernick’s face and includes the words, “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.”
Tom Brady is shown as one of the thousands of Instagram users to “Like” the sharing of Colin Kaepernick’s latest Nike advertisement. (Screenshot from Instagram/GQ)
The 41-year-old Brady almost always avoids commenting publicly on controversial matters, though he has expressed support for Kaepernick over the past couple of years.
In an interview with CBS last September, Brady praised Kaepernick’s quarterbacking ability and said, “he’s certainly qualified and I hope he gets a shot.”
In November on WEEI, Brady said Kaepernick “was a damn good quarterback. He’s played at a high level and brought his teams to Super Bowls.”
The new Kaepernick ad, which hit the internet on Sunday, resulted in instant reaction, both in support and protest of the statement. Brady’s unlikely to comment further on his social media activity, but considering that he knows how closely all of his social media activity is monitored and covered, the “like” on Instagram serves a firm statement on Brady’s behalf.
Kaepernick began his professional football career as a backup quarterback to Alex Smith, and became the 49ers’ starter in the middle of the 2012 season after Smith suffered a concussion. He then remained the team’s starting quarterback for the rest of the season, leading the team to their first Super Bowl appearance since 1994. During the 2013 season, his first full season as a starter, Kaepernick helped the 49ers reach the NFC Championship Game. Over the next three seasons, Kaepernick lost and won back his starting job, with the 49ers missing the playoffs for three years consecutively. He opted out of his contract with the 49ers to become a free agent after the 2016 season.
In 2016, Kaepernick became a national figure when he ignited a firestorm of controversy by choosing to kneel on one knee rather than stand while the United States national anthem was being played before the start of NFL games. He described his behavior as a protest against racial injustice in the United States.[2][3] His actions prompted negative and positive responses. The negative responses included suggestions that players who protest should be fired;[4] other people displayed their disapproval of players’ protests by leaving the stadium immediately after the protests or refusing to watch games at all.[5][6] Positive responses included similar activity by additional athletes in the NFL and other American sports leagues protesting in various ways during the anthem. In November 2017, Kaepernick filed a grievance against the NFL and its owners, accusing them of colluding to not hire him. In 2018, Amnesty International awarded Kaepernick with that year’s Ambassador of Conscience award.
In 2018, Kaepernick signed on Nike‘s 30th anniversary celebration ad campaign of the Just Do It slogan, agreeing to lend his name to Nike apparel.[7][8]
Kaepernick is of mixed race. He was born in 1987 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to Heidi Russo, a 19-year-old white woman who was single at the time.[9][10] His birth father, an African American man, left Russo before Colin was born.[11][12] Russo placed Colin for adoption with Rick and Teresa Kaepernick, a white couple who had two older children—son Kyle and daughter Devon—who decided to adopt a boy after losing two other sons to heart defects.[11][13] The German surname Käpernick is derived from Köppernig, the ancestral home of Nicolaus Copernicus (today the Polish village of Koperniki).[14]
Kaepernick lived in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, until age four, and attended grade school in Turlock, California.[15][16] When he was eight years old, Kaepernick began playing youth football as a defensive end and punter. At age nine, he was the starting quarterback on his youth team, and he completed his first pass for a long touchdown.[15] A 4.0 GPA student[17] at John H. Pitman High School in Turlock, California, Kaepernick played football, basketball and baseball and was nominated for All-State selection in all three sports his senior year. He was the Most Valuable Player (MVP) of the Central California Conference in football, leading his school to its first-ever playoff victory. In basketball, he was a first-team all CCC selection at forward and led his 16th-ranked team to a near upset of #1 ranked Oak Ridge High School in the opening round of playoffs. In that game, Kaepernick scored 34 points, but future NBA player Ryan Anderson of Oak Ridge scored 50 to lead the Oak Ridge Trojans to victory over John Pitman High School.[18]
College career
Recruitment
Kaepernick received most of his high school accolades as a baseball pitcher. He received several scholarship offers in that sport,[15] but he desperately wanted to play college football. As a senior, he was almost 6′ 5″ but weighed only 170 pounds (77 kg), and his coaches generally kept him from running the ball in order to limit his risk of injury.[16] Despite his strong arm, he also had poor throwing mechanics.[15] During his junior year, Larry Nigro—Pitman’s head coach at the time—made a highlight tape that Kaepernick’s brother, Kyle, copied to DVD, then sent to about 100 Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS, then known as Division I-A) programs. Kaepernick received some interest but no scholarship offers.[15] Even as a senior, he received little attention from FBS schools. Although the University of Nevada, Reno coaching staff frequently watched video of his high school team, no one from the Nevada Wolf Pack football staff came to Turlock to see him play during his senior football season.[16] Nevada head coach Chris Ault decided to offer him a scholarship after one of his assistants, Barry Sacks, saw Kaepernick dominate a high school basketball game on an evening he was suffering from a fever of 102 °F (39 °C). Nevada was the only school to offer him a football scholarship, but was concerned that he would opt for baseball until he signed in February 2006.[16]
Baseball
Kaepernick was a two-time California all-state baseball player and was listed as a draftable prospect on Major League Baseball‘s website in the class of 2006. He earned Northern California athlete of the week honors as a pitcher. As a senior in high school, he threw a 92 mph (148 km/h) fastball, as reported during Kaepernick’s first college football start in 2007 against Boise State.[19] He was also a member of the Brewers Grey squad in the 2005 Area Code games. In his senior year of high school Kaepernick had an ERA of 1.265 with 13 starts and 10 complete games. He finished the year with an 11–2 record with 97 strikeouts and 39 walks.[citation needed]
In the 2009 Major League Baseball Draft, Kaepernick was drafted in the 43rd round by the Chicago Cubs.[20] He decided that he wanted to continue to play football at the University of Nevada and chose not to sign with the Cubs.[21]
American football
2007
Kaepernick started his college career at Nevada playing in 11 of the team’s 13 games. He finished the season with 19 passing touchdowns, three interceptions, and 2,175 passing yards with a 53.8% completion percentage.[22] Kaepernick also added 593 rushing yards and six rushing touchdowns as the Nevada Wolf Pack finished 6-7.[23]
2008
As a sophomore, Kaepernick became just the fifth player in NCAA history to pass for 2,000 yards and rush for 1,000 or more yards in a single season. Some of his notable statistical achievements were:
Only NCAA quarterback in 2008 to pass for 2,500 or more yards and rush for 1,000 or more yards.
Ranked second among all NCAA QB’s in rushing yardage with 1,130.
Ranked seventh among all NCAA players with 7.02 yards per carry.
Was tied ninth among all NCAA players with 17 rushing TD’s.
Kaepernick, with 1,130 rushing yards, and running back Vai Taua, with 1,521 rushing yards, made 2008 the first year in school history that Nevada had two 1,000-yard rushers in the same season.[24]
Despite playing the entire second half with an ankle injury, he set a new Humanitarian Bowl record with 370 yards passing and was awarded the MVP in a losing effort. He was named the WAC Offensive Player of the Year at the end of the season. He was the first sophomore to win this award since Marshall Faulk of San Diego State did in 1992. He was also named first team All-WAC quarterback.[citation needed]
2009
Kaepernick was named the pre-season WAC Offensive Player of the Year at the WAC Media’s event in July. On August 3 it was announced he was named to the Davey O’Brien Award pre-season watch list. On August 14 it was announced that he was named to the pre-season Maxwell Award watch list and on August 17 to the Manning Award watch list. Kaepernick led the Wolf Pack to an 8–5 record and a second-place finish in the WAC behind undefeated Boise State. He was named second team All-WAC quarterback. He was the first player in Nevada history to earn the team’s MVP award twice, doing so in 2008 as well.[citation needed]
He finished the 2009 season with 2,052 passing yards and 1,183 rushing yards.[25] He became the first player in NCAA history to record back-to-back 2,000/1,000 yard seasons. His 1,183 rush yards along with Luke Lippincott’s 1,034 and Vai Taua’s 1,345 makes him a part of the first trio of teammates in NCAA history to rush for 1,000 yards each in the same season.[citation needed]
Entering the 2010 NCAA season, Kaepernick ranked first among active college football players in rushing touchdowns. He was second in yards-per-carry (behind Wolf Pack teammate Vai Taua), total offense-per-game, and touchdowns scored. He ranked third in yards-per-play and fourth in pass touchdowns and total number of offensive plays. He was a counselor at the prestigious Manning Passing Academy event in Thibodaux, Louisiana, during the 2010 camp. His performance drew praise from various NFL and ESPN personnel including former New York Giants quarterback Jesse Palmer who said of Kaepernick, “by far, the strongest arm in the camp”.[26]
On November 26, Kaepernick led his team to a 34–31 overtime victory against the previously undefeated Boise State Broncos, snapping a 24-game win streak that had dated back to the 2008 Poinsettia Bowl.[28] This game was played on Nevada’s senior night, the final home game for Kaepernick. Nevada Head Coach Chris Ault would later call this game the “most important win in program history”. During this game, Kaepernick surpassed 1,000 rushing yards for this season, becoming the first player in NCAA history to have over 2,000 yards passing and 1,000 yards rushing for three consecutive seasons. Along with Taua’s 131 yards rushing in the game, the duo became the NCAA’s all-time leaders in rushing yards by teammates (8,285) passing the legendary SMU “Pony Express” duo of Eric Dickerson and Craig James (8,193).[29]
On December 4 against Louisiana Tech University, Kaepernick joined Florida’s Tim Tebow as the second quarterback in FBS history to throw for 20 touchdowns and run for 20 in the same season. Later that same evening, Auburn’s Cam Newton joined Tebow and Kaepernick as the third. Kaepernick’s three rushing touchdowns in that game also placed him in a tie with former Nebraska quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner Eric Crouch for most rushing touchdowns in FBS history by a quarterback with 59 in his career.[30] Nevada claimed a share of the WAC title after defeating Louisiana Tech. Kaeperick was named WAC Co-Offensive Player of the Year with Kellen Moore, who won the award in 2009.[31]
Kaepernick is the only quarterback in the history of Division I FBS college football to have passed for over 10,000 yards and rushed for over 4,000 yards in a collegiate career. He is also the only Division I FBS quarterback to have passed for over 2,000 yards and rushed for over 1,000 yards in a single season three times in a career (consecutively).[citation needed]
Kaepernick graduated from Nevada in December 2010 with a bachelor’s degree in business management and is a member of Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity.[citation needed]
On April 29, 2011, the San Francisco 49ers traded up with the Denver Broncos from the thirteenth pick in the second round (#45 overall) to select Kaepernick as the fourth pick in the second round (#36 overall) at the 2011 NFL Draft.[33] The Broncos received picks 45, 108, and 141 overall in exchange for the 36th overall pick.
San Francisco 49ers
2011 season
For the 2011 preseason, Kaepernick completed 24-of-50 passes for 257 yards and five interceptions.[34] Kaepernick spent the 2011 season as backup to Alex Smith and played his first game in Week 4 (October 2) on the road against the Philadelphia Eagles.[34] On third down and 17 during the first quarter, he came in for Smith as quarterback with the offense in shotgun formation and handed off to Frank Gore, who ran for five yards.[35] In the Week 5 (October 9) home game, a 48–3 win over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Kaepernick completed three passes for 35 yards.[36] However, he failed to complete two passes in the 49ers’ Week 13 (December 4) game, a 26–0 win over the St. Louis Rams.[34] The 49ers finished the 2011 regular season 13–3 but lost the NFC championship to the eventual Super Bowl XLVI championNew York Giants by a score of 20–17.[37]
In 2012 against the New York Jets, Kaepernick scored his first career touchdown on a seven-yard run.[38] Throughout the early season, Kaepernick was used as a wildcat quarterback.[39] In Week 10 against the St. Louis Rams, Kaepernick replaced starter Alex Smith, who had suffered a concussion in the first half. However, the game would end in a rare 24–24 tie, the first tie in the NFL in four years.[40]
With Smith still recovering, Kaepernick got his first NFL start the next game on November 19, during a Monday Night Football game against the Chicago Bears at Candlestick Park.[41] Kaepernick completed 16-of-23 for 246 yards with two touchdowns in a 32–7 win against a highly ranked Bears defense. 49ers head coachJim Harbaugh spoke highly of Kaepernick’s performance after the game, leaving open the possibility of Kaepernick continuing to start. “Usually tend to go with the guy who’s got the hot hand, and we’ve got two quarterbacks that have got a hot hand”, Harbaugh said.[42] A quarterback controversy began. Smith was ranked third in the NFL in passer rating (104.1), led the league in completion percentage (70%), and had been 19–5–1 as a starter under Harbaugh, while Kaepernick was considered more dynamic with his scrambling ability and arm strength.[43][44]
Smith was cleared to play the day before the following game, but Harbaugh chose not to rush him back and again started Kaepernick. In a rematch of the 2012 playoffs against the New Orleans Saints, the 49ers won 31–21 with Kaepernick throwing for a touchdown and running for another.[45][46] The following week, Harbaugh announced that Kaepernick would start for the 8–2–1 49ers against St. Louis. Harbaugh stated that Kaepernick’s assignment was week-to-week, not necessarily permanent,[47] but he remained the starter for the rest of the season.
In his first career postseason start, the 49ers won 45–31 against the Green Bay Packers, and he set an NFL single-game record for most rushing yards by a quarterback with 181, breaking Michael Vick‘s record of 173 in a 2002 regular season game.[48] He also broke the 49ers postseason rushing record, regardless of position.[49] Kaepernick carried the ball 16 times for 181 yards and scrambled five times for 75 yards, including touchdowns of 20 and 56 yards, and collected another 99 yards rushing on zone-read option plays. He also passed for 263 yards and two touchdowns. In total, Kaepernick had 444 yards of total offense with four touchdowns. Kaepernick became the third player after Jay Cutler in 2011 and Otto Graham in both 1954 and 1955 to run for two touchdowns and pass for two others in a playoff game.[48] In the NFC Championship game, the 49ers defeated the Atlanta Falcons 28–24 with Kaepernick completing 16-of-21 passes for 233 yards and one touchdown.[50] The team advanced to Super Bowl XLVII in New Orleans against the Baltimore Ravens. Kaepernick threw for a touchdown and ran for another, but the 49ers fell behind early and could not come back, losing by a score of 31–34.[51]
2013 season
Kaepernick in 2013
In the season opener of the 2013 season against the Green Bay Packers, Kaepernick threw for a career-high 412 yards and three touchdowns, the first 400-yard game by a 49ers quarterback since Tim Rattay on October 10, 2004.[52] Of the total 412 yards, 208 yards were to newly acquired teammate Anquan Boldin, making his debut as a 49er. In addition, Kaepernick’s performance also marked the first 400-yard passing with three touchdowns performance by a 49ers quarterback since Jeff Garcia in the 1999 season.
In the NFC Championship Game against eventual Super Bowl championSeattle Seahawks, Kaepernick rushed for 130 yards, including a 58-yard run, and passed for 153 yards. The 49ers led until the fourth quarter. Two turnovers by Kaepernick led to the Seahawks having a 23–17 lead with a few minutes left. Kaepernick drove the 49ers to the red zone but with 22 seconds left, Kaepernick’s pass intended for Michael Crabtree was tipped by Seattle’s Richard Sherman and intercepted by Malcolm Smith, ending the 49ers’ season and attempt to return to the Super Bowl.[53] Kaepernick ended the season with 3,197 yards passing, 21 touchdowns, and only eight interceptions. He also finished with 524 yards rushing yards and four rushing touchdowns.[54]
2014 season
On June 4, Kaepernick signed a six-year contract extension with the 49ers, worth up to $126 million, including $54 million in potential guarantees, and $13 million fully guaranteed.[55]
On September 17, Kaepernick was fined by the NFL for using inappropriate language on the field.[56] On October 9, he was fined $10,000 by the NFL for appearing at a post-game press conference wearing headphones from Beats by Dre, while the league’s headphone sponsor was Bose.[57] In a game against the San Diego Chargers, he ran for a 90-yard touchdown.[58] The 49ers finished the season 8–8 and failed to make the playoffs for the first time since 2010.[59] Kaepernick threw for 3,369 yards with 18 touchdowns and 10 interceptions. He rushed for 639 yards and one touchdown.[60] Following the season, head coach Jim Harbaugh left to coach the University of Michigan.[61]
2015 season
In 2015, Kaepernick struggled under new head coach Jim Tomsula. A day after a 27–6 collapse at St. Louis in Week 8, Kaepernick lost his starting job to backup Blaine Gabbert for Week 9 against Atlanta.[62] With Gabbert starting as their new quarterback, the 49ers narrowly won 17–16. On November 21, the 49ers announced that Kaepernick would miss the rest of the season because of an injured left shoulder that required surgery.[63] He finished the season with 1,615 yards passing, six passing touchdowns, five interceptions and 256 rushing yards with one rushing touchdown.[64]
Head coach Tomsula was fired following the season and the 49ers hired Chip Kelly as his replacement.[65] In February 2016, Kaepernick expressed an interest in being traded.[66]
2016 season
Kaepernick entered the 2016 season competing for starting quarterback position with Gabbert.[67] On September 3, 2016, 49ers head coach Chip Kelly named Gabbert as the starter for the beginning of the 2016 season.[68] Prior to the 49ers Week 6 game against the Buffalo Bills, Kelly announced Kaepernick would start, marking his first start of the season. On October 13, it was announced that he and the 49ers restructured his contract, turning it into a two-year deal with a player option for the next season.[69] He completed 13-of-29 passes, with 187 passing yards, one passing touchdown and 66 rushing yards in the 49ers 45-16 loss to the Buffalo Bills.[70] On November 27, he recorded 296 passing yards, three passing touchdowns and 113 yards rushing in the 49ers’ 24-31 loss to the Miami Dolphins.[71] He joined Michael Vick, Cam Newton, Randall Cunningham, and Marcus Mariota as the only quarterbacks in NFL history to record at least three passing touchdowns and 100 yards rushing in a game. In a Week 13 loss to the Chicago Bears, Kaepernick threw a career-low four yards before getting benched for Gabbert.[72] He returned to the starting lineup the following week and threw for 183 yards and two touchdowns in the 49ers’ 13-41 loss to the Atlanta Falcons.[73] On December 24, Kaepernick recorded 281 total yards, two passing touchdowns, one interception, one rushing touchdown, and a two-point conversion on the game-winning drive as the 49ers beat the Los Angeles Rams 22-21 to get their first victory on the season with Kaepernick as the starter.[74] For the 2016 NFL season, Kaepernick played twelve games and ended the season with 2,241 passing yards, sixteen passing touchdowns, four interceptions and added 468 rushing yards and two rushing touchdowns.[75]
On March 3, 2017, Kaepernick officially opted out of his contract with the 49ers, an option as part of his restructured contract, therefore making him a free agent at the start of the 2017 league year.[76]
In the 49ers third preseason game of the 2016 season, Kaepernick was noticed sitting down during the playing of “The Star-Spangled Banner” as opposed to the tradition of standing. During a post-game interview, he explained his position stating, “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder”, referencing a series of events that led to the Black Lives Matter movement and adding that he would continue to protest until he feels like “[the American flag] represents what it’s supposed to represent”.[78][79][80] In the 49ers’ fourth and final preseason game of 2016, Kaepernick opted to kneel during the U.S. national anthem rather than sit as he did in their previous games. He explained his decision to switch was an attempt to show more respect to former and current U.S. military members while still protesting during the anthem after having a conversation with former NFL player and U.S. military veteran Nate Boyer.[81] After the September 2016 police shootings of Terence Crutcher and Keith Lamont Scott,[82] Kaepernick commented publicly on the shootings saying, “this is a perfect example of what this is about”.[83]
Kaepernick soon became highly polarizing as numerous people took public stances either supporting or maligning Kaepernick’s actions; in many cases this polarization correlates with racial divisions.[84] Various members of the NFL and other athletes across the United States, such as American professional soccer player Megan Rapinoe, also began kneeling and/or raising their fist like the 1968 Olympics Black Power salute during the playing of the U.S. national anthem.[85][86][87] Some U.S. military veterans voiced support using the social media hashtag “#VeteransForKaepernick”.[88] In the following weeks, Kaepernick’s jersey became the top-selling jersey on the NFL’s official shop website.[89] An NFL fan poll was taken during the beginning of the 2016 NFL season and Kaepernick was voted the most disliked player in the NFL; this poll was polarized, with 37% of Caucasians disliking him “a lot”, and 42% of African-Americans liking him “a lot.”[84] A few people posted videos of them burning Kaepernick jerseys. Former NFL MVP Boomer Esiason called Kaepernick’s actions “an embarrassment” while an anonymous NFL executive called Kaepernick “a traitor”.[90] The 2016 NFL season also saw a significant drop in their television ratings. Polls suggest that fans boycotting the NFL because of Kaepernick-inspired protests were a contributor to the decline in viewers.[91] He also stated that he received death threats.[83]
In September 2016, sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson wrote of the double bind faced by black people: “Black folk have, throughout history, displayed their patriotism by criticizing the nation for its shortcomings, and they have been, in turn, roundly criticized.” Dyson suggested that the wisdom of the abolitionist Frederick Douglass maintains relevance to racism in the context of Kaepernick and protest.[92] Dyson concluded, “When a black athlete bravely speaks up, we punish him.”
2017
In August 2017, former NYPD officer Frank Serpico gave a speech live on Facebook and stood with police officers at the foot of the Brooklyn Bridge in support of Kaepernick.[93][94] The same month, Pro Football Hall of Famer and longtime civil rights activistJim Browntold an interviewer that while he “wants to be in [Kaepernick’s] corner”, he would never “desecrate my flag and my national anthem.”[95]
In September 2017, President Donald Trump sent out multiple tweets, in which he advocated that NFL players should be either fired or suspended if they fail to stand up for the national anthem. In response, many NFL teams and players stood together to protest against Trump’s opinion. The players knelt, locked arms, or remained in the locker room during the playing of the anthem.[96]
2018
In 2018, Kaepernick signed on Nike‘s 30th anniversary celebration ad campaign of the Just Do It slogan, agreeing to lend his name to Nike apparel.[8] The company, which supplies game-day uniforms and sideline apparel for the NFL’s 32 teams, will donate to Kaepernick’s “Know Your Rights” campaign.[7]
Controversy over free agency
Following his departure from the 49ers, Kaepernick went unsigned through the offseason and 2017 training camps, leading to allegations that he was being blackballed because of his on-field political actions as opposed to his performance,[97][98][99][97] a notion supported by Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman.[100] Other players, including New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and Kansas City Chiefs quarterback and former teammate Alex Smith, have stated that they believe his sporting ability is competitive in the NFL, and they are incredulous of his prolonged unemployment,[101][102] while former quarterback Michael Vick argued that he was not signed because his performance had declined.[103] Outside of the NFL, PresidentDonald Trump claimed that Kaepernick’s situation was caused by a fear that he would use Twitter to create a public relations crisis for any team that signed him.[104][105] Kyle Wagner of FiveThirtyEight analysed his recent performance and found that no above-average QB of his level stays unemployed that long, implying that the reason must not be a sporting one.[106] Dan Graziano of ESPN reasoned that the issue dealt more with labor and management battles rather than Kaepernick’s beliefs or performance.[107]
In late July and early August 2017, the Baltimore Ravens were reportedly working to extend an offer to Kaepernick. According to former African American Ravens player Ray Lewis, the offer was terminated after Kaepernick’s girlfriend Nessa Diab—who works as a radio host— posted an incendiary tweet that compared Ravens team owner Steve Bisciotti to a slave owner and player Ray Lewis to a slave. Other reports, however, stated that Bisciotti had been objecting to signing Kaepernick before the incident.[108][109] A high-ranking member of the military had also raised concerns about bringing the polarizing quarterback to Baltimore.[110]
In November 2017, Kaepernick filed a grievance against the NFL, alleging that NFL owners colluded to keep him out of the league.[111] In August 2018 it was reported that system arbitrator Stephen B Burbank denied the NFL’s request to dismiss the case[112], the decision meant there was sufficient evidence for the case to go to trial.[113]
Activism
In 2016, after kneeling during the playing of the U.S. national anthem prior to NFL games in protest to what he believed to be racial injustices against black Americans, Kaepernick pledged to donate one million dollars to “organizations working in oppressed communities.”[114] In 2018, Kaeperkick announced that he would make the final $100,000 donation of his “Million Dollar Pledge” in the form of $10,000 donations to charities that would be matched by celebrities.[115]
In 2017, Kaepernick was named GQ magazine’s “Citizen of the Year” for his efforts.[116]
In April 2018, Amnesty International honored Kaepernick with the 2018 Ambassador of Conscience Award. The award celebrates ‘individuals and groups who speak out for justice’. In a statement about the award, Kaepernick stated that Amnesty’s award was one shared “with all of the countless people throughout the world combating the human rights violations of police officers, and their uses of oppressive and excessive force”.[117]
Personal life
Kaepernick was baptizedMethodist, confirmedLutheran, and attended a Baptist church during his college years.[118] Kaepernick spoke about his faith saying, “My faith is the basis from where my game comes from. I’ve been very blessed to have the talent to play the game that I do and be successful at it. I think God guides me through every day and helps me take the right steps and has helped me to get to where I’m at. When I step on the field, I always say a prayer, say I am thankful to be able to wake up that morning and go out there and try to glorify the Lord with what I do on the field. I think if you go out and try to do that, no matter what you do on the field, you can be happy about what you did.”[119]
Kaepernick has multiple tattoos. His right arm features a scroll with the Bible verse Psalm 18:39 written on it. Tattooed under the scroll are praying hands with the phrase “To God The Glory” written on them. To the left of both the scroll and praying hands is the word “Faith” written vertically. His left arm features a Christian cross with the words “Heaven Sent” on it referring to Jesus. Written above and below the cross is the phrase “God Will Guide Me”. Written to the left and right of the cross is the Bible verse Psalm 27:3. His chest features the phrase “Against All Odds” and artwork around it that represents “inner strength, spiritual growth, and humility”. His back features a mural of angels against demons.[120][121][122] Near the end of the 2012 NFL season, Kaepernick’s signature touchdown celebration involved flexing and kissing the bicep of his right arm. Kaepernick says he kisses his “Faith”, “To God The Glory”, and Psalm 18:39 tattoos and the reason he does the celebration is because “God has brought me this far. He has laid out a phenomenal path for me. And I can’t do anything but thank Him.”[120]
Story 3: Your Not A Paranoid President When The Political Elitist Establishment Is Out To Get Trump — Trump Goes On Offense — Videos
Trump lashes out at AG Sessions
Trump tweets new attacks on Sessions
Trump slams Sessions over indictments of GOP lawmakers
Rep. Darrell Issa on Trump vs. Sessions
President Donald Trump Slams AG Jeff Sessions Over GOP Indictments | NBC Nightly News
Trump called Attorney Jeff Sessions a ‘traitor,’ and said ‘Everybody’s trying to get me,’ according to an explosive new Bob Woodward book
President Donald Trump complained “Everybody’s trying to get me” after he learned that Robert Mueller had been appointed special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election that sent Trump to the White House, according to a new book.
Trump also called Attorney General Jeff Sessions “mentally retarded,” was called “unhinged” and an “idiot” by his chief of staff John Kelly, according to Woodward.
Woodward, according to The Washington Post’s preview of the book “Fear,” writes that Trump exploded in a rage after being subjected to a practice interview with his own lawyer playing the role of Mueller.
President Donald Trump talks via speakerphone with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto as they announce a bilateral deal to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) at the White House in Washington, August 27, 2018.
Legendary investigative journalist Bob Woodward has a new book about President Donald Trump’s administration, and explosive excerpts, revealed by The Washington Post, paint a picture of a White House gripped by fear, loathing and chaos.
According to the book, titled “Fear,” Trump called Attorney General Jeff Sessions “a traitor,” and complained “everybody’s trying to get me” after he learned that Robert Mueller had been appointed special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election that sent Trump to the White House.
Trump also called Sessions “mentally retarded.” The president was also the subject of insults. He was called “unhinged” and an “idiot” by his chief of staff, John Kelly, Woodward’s book says.
And the president once phoned Defense Secretary James Mattis to say “Let’s f—ing kill him” after Syrian leader Bashar Assad launched a chemical attack on civilians, according to the book.
“Let’s go in. Let’s kill the f—king lot of them,” Trump said in one of the highlights of the 448-page book that was described in an article Tuesday in The Washington Post, where Woodward has long worked. “Fear” is slated for a Sept. 11 release.
Woodward says in the book that he conducted hundreds of hours of interviews with participants and witnesses in the conversations he writes about. He also had taped notes, diaries and government documents.
The interviews were granted on the condition of “deep background,” which according to Woodward meant that while he could write what happened, he could not reveal the sources of particular stories.
The Washington Post, in a separate article Tuesday, published a lengthy transcript of a call last month between Trump and Woodward, during which the president said, “I would’ve loved to have spoken to you” for the book.
Woodward replied that he had sought an interview with the president through about a half-dozen people, including senior presidential advisor Kellyanne Conway and White House spokesman Raj Shah.
“You do not want to give Jeff Bezos a seven-year head start.”
Hear what else Buffett has to say
“They don’t tell me,” Trump said.
Mattis is depicted in the book as being “particularly exasperated and alarmed” by having to tell Trump that “we’re doing this in order to prevent World War III” to justify the presence of the U.S. military on the Korean Peninsula.
Mattis told associates that Trump “acted like — and had the understanding of — ‘a fifth- or sixth-grader,’ ” according to the book.
But Trump is quoted in “Fear” as being scornful of the intelligence of Sessions, a former Alabama senator whom he has long blamed for recusing himself in the Russian investigation, a step that led to Mueller’s appointment.
“He’s this dumb Southerner. … He couldn’t even be a one-person country lawyer down in Alabama,” Trump reportedly said of Sessions.
A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment to CNBC when asked about the president’s characterization of Sessions, who heads the department.
Woodward also writes that Trump exploded in a rage after a practice interview with his own lawyer John Dowd playing the role of Mueller, as they prepared for a potential sit-down with the special counsel.
“This thing’s a goddamn hoax,” Trump fumed, according to the book. “I don’t really want to testify.”
Dowd was sure that Trump would committ perjury if he did talk to Mueller, Woodward wrote.
But when Dowd told Trump, “Don’t testify,” warning that “It’s either that or an orange jumpsuit,” the president pushed back.
“I’ll be a real good witness,” Trump reportedly said.
“You are not a good witness,” Dowd retorted, according to the book.
The attorney quit the day after their conversation.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, in a prepared statement, said, “This book is nothing more than fabricated stories, many by former disgruntled employees, told to make the President look bad.”
According to the Post’s account of the book, Kelly despaired of dealing with Trump, whom he called “unhinged” during discussions with colleagues in the White House.
“He’s an idiot. It’s pointless to try to convince him of anything. He’s gone off the rails,” Kelly was quoted in the book as saying.
He added, “We’re in Crazytown. I don’t even know why any of us are here. This is the worst job I’ve ever had.”
Kelly on Tuesday said, in a prepared statement: “The idea I ever called the President an idiot is not true.”
“As I stated back in May and still firmly stand behind: ‘I spend more time with the President than anyone else, and we have an incredibly candid and strong relationship. He always knows where I stand, and he and I both know this story is total BS. I’m committed to the President, his agenda, and our country. This is another pathetic attempt to smear people close to President Trump and distract from the administration’s many successes.’ ”
Woodward reports that after Trump finally condemned white supremacists and neo-Nazis — he initially claimed that “both sides” were to blame for violence during a white supremacist rally last year in Charlottesville, Virginia — he complained to aides, “That was the biggest f—ing mistake I’ve made.”
The Pronk Pops blog is the broadcasting and mass communication of ideas about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, prosperity, truth, virtue and wisdom.
John Durham, U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut. Courtesy photo.
Scott Walker, the Republican governor of Wisconsin who ran for President against Trump in 2016 (pictured), lost his race against Democrat Tony Evers
Reuters
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
230,000
56,000
-5,700
AUGUST 2018
163,000
:brightness(10):contrast(5):no_upscale():format(webp)/will-work-unemploy-56a9a7985f9b58b7d0fdb494.jpg)
(Subscription required.) 
.png)
Pronk Pops 
8 thoughts on “The Six Living Generations In America”
Comments are closed.
http://www.marketingteacher.com/the-six-living-generations-in-america/