Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney suggested Friday that Americans should expect that there will be some disruptions to schools and transportation as a result of the coronavirus epidemic, but expressed confidence that the U.S. is well-prepared to handle the situation.
Amid <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/california-new-york-reportedly-monitoring-over-9000-people-for-coronavirus">reports</a> that over 8,000 people in California and several hundred in New York are being monitored for potential infection, Mulvaney addressed the issue of the virus&#8217;s spread during an appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Fort Washington, Maryland on Friday.
&#8220;Are you going to see some schools shut down? Probably. Maybe see impacts on public transportation? Sure,&#8221; Mulvaney said during the event, as reported by <a href="https://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/virus-could-disrupt-u-s-schools-transportation-mulvaney-says">Bloomberg Quint</a>. &#8220;But we do this,&#8221; he stressed. &#8220;We know how to handle this.&#8221;
Addressing the impact of the epidemic on the financial sector, Mulvaney added, &#8220;Really, what I’d like to do today to calm the markets is tell people to turn their televisions off for 24 hours.&#8221;
Bloomberg notes that Mulvaney&#8217;s comments &#8220;indicate that the administration is planning for potentially bigger disruptions.&#8221;
&#8220;He spoke a day after stock markets plunged the most since 2011 over concerns that the coronavirus outbreak would continue to spread and drag down the global economy,&#8221; the outlet reports. &#8220;There are now more than 83,000 cases of the virus worldwide, with infections spreading in Europe, Asia and Latin America. Germany.&#8221;
Mulvaney&#8217;s confidence in the U.S. response to the epidemic is an echo of President Trump&#8217;s repeated assurances that the federal government is on top of the issue, as he underscored in a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-conference/">press conference</a> Wednesday.
&#8220;Because of all we’ve done, the risk to the American people remains very low,&#8221; Trump said, in part referencing his decision to shut down flights from high-risk areas. &#8220;&#8230;We’re ready to adapt and we’re ready to do whatever we have to as the disease spreads, if it spreads.&#8221;
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/california-new-york-reportedly-monitoring-over-9000-people-for-coronavirus">The Daily Wire</a> reported Thursday, over 9,000 people are currently being monitored in the U.S. for potential infection, including over 8,000 in California and another 700 in New York.
The number of monitored cases in California dwarfs all other states. “California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Thursday that 33 people have tested positive for COVID-19 and the state is currently monitoring at least 8,400 others —a day after U.S. health officials confirmed the first possible community transmission of the coronavirus in a Solano County resident,” CNBC <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/27/california-is-monitoring-8400-people-for-the-coronavirus.html">reported</a>.
<a href="https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/02/26/coronavirus-update-de-blasio-cuomo-outline-preparations-in-new-york/">CBS New York</a> reported Thursday that New York state&#8217;s health department revealed that &#8220;700 people in the state have been asked to voluntarily self-isolate for two weeks.&#8221; None of those cases are in New York City, the outlet notes; nonetheless, city officials are preparing for a potential outbreak.
&#8220;Wednesday, Mayor Bill de Blasio joined New York City health officials to outline a plan of action once the virus shows up in the city,&#8221; CBS 2 reports. &#8220;As of Wednesday, there are no confirmed cases of coronavirus in the city. All those who were in quarantine have been released – but that’s expected to change. And once it does, city leaders say they’re ready, but could use more help from the federal government.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/california-new-york-reportedly-monitoring-over-9000-people-for-coronavirus">California, New York Reportedly Monitoring Over 9,000 People For Coronavirus</a>
&nbsp;

Mick Mulvaney

White House Chief of Staff: Expect Disruptions To Schools, Transportation Due To Coronavirus

California

Coronavirus

Donald Trump

New York

White House

Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman was fired from his job on the National Security Council on Friday and was escorted from the White House and his brother reportedly left with him, although it was not clear whether he was also fired.
&#8220;Vindman, the top Ukraine expert at the National Security Council, was pushed out of his role Friday months earlier than expected, according to a statement from his attorney,&#8221; CNN <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/politics/alex-vindman-donald-trump-impeachment/index.html">reported</a>. &#8220;Vindman was not slated to leave until July, but had been telling colleagues in recent weeks he would likely leave soon. It was not his decision to leave, however, according to one person familiar with the situation.&#8221;
&#8220;We do have one remaining question which is about the future of [Alexander Vindman&#8217;s] brother, Eugene, who is an attorney for the National Security Council who we are told also walked out with Vindman today but it&#8217;s unclear if he received the same message about his services no longer being needed,&#8221; CNN&#8217;s Kaitlan Collins said on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;The Lead&#8221; with Jake Tapper.
Collins added: &#8220;I’m told Vindman walked out with his brother, who is an attorney for the NSC. It’s unclear if he was also fired but that was the expectation.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I’m told Vindman walked out with his brother, who is an attorney for the NSC. It’s unclear if he was also fired but that was the expectation.
&mdash; Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) <a href="https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1225886222121390083?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 7, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
During Vindman&#8217;s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/excerpts-from-alexander-vindmans-testimony-to-congress-raises-questions-about-credibility">testimony</a> it was revealed that he did not know basic facts about U.S. aid to the country and, when the subject came up at his job, he apparently was not interested in wanting to know more about Hunter Biden joining the corrupt Ukrainian gas company Burisma.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Top Ukraine guy at NSC apparently thought Obama administration had provided Javelins to Ukraine. <a href="https://t.co/Gd1830At3K">pic.twitter.com/Gd1830At3K</a>
&mdash; Byron York (@ByronYork) <a href="https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1193255269918216197?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 9, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Corrupt Ukrainian company owned by corrupt Ukrainian oligarch hires vice president&#39;s son and top Ukraine guy on NSC doesn&#39;t want to know about it. From Vindman deposition: <a href="https://t.co/yy3QLX0dqd">pic.twitter.com/yy3QLX0dqd</a>
&mdash; Byron York (@ByronYork) <a href="https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1193533402273787905?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 10, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/timothy-morrison-alexander-vindmans-boss-reveals-problems-they-had-with-vindman">The Daily Wire previously reported</a> that during the impeachment hearings, Senior National Security Council official Timothy Morrison, who was the former boss of Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, testified that Vindman’s bosses had numerous concerns and problems with him.
GOP counsel Steve Castor asked, “You had indicated in your deposition that when you took over the [Ukraine] portfolio for Dr. Hill July 15 that you were alerted to potential issues in Colonel Vindman’s judgement?”
“Yes,” Morrison responded.
“Did she relay anything specifically to you why she thought that?” Castor asked.
Morrison responded that the concern apparently came from multiple officials and was an overall general concern about his judgment.
“Did any other NSC personnel raise concerns with you about Colonel Vindman?” Castor asked.
“Yes,” Morrison responded.
“Morrison later confirmed that multiple other officials were concerned that Vindman was potentially leaking sensitive information to the media,” The Daily Wire reported. “Morrison also confirmed that Vindman did not keep him in the loop about all the things that he was doing in the job and that Vindman went behind his back and did not inform him about the concerns that he had about President Donald Trump’s July 25 phone call with the president of Ukraine.”
“If he had concerns about something about the content of the call, that’s something that I expected that I would have been notified of,” Morrison said. “I also think as a matter of practice, since we both went to the lawyers, we didn’t both need to.”
“At any point subsequently, did [Vindman] become frustrated that he felt cut out of some of the Ukraine portfolio?” Castor asked.
“Yes,” Morrison responded, adding that Vindman was upset that he was not invited on a trip to Ukraine.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Top official Tim Morrison said Alexander Vindman&#39;s bosses had a lot of concerns about him:
-Judgement -Potential leaker -Did not keep his bosses in the loop on what he was doing -Went around his bosses&#39; backs -Was mad he was cut out of working on Ukraine <a href="https://t.co/Z9qgSVs9dt">pic.twitter.com/Z9qgSVs9dt</a>
&mdash; Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1196925677481521153?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

US-POLITICS-CONGRESS-TRUMP-IMPEACHMENT

Alexander Vindman Fired, Escorted From White House, Brother Goes With Him, Report Says

Alexander Vindman

National Security

Trump Administration

Nancy Pelosi

White House Officially Responds To Pelosi Ripping Up Trump’s Speech

On Tuesday, the White House stated it is considering the possibility of declassifying information showing the necessity for the airstrike that killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, that an imminent attack planned on American forces  was deterred by the airstrike.
As <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7861255/National-security-adviser-says-hes-looking-declassifying-intelligence-Qassem-Soleimani.html">The Daily Mail</a> reports, National Security Advisor Robert O&#8217;Brien told reporters he was “taking a look at” whether intelligence provoking President Trump’s order to kill Soleimani would be declassified. He stated that Soleimani was “planning to kill, to attack American facilities and diplomats. Soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who were located at those facilities.”
O&#8217;Brien also appeared on <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/robert-obrien-iran-national-security-united-nations">Fox &amp; Friends</a> Tuesday morning, where he asserted, &#8220;The president believes that weakness is provocative, and I think we have seen that throughout history. It&#8217;s something that&#8217;s been a cornerstone of President Trump&#8217;s foreign policy and national security policy &#8230; Soleimani and the Iranian regime knew exactly what they were doing. And what I think they did is they underestimated the president and his restraint.&#8221;
On Tuesday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo echoed the perspective of the necessity for the airstrike, telling reporters at a State Department press briefing:
<blockquote>There’s been much made about this question of intelligence and imminence; I answered it multiple times on Sunday. I’m happy to walk through it again. Any time a president makes a decision of this magnitude, there are multiple pieces of information that come before us. We presented that to him in all its broad detail; we gave him all the best information that came out from the intelligence community but from those of us who have teams in the field.
We evaluated the relevant risks and the opportunity that might present itself at some point and we could see clearly that not only had Soleimani done all of the things that we have recounted, hundreds of thousands massacred in Syria, enormous destruction of countries like Lebanon and Iraq; where they’ve denied them sovereignty and the Iranians have really denied people in those two countries what they want; sovereignty, independence and freedom; this is all Soleimani’s handiwork. And then we’d watch as he was continuing the terror campaign in the region.</blockquote>
Pompeo continued:
<blockquote>We know what happened at the end of the year last year in December, ultimately leading to the death of an American. So if you&#8217;re looking for imminence, you needn&#8217;t look further than the days that led up to the strike that was taken against Soleimani. And then, you in addition to that have what we can clearly see; were continuing efforts on behalf of this terrorist to build out a network of campaign activities that were going to lead potentially to the death of many more Americans. It was the right decision; we got it right. The Department of Defense did excellent work and the president had an entirely legal, appropriate and a basis as well as a decision that fit perfectly within our strategy and how to counter the threat of malign activity from Iran more broadly.</blockquote>
Video of Pompeo below:
<iframe id="molvideoplayer" title="MailOnline Embed Player" src="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/2083284.html" width="698" height="573" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>

US-POLITICS-SECURITY-TRUMP

White House May Declassify Info Showing Necessity For Airstrike Killing Soleimani, Report Says

pompeo

Qassem Soleimani

I have been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-sondlands-testimony-reveals-the-error-of-the-white-houses-impeachment-defense-strategy">arguing</a> for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-stop-calling-everything-impeachable-offense-josh-hammer">awhile</a> now that the White House, congressional Republicans, and Trump-friendly punditocracy alike ought to alter their predominant impeachment defense narrative. The &#8220;no quid pro quo&#8221; narrative amounts to tendentious semantic debate: Its ability to persuade is largely cabined, in Rorschach test-like fashion, to the universe of voters already predisposed toward Trump sympathy. It is preferable to make a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-sondlands-testimony-reveals-the-error-of-the-white-houses-impeachment-defense-strategy">substantive argument</a> that attaching corruption-related strings to the doling out of <a href="https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/03/11/foreign-aid">politically unpopular</a> U.S. taxpayer-funded foreign aid simply does not rise to an &#8220;abuse or violation of some public trust,&#8221; as Alexander Hamilton&#8217;s defined the Constitution&#8217;s &#8220;high crimes and misdemeanors&#8221; impeachment criterion in <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed65.asp">The Federalist No. 65</a>.
But it is possible that there is an even more straightforward and politically palatable impeachment defense that does not necessarily entail accepting a certain view of foreign policy or foreign aid. The defense revolves around the nexus of political quid pro quos and constitutionally protected free speech.
As Texans will certainly remember, then-Governor Rick Perry was <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/16/us/gov-rick-perry-of-texas-is-indicted-over-veto-of-funds-for-das-office.html">indicted</a> in 2014 by a grand jury for abusing his official capacity when he threatened to withhold $7.5 million in funding for the Travis County district attorney&#8217;s Public Integrity Unit unless the district attorney, who had previously been convicted of drunk driving and subsequently incarcerated, resigned.
Sounds a lot like a quid pro quo, no?
At the time, the special prosecutor&#8217;s operative legal theory <a href="https://www.statesman.com/NEWS/20141112/Criminal-prosecution-of-Governor-Perry-is-an-outrage">required</a> that the First Amendment not protect a governmental actor&#8217;s right to threaten taking a lawful action in order to attain a preferred political outcome. If the special prosecutor were wrong, then Governor Perry&#8217;s attempted quid pro quo would hardly be illegal at all — it would actually be constitutionally protected speech.
At the time, powerful and ideologically <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2015/11/amicus1.pdf">diverse group of attorneys argued</a> that the special prosecutor sought to criminalize constitutionally protected speech. The group included right-leaning legal luminaries such as law school professors Eugene Volokh and former Judge Michael McConnell, as well as former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey. The group also includes historically liberal-leaning First Amendment scholars, such as Floyd Abrams and Alan Dershowitz. The counsel of record on this notable amicus brief was then-private attorney James C. Ho — for whom, in the interest of full disclosure, I served as a law clerk upon his successful nomination as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
The amicus brief argued that &#8220;[a] political official has the right to threaten to perform an official act in order to persuade another government official to engage in some other official act.&#8221; It continued: &#8220;That is not a crime — it is core political speech.&#8221; Governor Perry&#8217;s quid pro quo with respect to withholding funds from the Travis County district attorney&#8217;s Public Integrity Unit, the brief contended, &#8220;is protected free expression, and the [g]overnor cannot be prosecuted for it.&#8221;
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the Lone Star State&#8217;s highest court for criminal cases, <a href="http://www.search.txcourts.gov/SearchMedia.aspx?MediaVersionID=68138db0-9e0e-4928-b39d-dd16cb47ddd8&amp;coa=coscca&amp;DT=OPINION&amp;MediaID=457489da-dfc2-4de6-a0b4-723dd35a014a">agreed</a>. &#8220;[P]ublic servants have a First Amendment right to engage in expression, even threats, regarding their official duties,&#8221; the Court held. &#8220;Many threats that &#8230; public servants make as part of the normal functioning of government&#8221; would be criminalized under the special prosecutor&#8217;s legal theory, the Court continued.
The Court&#8217;s rationale is not even remotely partisan or political; it is pure logic and common sense. Quid pro quos routinely happen in politics as a <a href="http://webhome.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/logrolling.phtml">day-to-day reality</a> of politics. Before issuing his DAPA executive amnesty, President Barack Obama consistently threatened to use his &#8220;pen and phone&#8221; if Congress did not take the legislative action he desired. Unruly congressmen often have their committee assignments threatened by committee chairmen if they fail to vote in accordance with congressional leadership&#8217;s desires. Heck, does anyone think that neither House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) nor Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) engages in dozens of quid pro quos on a weekly basis as a rudimentary requirement of executing their chamber-wide leadership jobs?
The Trump impeachment defense should adopt this line of argumentation. How on earth can the president of the United States be impeached for engaging in constitutionally protected speech? How on earth can the president&#8217;s deployment of constitutionally protected speech, in the context of foreign policy, amount to an &#8220;abuse or violation of some public trust&#8221; that merits impeachment less than one year away from a presidential election? Has everyone in our politics who has engaged in a quid pro quo committed an offense that requires removal from office? If so, can we even have a functioning political system in the first instance?
A quid pro quo obviously cannot be conducted for personal pecuniary benefit — that would be bribery. But political exchanges for political value are utterly commonplace in our politics. Indeed, they ought to be uncontroversial. If this conduct is unlawful, then virtually everyone in Washington, D.C. should be in prison. And if this conduct is merely so unethical so as to require removal from office, then every president over at least the past century ought to have been impeached and every congressman in the current Congress ought to be voted out.
The most persuasive, politically wide-ranging, and tenable impeachment defense is therefore one that rests upon the crown jewel of our Bill of Rights: The First Amendment itself.

Trump White House lawn

HAMMER: There Is One Terrific Impeachment Defense That The White House Is Not Making

Constitution

First Amendment

Free Speech

Impeachment

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton claimed on Friday that the Trump administration prevented him from using his Twitter account following his resignation several weeks ago, a claim that was met with strong response from White House Press Secretary and Communications Director Stephanie Grisham.
&#8220;Glad to be back on Twitter after more than two months. For the backstory, stay tuned,&#8221; Bolton <a href="https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1197862304462901248">tweeted</a> early on Friday, later <a href="https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1197900337690107904">adding</a>, &#8220;We have now liberated the Twitter account, previously suppressed unfairly in the aftermath of my resignation as National Security Advisor. More to come.&#8221;
&#8220;Re: speaking up &#8212; since resigning as National Security Advisor, the @WhiteHouse refused to return access to my personal Twitter account. Out of fear of what I may say? To those who speculated I went into hiding, I’m sorry to disappoint!&#8221; Bolton <a href="https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1197946364669370368">tweeted</a> a few hours later, <a href="https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1197982064945094657">adding</a>, &#8220;In full disclosure, the @WhiteHouse never returned access to my Twitter account. Thank you to @twitter for standing by their community standards and rightfully returning control of my account.&#8221;
“The White House attached software to the account,” Bolton <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/us/politics/bolton-twitter-trump.html">told</a> The New York Times on Friday. “They would not give it back. A representative of mine spoke with John Eisenberg, who said he would get it released, and it never happened. So finally we went to Twitter.”
The Times reported that Bolton allegedly &#8220;had turned over control of his personal Twitter account to the White House when he joined the National Security Council last year&#8221; and &#8220;wanted it back when he left.&#8221;
A senior administration official told ABC News on Friday afternoon: &#8220;The White House did not block Mr. Bolton from accessing his personal Twitter account, and wouldn’t have the technical means to do so.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NEW: After John Bolton claimed the White House &#8220;never returned access to my Twitter account,&#8221; a senior administration official tells <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABC</a> News, &#8220;The White House did not block Mr. Bolton from accessing his personal Twitter account, and wouldn’t have the technical means to do so.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/1KnyAGed3I">https://t.co/1KnyAGed3I</a>
— ABC News (@ABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1197999386460147714?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
On Friday evening, Grisham appeared on Fox Business Network&#8217;s &#8220;Lou Dobbs Tonight&#8221; where she hit back at Bolton&#8217;s claims.
&#8220;Ambassador Bolton today with this nonsense about Twitter wanting his dedicated handle,&#8221; host Lou Dobbs said. &#8220;That was never the possession of the White House, was it?&#8221;
&#8220;Well, it was his personal account that he continued to use while he was at the White House,&#8221; Grisham responded. &#8220;I don&#8217;t know a whole lot about it, but sometimes &#8230; somebody who is of an advanced age may not understand that all you have to do is contact Twitter and reset your password if you&#8217;ve forgotten it. So I&#8217;ll just leave it at that.&#8221;
&#8220;And I&#8217;m trying to quickly calculate whether Bolton or myself is the older fellah with a Twitter account,&#8221; Dobbs responded. &#8220;It&#8217;s a shame to see Bolton behave like this, because this is a man who was next to the president, serving the President of United States, and now is acting like &#8212; to me, it&#8217;s just very disappointing that he would stoop to the level that he has, just in innuendo.&#8221;
&#8220;I hear he&#8217;s got some—a book deal and I hear he&#8217;s been on quite the speaking circuit and charging some high fees for that,&#8221; Grisham responded. &#8220;So I guess money can get you to do a lot of things.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Press Sec Stephanie Grisham responds to John Bolton’s claim that the Trump admin locked him out of his Twitter account: “Sometimes … somebody who is of an advanced age may not understand that all you have to do is contact Twitter and reset your password if you’ve forgotten it” <a href="https://t.co/Yli9YAfuNq">pic.twitter.com/Yli9YAfuNq</a>
— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1198101687480676352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2019</a></blockquote>

Stephanie Grisham John Bolton

Bolton Accuses WH Of Locking His Twitter Account. Stephanie Grisham Gives Priceless Response.

John Bolton

Early Thursday morning, a vehicle attempted to enter the White House complex after following another vehicle – which was authorized to enter the complex – through a security checkpoint.
The incident caused several streets in Washington, D.C. to be closed temporarily, and the person who attempted to enter the White House complex was taken into custody, The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2019/11/21/several-streets-downtown-washington-are-closed/?outputType=amp">reported</a>. It was around 4:45 a.m. when Joy Ihuoma Utokanandu, a 42-year-old from Grand Prairie, TX, attempted to trail another vehicle through a security checkpoint. Officials with the Secret Service released a statement on the incident <a href="https://twitter.com/SecretService/status/1197487181884985345?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-35113094633878874726.ampproject.net%2F1911121900560%2Fframe.html">on Twitter</a> a few hours later.
“An unauthorized vehicle attempted to gain entry to the White House complex by following another vehicle that was lawfully entering at an external complex checkpoint,” the statement said. “The vehicle was stopped and the individual was immediately taken into custody by Secret Service U.D. Officers.”
Utokanandu’s actions caused several streets near the White House to shut down for nearly two hours. A section of Pennsylvania Avenue and 17th Street NW were both part of the shutdown.
NBC News <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/secret-service-stops-suspicious-vehicle-trying-get-white-house-complex-n1088321">reported</a> that in addition to the Secret Service, the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department and a bomb disposal team also responded to the incident. The outlet also included a photo from the incident of Utokanandu’s black Mercedes SUV “surrounded by luggage and what appears to be piles of colorful material.”
At this time, no motive has been established.
Earlier this year, a man was arrested after gaining access to a restricted area near the White House. The man said in court documents <a href="https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Man-Arrested-at-White-House-Said-He-Wanted-to-Take-Bottles-of-Crown-Royal-to-President-Trump-503828091.html">reviewed by NBC4</a> that he was trying to take President Donald Trump two bottles of Crown Royal. The man, Yianny Georgopoulos, moved a bike rack with a “No trespassing authorized personnel only” sign on it in order to get into the restricted area.
Trump famously doesn’t drink.
In January 2019, a 21-year-old man was arrested for allegedly planning to attack the White House and other government buildings. NBC News <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-arrested-allegedly-planning-attack-white-house-other-federal-buildings-n959576">reported</a> at the time that Hasher Jallal Taheb, from Georgia, was arrested after a yearlong investigation into the alleged planning of his attack.
No one could forget the death of Miriam Carey, who drove her car into the White House back in 2013 and then led police through the streets of Washington, D.C., until she was gunned down. Carey had her infant daughter in the back seat of her vehicle and appeared to have suffered from postpartum depression with psychosis. She had previously believed President Barack Obama had wiretapped her home.
Also during the Obama administration, a man landed a gyrocopter on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol in 2015. Sixty-two-year-old Douglas Hughes, a formal postal worker, pleaded guilty to flying the vehicle without the proper licensing. He was sentenced to four months in prison in 2016. Hughes apparently did not realize how dangerous his flight would be or how D.C. residents would view his intentions.

Someone Tried To Enter The White House Complex By Following An Authorized Vehicle Through A Checkpoint

Crime

For weeks now, I have been pushing the message on my weekly Election Wire newsletter (sign up <a href="http://lp.dailywire.com/getelectionwire/">here</a>!) that the White House&#8217;s current impeachment defense strategy is misguided. Rather than focus on the procedural and semantical debate over whether a &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; took place on the impeachment inquiry&#8217;s underlying Jury 25th phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, I have argued that it would be far preferable for the White House to <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1197163856482713603?s=12">defend the underlying substance</a> of the phone call as failing to rise to the Constitution&#8217;s impeachment criteria.
Following U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland&#8217;s testimony today in front of the House Intelligence Committee, I feel vindicated. After all, Sondland&#8217;s testimony today focused <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/sondland-yes-there-was-a-quid-pro-quo-for-white-house-meeting">disproportionately</a> — perhaps nearly <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ambassador-sondland-strikes-at-democrats-impeachment-narrative-trump-told-me-he-wanted-no-quid-pro-quo">exclusively</a> — on the question of whether a &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; took place when Trump broached the subject of investigating the corrupt nexus of the Bidens and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-hammer-on-tipping-point-with-liz-wheeler-the-hunter-biden-foia-bombshell">troubled Ukrainian energy company Burisma</a> in the context of doling out fresh U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine.
The debate over whether a &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; transpired has been at the very heart of Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff&#8217;s (D-CA) impeachment inquiry, and it seems to be the consensus Democratic Party stance that such a &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; would be ipso facto (hey, the English language has other Latin loanwords, too) <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-stop-calling-everything-impeachable-offense-josh-hammer">impeachable</a>. Accordingly, President Trump and his defenders in both the Republican elected official ranks and conservative punditry have centered their defense of Trump&#8217;s actions around the argument that no &#8220;quid pro quo&#8221; took place on the July 25th phone call.
This is a tactical error that ought to be remedied. But the good news is that it is not too late to change course.
Let&#8217;s start with first principles. <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii">Article II, Section 4</a> of the U.S. Constitution defines the jurisdiction of impeachable offenses as being &#8220;treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.&#8221; In using the phrase &#8220;high crimes and misdemeanors,&#8221; the Constitution&#8217;s Framers employed a well-known phrase with a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crimes_and_misdemeanors#Britain">rich history</a> in the English common law tradition.
In <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed65.asp">The Federalist No. 65</a>, Alexander Hamilton helpfully defines &#8220;high crimes and misdemeanors&#8221; as being &#8220;those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.&#8221; By contrast, the men at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 expressly considered the much lower impeachment threshold of mere <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/09/27/how-founding-fathers-saw-impeachment-high-crimes-misdemeanors/">&#8220;maladministration&#8221;</a> before deciding against it. Put another way, the Framers specifically deliberated the possibility of constitutionally permitting impeachment for something as trivial as a mere policy disagreement or partisan squabble before rejecting that possibility outright.
The White House, congressional Republicans, and Trump-friendly conservative media alike should reorient their impeachment defense toward arguing that Trump&#8217;s conduct on the July 25th phone call with Zelensky simply does not rise to this elevated &#8220;high crimes and misdemeanors&#8221; constitutional criterion. The White House and its defenders should make the point that the absolute worst-case interpretation of the phone call is that of an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-at-the-new-york-post-alexander-vindman-condemned-himself-in-his-impeachment-testimony">ethical disagreement</a> over how — or how not — presidents ought to attach strings to the doling out of U.S. taxpayer-funded foreign aid. In no world, the White House should argue, does Trump&#8217;s conduct in attaching <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/the-two-theories-of-trumps-actions-in-the-ukraine-affair/">legitimate, corruption crackdown-tied strings</a> to the U.S.&#8217;s doling out substantial foreign aid to Ukraine constitute, using the Hamiltonian language of The Federalist No. 65, an &#8220;abuse or violation of some public trust.&#8221; This argument would be politically popular, to boot: Americans <a href="https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/03/11/foreign-aid">routinely poll against foreign aid</a>, and agreeing with the premise that <a href="https://www.facebook.com/GlennBeck/videos/3094994400515040/">strings should be attached to foreign aid</a> is therefore a winning message for Republicans as we head into the heart of election season.
It is not yet too late for the GOP to change tactical course. But Sondland&#8217;s testimony today really ought to serve as a wakeup call for the White House and its congressional allies that they should do so sooner rather than later.

Gordon Sondland testifying

HAMMER: Sondland’s Testimony Reveals The Error Of The White House’s Impeachment Defense Strategy

Democratic Party

Gordon Sondland

Hunter Biden

Joe Biden

Ukraine

Volodymyr Zelensky

Quid pro quo.
It&#8217;s all anyone in Washington, D.C. is talking about. Did President Trump demand Ukrainian leaders investigate the business dealings of the son of a potential 2020 presidential opponent in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. aid? That is at the heart of the impeachment inquiry now underway on Capitol Hill.
You&#8217;ll get a different answer from the two political camps — and sometimes, from a single witness testifying before the House Intelligence Committee.
Gordon Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union (EU), testified on Wednesday that there was a quid pro quo as it relates to &#8220;the requested White House call and White House meeting.&#8221; Sondland also said it came from former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Trump&#8217;s personal lawyer, at the &#8220;express direction&#8221; of the president.
“Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the president of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the president,” Sondland said.
But the White House on Wednesday refuted Sondland’s testimony that there was a quid pro quo involving the White House and Ukraine.
“Ambassador Sondland previously testified that the president told him directly that he was not interested in a quid pro quo,” the White House said in a statement, referring to his private testimony last month. “He testified that President Trump repeatedly made it clear he wanted no quid pro quo.”
In those close-door hearings, Sondland — a political novice and hotel executive who was named EU ambassador after contributing $1 million to the 2016 Trump campaign — asserted that Trump had not sought a quid pro quo by withholding U.S. aid to force Ukraine to perform political favors.
On November 5th, Sondland revised his earlier testimony, <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/469155-sondland-changes-quid-pro-quo-story">The Hill</a> reported.
<blockquote>Sondland says “I now recall” a Sept. 1 meeting with top U.S. and Ukrainian officials in Warsaw, where he told an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that nearly $400 million in U.S. financial aid was contingent on Zelensky committing to investigations into the 2016 election and Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company that employed the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading 2020 presidential contender.
“After a large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Sondland said, referring to the aide, Andriy Yermak.</blockquote>
“By the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement,” his revised declaration said.
On Tuesday, the White House pointed out the conflicting accounts.
&#8220;Ambassador Sondland squarely states that he ‘did not know, (and still does not know) when, why or by whom the aid was suspended.’ He also said he ‘presumed’ there was a link to the aid — but cannot identify any solid source for that assumption,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said.
Sondland said he spoke with Trump on his cell phone on July 26th, the day after the president had a phone call with Zelensky.
Asked about that call, Trump said: &#8220;I know nothing about that. First time I&#8217;ve heard it. The one thing I&#8217;ve seen that Sondland said was that he did speak to me with for a brief moment and I said &#8216;no quid pro quo under any circumstances.'&#8221;
&#8220;And that&#8217;s true. But I&#8217;ve never heard this. In any event, it is more secondhand information, but I&#8217;ve never heard it,&#8221; Trump told reporters last week.

House Intelligence Committee Continues Open Impeachment Hearings

White House Pushes Back On Ambassador’s Claim Of ‘Quid Pro Quo’

On Monday, when the World Series champion Washington Nationals visited the White House, one member of the team decided to flout current political correctness and don a MAGA hat, raising his arms in triumph.
That athlete was Nationals’ catcher Kurt Suzuki, who told the crowd, &#8220;I love you all.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;I love you all! Thank you!&quot; 
Nationals catcher Kurt Suzuki walks up to a microphone outside the White House and whips out a <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MAGA?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MAGA</a> hat.
Check out <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a>&#39;s reaction: <a href="https://t.co/PdR8wFnfN8">pic.twitter.com/PdR8wFnfN8</a>
&mdash; Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) <a href="https://twitter.com/dcexaminer/status/1191429202609868800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 4, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In 2012, Suzuki and his wife Renee founded the Kurt Suzuki Family Foundation; its <a href="http://www.kurtsuzukifamilyfoundation.org/">website</a> states, “With the many blessings bestowed on our family, we want to do our part to improves the lives of others. Offering service to others produces the highest rewards … The Kurt Suzuki Family Foundation is a non-profit agency that is dedicated to supporting the scientific research of chronic illnesses as well as encouraging healthy lifestyle choices.&#8221;
It has been all too common in recent years for professional athletes on championship winning teams to refuse to visit the Trump White House. Ss recently as last week Nationals’ pitcher Sean Doolittle stated he would not join the team when they visited the White House, telling <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/11/01/sean-doolittle-declining-white-house-invite-i-dont-want-hang-out-with-somebody-who-talks-like-that/">The Washington Post</a>, “There’s a lot of things, policies that I disagree with, but at the end of the day, it has more to do with the divisive rhetoric and the enabling of conspiracy theories and widening the divide in this country. My wife and I stand for inclusion and acceptance, and we’ve done work with refugees, people that come from, you know, the ‘s***hole countries.’ At the end of the day, as much as I wanted to be there with my teammates and share that experience with my teammates, I can’t do it. I just can’t do it.”
He added, “People say you should go because it’s about respecting the office of the president. And I think over the course of his time in office he’s done a lot of things that maybe don’t respect the office.”
Speaking of racism and white supremacy, Doolittle said, “The rhetoric, time and time again, has enabled those kind of behaviors. That never really went away, but it feels like now people with those beliefs, they maybe feel a little bit more empowered. They feel like they have a path, maybe. I don’t want to hang out with somebody who talks like that.”
Prior to that, in June 2018 the Trump White House announced the Philadelphia Eagles were officially <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/31447/trump-disinvites-philadelphia-eagles-white-house-james-barrett">disinvited</a> from the White House after only a few committed to visit to celebrate their Super Bowl victory. That prompted then-Cleveland Cavaliers star LeBron James during the NBA Finals between the Cavaliers and the Golden State Warriors to <a href="https://www.nba.com/article/2018/06/05/warriors-cavaliers-say-theyre-not-going-white-house">state</a>, &#8220;I know no matter who wins this series, no one wants the invite anyway. So it won&#8217;t be Golden State or Cleveland going.&#8221;
U.S. Women’s Soccer Team co-captain Megan Rapinoe <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ouch-trump-blasts-megan-rapinoe-after-she-says-amanda-prestigiacomo">infamously stated</a>, “I’m not going to the f&#8212;&#8212; White House.” Rapinoe’s comment triggered <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1143892329582997505?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1143892329582997505&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2Fouch-trump-blasts-megan-rapinoe-after-she-says-amanda-prestigi">Trump to tweet</a>, “Megan should never disrespect our Country, the White House, or our Flag, especially since so much has been done for her &amp; the team. Be proud of the Flag that you wear. The USA is doing GREAT!”

President Trump Hosts World Series Champions,  The Washington Nationals

Nationals’ Catcher Dons MAGA Cap At White House Event Celebrating Championship

Washington Nationals

A Halloween party at the White House last week invited children and their families to help &#8220;Build the Wall&#8221; by creating a paper mural with their own personalized bricks.
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="4" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
&#8220;The party, which took place inside the office building used by White House staff, included the families of executive-branch employees and VIP guests inside and outside government,&#8221; reports <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/white-house-childre-build-the-wall-halloween_n_5dbdf8b3e4b0576b62a2e141">HuffPost</a>. Even though many of the attendees were members of President Trump’s administration, not everyone thought the Halloween game was a treat.&#8221;
Here is just one photo of the display:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
EXCLUSIVE: At a White House Halloween party, children were encouraged to help “Build the Wall” with their own personalized bricks <a href="https://t.co/ckofO1fIrY">https://t.co/ckofO1fIrY</a> by <a href="https://twitter.com/janawinter?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@janawinter</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/hunterw?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@hunterw</a> &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/CEDickson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CEDickson</a> <a href="https://t.co/X6QExgMNZ4">pic.twitter.com/X6QExgMNZ4</a>
&mdash; Yahoo News (@YahooNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/YahooNews/status/1190652585579044864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Children dressed in costumes were given brick-colored paper and asked to write their names down to form the display. Their &#8220;bricks&#8221; were taped to a wall on, forming a &#8220;Build the Wall&#8221; display on the first floor of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.
The &#8220;Wall&#8221; was the work of an EEOB staffer, not the president&#8217;s or vice president&#8217;s office directly.
&#8220;Earlier in the week offices inside the EEOB had been instructed to put together kid-friendly displays for trick-or-treaters,&#8221; continued HuffPost. &#8220;The displays were supposed to be interactive and inspiring, and all were supposed to address the party’s theme: &#8216;When I grow up I want to be…'&#8221;
Though the vice president&#8217;s ceremonial office is located on the building&#8217;s second floor, a spokesperson for Mike Pence said his office had no hand in the display.
“Our ceremonial office had a plane display,” the spokesperson said. “We had kids build their own paper airplanes and fly them. That’s what the VP came to. He came to our ceremonial office.”
One person in attendance told Yahoo News on the condition of anonymity that they were horrified by the display. “Horrified. We were horrified,&#8221; the person said.
One anonymous official in the Trump administration felt people were making too big a deal out of the display. “Everyone loses their minds over everything, and nothing can be funny anymore,” the person said.
One Republican congressional staffer frankly said, &#8220;Who gives a s*** about EEOB having Halloween decorations.”
Ben Rohrbaugh, who worked on National Security Council on border security in the Obama administration, told Yahoo News that the wall is a &#8220;xenophobic symbol.&#8221;
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="9" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="16" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
“To the extent the wall is just a xenophobic symbol, this is obviously a gross thing to have children do,” said Rohrbaugh. “To the extent it’s a representation of an actual wall on the southwest border, the kids have made nearly as much progress as the president has since 2017.”
Nate Snyder, who previously served in the Department of Homeland Security as a counterterrorism official, said the White House never created such political displays during the Obama administration.
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="18" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
“We never did anything like this in the Obama administration,” said Snyder. “We hung up skeletons and ghosts.”
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="19" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
Immigration activists were also disturbed by the display. Erika Andiola, the chief advocacy officer for pro-immigration non-profit RAICES, said a border wall should never have been part of a children&#8217;s Halloween party.
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="23" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
“I don’t think they understand the amount of pain that people are going through at the border for them to make a joke out of it,” Andiola said. “We still are dealing with children in cages even if people are not calling it that, so it’s not a joke.”
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="28" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="25" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, said the display dehumanized brown people. “It screams to white grievance voters that ‘real Americans’ should fear, exclude and dehumanize brown people,” Sharry said. “Only in Trump’s White House would a holiday event centered on kids, costumes and candy become a propaganda opportunity for his racism and xenophobia.”
</div>
</div>
</div>

President Trump And First Lady Melania Host Halloween Event At The White House

Families Visiting White House Were Invited To Help ‘Build The Wall’ On Halloween

Halloween

Immigration

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), one of the key members of the progressive Congressional &#8220;squad,&#8221; reiterated a claim Sunday that Democrats are quietly considering jailing allies of President Donald Trump if they do not comply with the House&#8217;s impeachment inquiry.
Tlaib told local Detroit news program, Deadline Detroit, that Democrats, who have issued a number of subpoenas to Trump friends, family members, and administration officials, have discussed detaining those who don&#8217;t show up to testify, <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/465551-tlaib-says-democrats-have-discussed-detaining-white-house-officials-who-dont">the Hill reports</a>.
&#8220;There have been actual serious conversations about what the logistics would look like &#8230; if we did have to force someone through a court order to come before the Congressional committee,&#8221; she said.
Congress typically negotiates with potential witnesses who receive subpoenas but have concerns about testifying. Jailing those who refuse to comply with a demand for testimony would be a novel approach, which Tlaib acknowledged: &#8220;This is pretty uncharted territory for many of us and even for Congress.&#8221;
This isn&#8217;t the first time Tlaib has talked about jailing ideological opponents, particularly those allied with the president, who could have information as to whether Trump discussed a deal with Ukrainian officials, returning cancelled foreign aid if Ukrainian prosecutors pursued Hunter Biden, son of former Vice President Joe Biden, and investigated an energy corporation that placed Hunter Biden on its board.
Tlaib gleefully announced Democrats&#8217; plans to jail impeachment inquiry witnesses at a town hall meeting in metropolitan Detroit last week.<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-rashida-tlaib-claims-democrats-are-quietly-talking-about-arresting-trump-officials"> The Daily Wire&#8217;s Molly Prince</a> reported on the incident last Tuesday.
&#8220;Let me tell you, this is pretty — and this is the last caucus conversation we had. Do you know this is really unprecedented? This is the worst time we&#8217;ve ever had a situation like this,&#8221; Tlaib said then. &#8220;So they&#8217;re trying to figure out — no joke — they&#8217;re trying to figure out, &#8216;Well, is it the D.C. police that goes and gets them?&#8217; No, no.&#8221;
&#8220;What are we hoping? I mean, I&#8217;m not in those kinds of conversations, but I&#8217;m asking, like, you know, what happens? And they&#8217;re like, &#8216;Well, Rashida, we&#8217;re trying to figure it out ourselves because this is uncharted territory,'&#8221; she continued. &#8220;No, I&#8217;m telling you that they&#8217;re trying to be like, &#8216;Well, where are we going to put them? Where are we going to hold them?&#8217; No, I mean those are the kinds of things they’re trying to tread carefully.&#8221;
Other Democrats, aside from Tlaib, have expressed interest in jailing non-compliant witnesses. Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA) told CNN on Wednesday that he would like the House Sergent-at-Arms to &#8220;march&#8221; them to the &#8220;little jail&#8221; they have in the Capitol if they refuse to honor their subpoenas.
So far, at least two White House officials, Attorney General William Barr and Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, have refused Congressional orders to testify and House Democrats have voted to hold both in contempt as a result. The House does have the option of jailing those who defy subpoenas but has historically avoided such a display. In this case, as in cases before, the visual of escorting administration officials to jail probably would not benefit the jailing party.
Luckily for Barr, Ross, and the rest of the White House staff &#8212; all of whom have been instructed not to respond to the impeachment inquiry &#8212; Tlaib isn&#8217;t among the legislators responsible for handling their testimony.

us-politics-immigration-migrants

Rashida Tlaib: We’re Considering Jailing The President’s Allies If They Don’t Comply With Impeachment Inquiry

Rashida Tlaib

What would your “What I Did on My Summer Vacation” essay look like? More to the point, what would Congress’ look like? While the House and the Senate adjourned for all of August (and had little to show for June and July), the White House was hard at work addressing the crisis at the border.
With three initiatives — the Migrant Protection Protocol (MPP), the asylum cooperation agreement with Guatemala, and the interim final rule for migrants requesting asylum at the southern border — the Trump administration has sought to enforce existing law consistently and fairly and to regain control of our borders.
Additionally, the administration has successfully pressed Mexico to step up enforcement of its own laws, a move which <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-border-crossings-continue-to-fall-as-mexico-disrupts-migrant-flow-11567646550">cut illegal border crossings into the U.S. by 30%</a> from July to August.
The MPP, sometimes referred to as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, directly addresses the immigration magnet at the root of our border crisis — the promise of asylum, a way to get to the front of the line for legal immigration.
Our asylum system is designed to help those who are truly fleeing danger — those with a “credible fear” of persecution by their government. It’s not designed for those simply seeking a better job or even a better life. Under the old rules, asylum seekers would be released into the U.S. as they await their court dates (and many would simply not appear for court). By sending asylum claimants back to Mexico — still thousands of miles from the danger they say they’re fleeing — the administration is removing that temptation.
The Trump administration is also working to address asylum claims through its new asylum cooperation agreement with Guatemala — requiring migrants to seek asylum in Guatemala rather than in the U.S. Again, the point of the U.S. asylum system is to protect those who are truly in danger. Once migrants enter into a safe third country, they’re out of danger (though now, many of them undertake the long and dangerous trek to the U.S. southern border, often at the mercy of human traffickers). The agreement with Guatemala will help our migration crisis by discouraging false claims made by those who, when pressed, <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2019/08/09/migrants-seeking-asylum-america-pushed-farther-south-mexico/">admit</a> they’re only coming to the U.S. for a better job.
It will also help curb human trafficking. It will, as President Trump <a href="https://www.apnews.com/23f6b9a087e841188c5484cd5cf04f3d">said</a>, help “put the coyotes and smugglers out of business.”
The administration’s interim final rule — which would declare migrants ineligible for asylum if they passed through Mexico without applying for asylum there — would also help discourage fake claims.
But a federal judge has blocked that rule from going into effect with a temporary injunction, and he’s now indicating <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-05/judge-leans-toward-blocking-trump-asylum-restriction-nationwide">he could make that permanent</a>. That would be a disservice — both to the U.S. immigration system and to genuine asylum seekers themselves.
The judge’s reasoning is that the new rule “<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-24/trump-s-asylum-seeker-restriction-blocked-by-judge">is inconsistent with the existing asylum laws</a>.” It’s not. It’s entirely consistent with the goal of ensuring safety — and fairness — to the persecuted. The current influx of asylum seekers, on the other hand, has completely overwhelmed a system that should be deliberate, thoughtful, and comprehensive.
The Trump administration will fight that ruling — as it should — all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Finally, the administration has convinced Mexico to enforce its own laws and its own borders, and the result has been a decrease in the flow of migrants from Central America. Immigration officials put the decrease at about <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-border-crossings-continue-to-fall-as-mexico-disrupts-migrant-flow-11567646550">30%</a> — at a time of the year when border crossings normally increase, not decrease.
Mexico is simply guarding its border — as all sovereign nations have a right to do — instead of allowing Central Americans to pass through and place a greater strain on the U.S. border. And it’s deporting those who enter Mexico illegally.
Critics of the administration say these measures are heartless — that we are a nation of immigrants, and migrants are only coming for the freedom and opportunities we enjoy.
But these criticisms conflate two things — legal immigration and illegal immigration. If we just stop enforcing our immigration laws because they’re difficult, or unpopular, then we’re setting aside the rule of law — the very thing that makes the United States different from the Central American countries many are fleeing.
Critics also conflate asylum seekers with economic refugees. They’re different, as are the ways that U.S. immigration laws deal with them. The bar for asylum seekers is high; the line for migrants looking for a better life is long. Confusing the two only muddles the debate.
Ultimately, Congress must do its job by implementing immigration reform that’s in the best interest of the United States and its citizens. Until then, the Trump administration is doing what it can, and making a difference.
Summer is over for both the House and the Senate. They’ll return to find that the White House hasn’t been idle.
The Honorable John N. Hostettler is the Vice President for Federal Affairs for States Trust at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. He served in the U.S. House from 1995 to 2007 representing Indiana’s Eighth District.

HOSTETTLER: Congress Has Been On Recess, But The Trump Administration Has Been Busy

Congress

Illegal Immigration

Southern Border

*This article has been changed since its original publication.
President Donald Trump&#8217;s personal assistant Madeleine Westerhout resigned from her job after the White House learned that she had revealed personal information about Trump and his family to reporters in an &#8220;off-the-record&#8221; conversation. How the White House learned about the conversation has sparked speculation, with one Republican insider alleging that a Washington Post journalist &#8220;burned&#8221; Westerhout.
According to <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-personal-assistant-madeleine-westerhout-abruptly-resigns-n1048166">NBC News</a>, Westerhout resigned from her position late Thursday when the White House learned she had shared personal information about the president and his family during an off-the-record conversation with reporters earlier this month while they were covering his vacation at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey. Though the details she allegedly shared remain unknown, a source close to the situation told <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/29/us/politics/trump-madeleine-westerhout.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share">The New York Times</a> Westerhout&#8217;s resignation was swift and abrupt.
Westerhout had been serving under President Trump since the 2016 transition.
Since her resignation, GOP political strategist Arthur Schwartz has alleged that two reporters and White House insiders have fingered Philip Rucker of the Washington Post as the journalist who &#8220;burned&#8221; Westerhout for the off-the-record conversation in what would be a violation of journalistic standards.
&#8220;I&#8217;ve heard from two reporters that [Philip Rucker] is the one that burned Madeleine Westerhout. A couple of people in the WH told me the same,&#8221; Schwartz tweeted on Friday.
&#8220;Where the hell is the <a href="https://twitter.com/whca" data-focusable="true">@whca</a> on the Amazon Washington Post / <a href="https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker" data-focusable="true">@PhilipRucker</a> scandal? They&#8217;re busy defending a Playboy columnist&#8217;s right to behave like a buffoon at the WH instead of addressing an unprecedented credibility crisis facing their entire profession. Shameful,&#8221; Schwartz continued.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I’ve heard from two reporters that <a href="https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PhilipRucker</a> is the one that burned Madeleine Westerhout. A couple of people in the WH told me the same.
— Arthur Schwartz (@ArthurSchwartz) <a href="https://twitter.com/ArthurSchwartz/status/1167280974528491524?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Where the hell is the <a href="https://twitter.com/whca?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@whca</a> on the Amazon Washington Post / <a href="https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PhilipRucker</a> scandal? They’re busy defending a Playboy columnist’s right to behave like a buffoon at the WH instead of addressing an unprecedented credibility crisis facing their entire profession. Shameful.
— Arthur Schwartz (@ArthurSchwartz) <a href="https://twitter.com/ArthurSchwartz/status/1167438011665190914?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
In a later post, Schwartz shared Washington Post&#8217;s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ask-the-post/wp/2016/01/01/policies-and-standards/">policies and standards</a> regarding reporters, which clearly states that &#8220;off-the-record&#8221; subjects should not be &#8220;for publication or in further reporting&#8221; and that the journalist must ensure that the person being interviewed has a full understanding of the term &#8220;off-the-record.&#8221;
<blockquote>This is the trickiest of all, because so many people misuse the term. By the traditional definition, off-the-record information cannot be used for publication or in further reporting. But many sources, including some sophisticated officials, use the term when they really mean &#8220;not for attribution to me.&#8221; We must be very careful when dealing with sources who say they want to be &#8220;off the record.&#8221; If they mean &#8220;not for attribution to me,&#8221; we need to explain the difference, and discuss what the attribution will actually be. If they really mean off the record as the term is traditionally defined, then in most circumstances, we should avoid listening to such information at all. We do not want to be hamstrung by a source who tells us something that becomes unusable because it is provided on an off-the-record basis.</blockquote>
Madeleine Westerhout previously served as a Republican National Committee aide prior to working for Mitt Romney&#8217;s 2012 presidential campaign. The New York Times reports that she &#8220;cried on election night because she was upset over Mr. Trump&#8217;s victory&#8221; and that &#8220;the president at first viewed her warily, as a late convert to his cause who could not be trusted.&#8221;
&#8220;Some of Mr. Trump&#8217;s top officials — like John F. Kelly, who has since left as chief of staff — tried to turn Ms. Westerhout into an ally who could help them manage Oval Office traffic,&#8221; reports the Times. &#8220;They hoped that she could block individuals from reaching the president on the phone or in person, and that she would report back on the calls and meetings that made it through.&#8221;
UPDATE: Shortly after the publication of this article, <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/30/trumps-personal-assistant-fired-ivanka-tiffany-1479226">Politico reported</a> that Madeleine Westerhout allegedly told the journalists present that &#8220;she had a better relationship with Trump than his own daughters, Ivanka and Tiffany Trump, and that the president did not like being in pictures with Tiffany because he perceived her as overweight.&#8221;
&#8220;Westerhout also jokingly told the journalists that Trump couldn&#8217;t pick Tiffany out of a crowd, said one of the people,&#8221; reported Politico. &#8220;&#8216;She had a couple drinks and in an uncharacteristically unguarded moment, she opened up to the reporters,&#8217; the person said.&#8221;

President Donald Trump AndMadeleine Westerhout

Trump’s Personal Assistant Resigns Over ‘Off-The-Record’ Conversation With Reporters

Back in the 1980s, President Reagan used to dodge questions from the press as he walked toward his presidential helicopter, Marine One, on the lawn of the White House. With ABC News reporter Sam Donaldson in his terrible toupee yelling &#8220;Sir! Sir!&#8221; at him, Reagan would cup a hand around his ear, shrug his shoulders as if he couldn&#8217;t hear, then walk off, all without missing a stride.
The press complained loudly back then.
But President Trump does it a bit differently. As he strolls toward his chopper, he stops and takes questions — sometimes a whole bunch of questions. And wouldn&#8217;t you know it, the press don&#8217;t like THAT either.
One reporter told <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/22/trump-marine-one-press-briefings-1471629">Politico</a> that if Trump were at a podium, &#8220;we would be correcting him.&#8221;
&#8220;If he was at a podium, we would be pressing him after he answers the question, we would be correcting him, we would be pointing out discrepancies in previous answers, and we&#8217;re not able to do that in the chaotic setting of a departure,&#8221; CBS News White House correspondent Weijia Jiang said. &#8220;Many times I&#8217;ve tried to ask a follow-up question, but he&#8217;s already pointed to somebody else.&#8221;
Aw, that&#8217;s horrible. Doesn&#8217;t the president of the United States realize that the NBC reporter is running the press conference? What a travesty!
Jiang also said the loud engines on the chopper give Trump an advantage. &#8220;He&#8217;ll just hear a word that catches his attention like &#8216;racism&#8217; or &#8216;the Squad&#8217; or whatever the topic is, and he&#8217;ll just deliver what he&#8217;s probably already been tweeting about and what he already firmly believes so that can be difficult,&#8221; she said.
But Trump&#8217;s on-the-move press conferences give reporters far more access than his predecessor gave, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-chopper-talks-reporters-criticize-accesible-accountable-marine-one-helicopter-press-secretary-grisham">Fox News</a> reports.
&#8220;According to CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller, who keeps detailed records of the presidency, Trump has stopped to answer reporter questions — both departing or arriving to the White House on Marine One and on the tarmac before or after riding Air Force One — more than 80 times. He said he found only three instances when former President Barack Obama similarly spoke to reporters in transit and, during such times, he used a podium,&#8221; Fox wrote.
Reporters have had far more access to Trump — and not just on the White House lawn. &#8220;The frequent &#8216;chopper talk&#8217; is one of the reasons Trump has surpassed his five predecessors — Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan — in fielding questions from reporters during their first 30 months in office, according to the White House Transition Project. Those five presidents took questions at approximately one third of their public speaking events, while Trump does so at more than half of his,&#8221; Politico reported.
White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said last week that Trump is &#8220;so accessible&#8221; she can&#8217;t fathom why &#8220;what any of the press could complain about.&#8221;
&#8220;President Trump communicates directly with the American people more than any President in history,&#8221; she said. &#8220;The fact that the White House press corps can no longer grandstand on TV is of no concern to us.&#8221;
But veteran reporter Peter Baker of the New York Times also complained about the way Trump takes questions.
&#8220;There&#8217;s no question that it works to his advantage that we look unruly and disorderly,&#8221; Baker told Politico. &#8220;It&#8217;s not like standing at a podium in the East Room or the briefing room, where you can have a civilized calling on people who raise their hands.&#8221;
Baker also said reporters are forced to ask straight-forward questions. &#8220;You can&#8217;t ask a question that has a predicate or a kind of complex construction because you&#8217;re shouting with all the other reporters like &#8216;Mr. President, what about Iran?’&#8217;or &#8216;Mr. President, they say you&#8217;re a racist,'&#8221; Baker said.​
Aww, the poor White House press corps.

President Donald Trump Departs White House For Kentucky

Trump Infuriates White House Press Corps By Taking A Bunch Of Questions So Often

Politico

During the White House&#8217;s Social Media Summit in the Rose Garden on Thursday, CNN contributor Brian Karem and radio host Sebastian Gorka got involved in a tense verbal exchange that included a challenge from Karem to &#8220;go outside&#8221; and Gorka calling Karem a &#8220;punk.&#8221; But in CNN Chief White House Correspondent Jim Acosta&#8217;s incomplete summary of events, the blow-up — started by Karem, as video evidence shows — was an example of Trump&#8217;s &#8220;social media allies&#8221; &#8220;verbally abus[ing] reporters who were trying to do their jobs.&#8221;
Acosta began his curtailed coverage of the event by taking a selfie and describing the group of social media figures as &#8220;Trump’s social media allies,&#8221; who, Acosta makes sure to note, are &#8220;in the front rows&#8221; while all the White House press are &#8220;in the back.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">The scene in the WH Rose Garden. All WH press in the back. Trump’s social media allies in the front rows. <a href="https://t.co/wi8m4yW53N">pic.twitter.com/wi8m4yW53N</a>
— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) <a href="https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1149431908293578753?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 11, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
The moment from the event that generated the most buzz online was Karem and Gorka&#8217;s heated exchange. Acosta, who has consistently portrayed himself as unfairly targeted by the White House, framed the incident as Trump&#8217;s &#8220;allies&#8221; attacking a journalist just there to do his job while White House officials stood by in tacit approval.
&#8220;WH officials invited Trump&#8217;s social media allies to sit in the Rose Garden. But after the event was over, West Wing aides did nothing when those social media figures began to verbally abuse reporters who were trying to do their jobs. A good snapshot of how press is treated by WH,&#8221; Acosta tweeted.
He linked to a video that only shows Gorka calling Karem a &#8220;punk&#8221; and social media figures cheering Gorka — one predicting Gorka could kick Karem&#8217;s &#8220;punk a**&#8221; — while some of Karem&#8217;s fellow &#8220;real journalists&#8221; complain.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">WH officials invited Trump&#8217;s social media allies to sit in the Rose Garden. But after the event was over, West Wing aides did nothing when those social media figures began to verbally abuse reporters who were trying to do their jobs. A good snapshot of how press is treated by WH. <a href="https://t.co/j0Ys542dok">https://t.co/j0Ys542dok</a>
— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) <a href="https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1149450457414340613?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 11, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">&#8230; in the rose garden of the <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@whitehouse</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/SebGorka?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@sebgorka</a> just screamed at journalist <a href="https://twitter.com/BrianKarem?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@briankarem</a> calling him a &#8220;punk.&#8221; then someone remarked that gorka could &#8220;kick your punk ass.&#8221;
again, this happened&#8230; in the rose garden. 
vid from <a href="https://twitter.com/katierogers?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@katierogers</a> <a href="https://t.co/F88NX4lWk7">pic.twitter.com/F88NX4lWk7</a>
— fake nick ramsey (@nick_ramsey) <a href="https://twitter.com/nick_ramsey/status/1149438819248365571?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 11, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
But, as people quickly pointed out to Acosta, his account of the confrontation and the video he linked conveniently left out how the whole thing got started (h/t <a href="https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2019/07/11/shocker-jim-acostas-account-of-what-went-down-at-the-wh-between-a-journo-and-seb-gorka-is-missing-something-video/">Twitchy</a>).
&#8220;As expected: Starting the clip with Gorka comment without the context of Karem earlier challenging him to a fight. Which is punk. And dishonest on @Acosta &#8216;s part,&#8221; wrote one follower.
Breitbart&#8217;s Kyle Morris responded by providing another angle of the incident: &#8220;Sounds as if Brian Karem was only in attendance to berate Trump supporters,&#8221; wrote Morris.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">Here’s a better angle. Sounds as if Brian Karem was only in attendance to berate Trump supporters. <a href="https://t.co/gMhlcL3VDE">pic.twitter.com/gMhlcL3VDE</a>
— Kyle Morris (@RealKyleMorris) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealKyleMorris/status/1149474934655090697?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
As Morris&#8217; video shows, Karem prompted Gorka&#8217;s actions by taunting the social media figures. &#8220;This is a group of people that are eager for demonic possession,&#8221; said Karem.
In response, Gorka yelled back, &#8220;And you&#8217;re a journalist, right?&#8221;
&#8220;Hey, come on over here and talk with me, brother, we can go outside and have a long conversation,&#8221; said Karem, gesturing for Gorka to come over.
Gorka complied, walking over rapidly. &#8220;You&#8217;re threatening me now, at the White House? In the Rose Garden? You&#8217;re threatening me, in the Rose Garden!&#8221; said Gorka. &#8220;You are a punk! You&#8217;re not a journalist! You&#8217;re a punk!&#8221; Gorka yelled in Karem&#8217;s face.
&#8220;Go home,&#8221; said Karem. &#8220;Hey Gorka, get a job!&#8221;
The exchange inspired the &#8220;Gorka!&#8221; cheers from social media personalities.
A couple of other responses to Acosta&#8217;s &#8220;fake news&#8221; post: &#8220;Nope[.] But a solid #FakeNews take@BrianKarem started it by saying of the invited guests[.] &#8216;This is a group that is eager for demonic possession.&#8217; Then @SebGorka responded to that insult,&#8221; wrote Jim Hanson. &#8220;The king of #FakeNews @Acosta will never admit he’s a liar Jim,&#8221; added ret. Col. Rob Maness.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">Nope 
But a solid <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FakeNews?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FakeNews</a> take<a href="https://twitter.com/BrianKarem?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BrianKarem</a> started it by saying of the invited guests 
&#8220;This is a group that is eager for demonic possession&#8221; 
Then <a href="https://twitter.com/SebGorka?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SebGorka</a> responded to that insult
I assume you&#8217;ll correct the record<a href="https://t.co/v5SU1agUeU">https://t.co/v5SU1agUeU</a>
— Jim Hanson (@Uncle_Jimbo) <a href="https://twitter.com/Uncle_Jimbo/status/1149479991173713920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">The king of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FakeNews?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FakeNews</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Acosta?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Acosta</a> will never admit he’s a liar Jim.
— Col. Rob Maness ret. (@RobManess) <a href="https://twitter.com/RobManess/status/1149659077301035011?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet"></div>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47313/cnns-acosta-lies-about-what-trump-said-speech-gets-ryan-saavedra">CNN&#8217;s Acosta Lies About What Trump Said At Speech, Gets Slammed Online</a>

Acosta Says Trump’s ‘Social Media Allies’ Verbally Abused Reporters, Then Video Comes Out

Fake News

Jim Acosta

According to sources who spoke to The Daily Wire from both inside and outside the administration, the Trump administration will not implement any policy that allows countries to import Iranian oil — thus apparently closing the door on a <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/03/trump-china-iran-oil-1396052">proposal being circulated among State Department hands</a> that would have allowed China to use an obscure legal loophole to avoid U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil imports.
Last Wednesday, Eliana Johnson of Politico <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/03/trump-china-iran-oil-1396052">reported a very interesting scoop</a>: &#8220;The State Department is seriously considering using an Obama-era loophole to allow China to import oil from Iran,&#8221; which would &#8220;violat[e] the Trump administration’s pledge to bring Iranian oil exports to zero.&#8221; Specifically, Johnson cited &#8220;three U.S. officials&#8221; who claimed that the U.S. is considering &#8220;granting China a waiver to a 2012 law [the Iran Freedom and Counterproliferation Act] intended to kneecap the Iranian oil industry.&#8221; The proposal would have effectively allowed China to avoid paying directly for Iranian oil while nonetheless still acquiring it.
For close observers of the Trump administration&#8217;s foreign policy and national security apparatus, this might have seemed more than a little strange. Why would this administration, which famously removed the U.S. from the harrowing capitulation to fundamentalist jihadist evil that was President Barack Obama&#8217;s Iran nuclear deal and has infamous Iran hawk John Bolton as its national security advisor, undercut the thrust of its own <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2019/04/29/trump-ends-waiver-grace-period-for-irans-oil-customers/">hardline Iran oil waivers policy</a> by granting an obscure legal loophole to the U.S.&#8217;s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47057/hammer-china-americas-greatest-21st-century-threat-josh-hammer">number one 21st century geopolitical threat</a>?
To be sure, Politico almost assuredly did not get the story wrong. Rather, leakers in the famously Arabist/anti-Israel State Department bureaucracy were likely candid about internal deliberations in Foggy Bottom.
But reading Johnson&#8217;s scoop, one is forced to ponder the distinct possibility that the State Department could be wildly out of line with administration officials in and around the White House national security apparatus. Sure enough, a senior Trump administration official contacted by The Daily Wire categorically ruled out implementation of any proposal that would grant the Chinese such a waiver for Iranian oil imports.
&#8220;There will be no waivers issued to any country for the import of Iranian oil, in accordance with the President’s direction,&#8221; the senior administration official stated. &#8220;Importing Iranian oil is a sanctionable activity under U.S. law. U.S. secondary sanctions will be fully enforced.&#8221;
Well.
This is what a brutal inter-agency fight looks like. Hawkish Iran hardliners in the administration are battling — quite publicly now, as of this writing&#8217;s publication — with dovish State Department mandarins.
Contacted by The Daily Wire, a U.S. official familiar with the inter-agency Trump administration battle over Iranian oil waivers put it bluntly: &#8220;The president is under enormous pressure to give Iran a face-saving off-ramp and look the other way at sanctions busting. The Europeans and their friends inside the administration are selling him the delusion that the ayatollah is ready to make a deal, if only he&#8217;ll bribe Iran with a few hundred million dollars. It hasn&#8217;t worked yet. They&#8217;re still trying.&#8221;
This will be a fascinating inter-agency fight to watch unfold. Iran hawks have a very clear rooting interest — and it is surely not with the State Department. Suffice it to say there is no world whatsoever in which China ought to be granted any waivers at all for importing Iranian oil.

HAMMER: INTER-AGENCY FIGHT: White House Closes Door On Plan To Give China ‘Get-Out-Of-Jail’ Free Card For Iran Oil

Barack Obama

Iran

Mike Pompeo

Nuclear Weapons

State Department

In her upcoming book, &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/What-Do-We-Need-Men/dp/1250215439">What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal</a>,&#8221; famous Elle advice columnist E. Jean Carroll accuses Donald Trump of forcefully raping her in the mid-1990s, an allegation she says she chose not to make public earlier because she did not want to deal with the potential blowback. In a statement to <a href="https://www.thecut.com/2019/06/donald-trump-assault-e-jean-carroll-other-hideous-men.html#_ga=2.263806606.363324053.1561140850-961065709.1561140850">New York Magazine</a>, which published the passage from the book containing the accusation, the White House dismissed her account as &#8220;a completely false and unrealistic story surfacing 25 years after allegedly taking place.&#8221;
In the excerpt of the book&#8212; which includes multiple sexual assault allegations, including against former CBS CEO Les Moonves &#8212; Carroll says that in the mid-1990s, when she was 52, she ran into Trump in the luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman in midtown Manhattan. Recognizing her, Trump asked if she could help him pick out lingerie for another woman. When Trump asked her to model a lace bodysuit, she jokingly suggested that he should try it on instead, she says.
&#8220;As we head to the dressing rooms, I&#8217;m laughing aloud and saying in my mind: I&#8217;m gonna make him put this thing on over his pants!&#8221; she writes. Then, she says, things quickly turned from jovial to violent:
<blockquote>
The moment the dressing-room door is closed, he lunges at me, pushes me against the wall, hitting my head quite badly, and puts his mouth against my lips. I am so shocked I shove him back and start laughing again. He seizes both my arms and pushes me up against the wall a second time, and, as I become aware of how large he is, he holds me against the wall with his shoulder and jams his hand under my coat dress and pulls down my tights.
I am astonished by what I&#8217;m about to write: I keep laughing. The next moment, still wearing correct business attire, shirt, tie, suit jacket, overcoat, he opens the overcoat, unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway &#8212; or completely, I&#8217;m not certain &#8212; inside me. It turns into a colossal struggle. I am wearing a pair of sturdy black patent-leather four-inch Barneys high heels, which puts my height around six-one, and I try to stomp his foot. I try to push him off with my one free hand &#8212; for some reason, I keep holding my purse with the other &#8212; and I finally get a knee up high enough to push him out and off and I turn, open the door, and run out of the dressing room.
The whole episode lasts no more than three minutes. I do not believe he ejaculates. I don&#8217;t remember if any person or attendant is now in the lingerie department. I don&#8217;t remember if I run for the elevator or if I take the slow ride down on the escalator. As soon as I land on the main floor, I run through the store and out the door &#8212; I don&#8217;t recall which door &#8212; and find myself outside on Fifth Avenue.
</blockquote>
Carroll, now 75, says that while she did not tell police, she did tell two friends about the incident. One &#8212; whom she describes as &#8220;a journalist, magazine writer, correspondent on the TV morning shows, author of many books, etc.&#8221; &#8212; &#8220;begged&#8221; her to go to the police, she says, while the second &#8212; also a journalist and New York anchorwoman &#8212; advised her to, &#8220;Tell no one. Forget it! He has 200 lawyers. He&#8217;ll bury you.&#8221;
In explanation of why she hasn&#8217;t come forward about the incident before, Carroll writes: &#8220;Receiving death threats, being driven from my home, being dismissed, being dragged through the mud, and joining the 15 women who&#8217;ve come forward with credible stories about how the man grabbed, badgered, belittled, mauled, molested, and assaulted them, only to see the man turn it around, deny, threaten, and attack them, never sounded like much fun. Also, I am a coward.&#8221;
<a href="http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/president-donald-trump-faces-new-rape-accusation.html?utm_medium=s1&amp;utm_source=tw&amp;utm_campaign=nym&amp;__twitter_impression=true&amp;__twitter_impression=true&amp;__twitter_impression=true">New York Magazine</a> reports that it &#8220;has verified that Carroll did disclose the attack to these friends at the time, and has confirmed that Bergdorf Goodman kept no security footage that would prove or disprove Carroll&#8217;s story.&#8221;
When the magazine reached out to Trump for comment, a senior White House official dismissed the allegations, saying in a statement, &#8220;This is a completely false and unrealistic story surfacing 25 years after allegedly taking place and was created simply to make the President look bad.&#8221;
A representative for Moonves also responded to a request for comment, saying he &#8220;emphatically denies&#8221; Carroll&#8217;s claim that he once tried to force himself on her in an elevator.
UPDATE: Trump responded to Carroll&#8217;s allegations in a <a href="http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/president-donald-trump-faces-new-rape-accusation.html">statement</a> released to the White House Press Pool on Friday:
<blockquote>
Regarding the &#8220;story&#8221; by E. Jean Carroll, claiming she once encountered me at Bergdorf Goodman 23 years ago. I&#8217;ve never met this person in my life. She is trying to sell a new book &#8212; that should indicate her motivation. It should be sold in the fiction section.
Shame on those who make up false stories of assault to get publicity for themselves, or sell a book, or carry out a political agenda &#8212; like Julie Swetnick who falsely accused Justice Brett Kavanaugh. It&#8217;s just as bad for people to believe it, particularly when there is zero evidence. Worse still for a dying publication to try to prop itself up by peddling fake news &#8211; it&#8217;s an epidemic.
Ms. Carroll &amp; New York Magazine: No pictures? No surveillance? No video? No reports? No sales attendants around?? I would like to thank Bergdorf Goodman for confirming they have no video footage of any such incident, because it never happened.
False accusations diminish the severity of real assault. All should condemn false accusations and any actual assault in the strongest possible terms.
If anyone has information that the Democratic Party is working with Ms. Carroll or New York Magazine, please notify us as soon as possible. The world should know what&#8217;s really going on. It is a disgrace and people should pay dearly for such false accusations.
</blockquote>

Advice Columnist: Trump Raped Me In Mid-’90s; UPDATE: Trump Responds

E. Jean Carroll

Rape

Sexual Assault

Last Thursday, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan and Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney held a phone briefing with members of the media. The full transcript is <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/05/30/background-press-call-senior-administration-officials-crisis-our-southern-border">publicly available</a>, courtesy of the Department of Homeland Security. On the call, McAleenan referred to the present overwhelming influx of migrant aliens as placing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in a situation that is &#8220;beyond sustainable capacity.&#8221;
The Center for Immigration Studies has a <a href="https://cis.org/Arthur/McAleenan-Details-Scope-Disaster-Border">helpful summary</a> of the staggering &#8212; and truly tragic, from a humanitarian perspective &#8212; key takeaways of the McAleenan/Mulvaney phone call:
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Over the past 21 days, an average of over 4,500 people have crossed our border illegally or arrived at ports of entry without documents. In May of 2017, that number was less than 700 a day. The month of May is on pace to be the highest month in crossings in over 12 years and will significantly surpass the record 109,000 in April.</li>
<li>U.S. immigration authorities now have over 80,000 people in custody, a record level that is beyond sustainable capacity with current resources. Over 7,500 single adults are in custody at the border and Immigration and Customs Enforcement is holding over 50,000.</li>
<li>Over 2,350 unaccompanied children &#8211; the highest level ever &#8211; are currently in custody waiting for days for placements in border stations that cannot provide appropriate conditions for them because Health and Human Services is out of bed space and Congress has failed to act on the administration&#8217;s emergency supplemental request for more than four weeks.</li>
<li>A five- and a ten-month old drowned in a river transiting Mexico to the United States in the last few days.</li>
<li>More than 75,000 families have already transited through Mexico to the Southwest border this month alone.</li>
<li>More than 4,000 foreign nationals appeared at the border this year with children that they fraudulently claimed were their own, a number that is increasing.</li>
<li>At any given moment, up to 100,000 migrants are transiting Mexico on their way to the U.S. border.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
CBP has often used extraordinarily blunt language, of late, in describing the present <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/46643/poll-even-many-more-democrats-now-describe-our-josh-hammer">crisis</a> at our southern border. In a <a href="https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/local-media-release/over-2200-apprehensions-el-paso-sector-border-patrol-memorial-day">press release</a> from last week <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47792/cbp-reports-staggering-number-memorial-day-josh-hammer">announcing</a> a staggering number of Memorial Day apprehensions for the CBP-designated El Paso Sector, for example, CBP referred to the &#8220;influx of illegal aliens entering our country [who have] no respect for our immigration laws.&#8221; As The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/46992/crisis-cbps-april-border-numbers-further-reveal-josh-hammer">reported</a>, furthermore, CBP responded to the publication earlier last month of its monthly apprehension numbers for the month of April by tweeting about the &#8220;unprecedented&#8221; and &#8220;unsustainable&#8221; influx: &#8220;#CBP is experiencing an unprecedented and unsustainable situation at the Southwest border. In April, CBP apprehended or deemed inadmissible 109,144 individuals along the SWB.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CBP?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CBP</a> is experiencing an unprecedented and unsustainable situation at the Southwest border. In April, CBP apprehended or deemed inadmissible 109,144 individuals along the SWB. Details here: <a href="https://t.co/ru9AsalgPb">https://t.co/ru9AsalgPb</a> <a href="https://t.co/kzfTpfPNP8">pic.twitter.com/kzfTpfPNP8</a>
&#8212; CBP (@CBP) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBP/status/1126214086839214083?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
A month prior, CBP Deputy Commissioner Robert E. Perez <a href="https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releases-march-statistics-southwest-border-migration">referred</a> to the migrant alien onslaught as presenting a &#8220;system-wide emergency.&#8221; &#8220;We are currently experiencing a system-wide emergency in our processing and holding facilities,&#8221; Perez stated at the time of the release of CBP&#8217;s apprehension data for the month of March.
Congressional Democrats have <a href="https://amgreatness.com/2019/05/04/the-democrats-are-humanitarian-frauds-on-the-border/">consistently rejected attempts</a> to help mollify the humanitarian crisis presently afflicting our <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/46207/day-our-beleaguered-border-human-smugglers-arizona-josh-hammer">beleaguered</a> border.

DHS: Number Of Aliens In Custody At Border ‘Beyond Sustainable Capacity’

Department of Homeland Security

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Mexico

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

In a horrifying moment caught on video, a man set himself on fire near the White House on Wednesday, walking around fully engulfed in flames for several seconds before Secret Service and police arrived to extinguish the flames and attempt to save his life. The man died from the wounds Wednesday evening, authorities say. More details about the man, who has since been identified, have emerged.
The man, who U.S. Park Police identified early Thursday as Arnav Gupta, 33, of Bethesda, Maryland, died of his wounds Wednesday evening, Washington D.C.&#8217;s <a href="https://wtop.com/dc/2019/05/man-sets-himself-on-fire-near-white-house-secret-service-says/">WTOP</a> reported Thursday. Gupta had been reported missing earlier Wednesday, family members citing concerns about his &#8220;physical and emotional welfare.&#8221;
On Wednesday, the Montgomery County Police Department issued the following <a href="http://www.mymcpnews.com/2019/05/29/concern-for-missing-bethesda-area-man-2/">press release</a> announcing &#8220;Concern for Missing Bethesda Area Man&#8221;:
<blockquote>
Detectives from the Montgomery County Department of Police &#8211; 2nd District Investigative Section are asking for the public&#8217;s assistance in locating a missing Bethesda area man.
Arnav Gupta, age 33, was last seen by family when he left his Cindy Lane home at approximately 9:20 this morning (Wednesday, May 29).
Gupta is described as an Indian male who is 5&#8217; 9&#8221; tall and weighs 200 pounds. He has black hair, brown eyes, a mustache, and wears glasses.
Police are concerned for Gupta&#8217;s physical and emotional welfare.
Anyone with information regarding the whereabouts of Arnav Gupta is asked to call the Montgomery County Police non-emergency number at 301-279-8000 (available 24 hours). Callers may remain anonymous.
</blockquote>
&#8220;At approximately 12:20 p.m. a man lit himself on fire on the Ellipse near 15th and Constitution Ave., Secret Service personnel are on scene assisting @NatlParkService and @usparkpolicepio in rendering first aid,&#8221; the Secret Service tweeted Wednesday.

<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
At approximately 12:20 p.m. a man lit himself on fire on the Ellipse near 15th and Constitution Ave., Secret Service personnel are on scene assisting <a href="https://twitter.com/NatlParkService?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@NatlParkService</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/usparkpolicepio?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@usparkpolicepio</a> in rendering first aid.
&#8212; U.S. Secret Service (@SecretService) <a href="https://twitter.com/SecretService/status/1133780123675746305?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
After authorities put out the flames, Gupta was rushed to a nearby hospital.
&#8220;Sgt. Eduardo Delgado, a spokesman for the U.S. Park Police, said the man was in critical condition. Park police assumed jurisdiction because the Ellipse is a national park,&#8221; The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/man-sets-himself-on-fire-on-white-house-ellipse-secret-service-says/2019/05/29/bf72fc9e-8233-11e9-95a9-e2c830afe24f_story.html">reported</a> Wednesday. &#8220;Delgado said authorities are trying to identify the accelerant that was used and determine whether the man has a car parked in the area. He said police do not yet know the man&#8217;s identity and don&#8217;t know a motive.&#8221;
The case has since been turned over to the Washington D.C. police department.
Video of the incident quickly made its way onto social media (warning: disturbing content):
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/FoxNews?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@FoxNews</a> Video of the person that was literally engulfed in flames on the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WhiteHouse?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WhiteHouse</a> lawn. Unbelievable <a href="https://t.co/4IS37Rndme">pic.twitter.com/4IS37Rndme</a>
&#8212; Krisjan Berzins (@KrisjanBerzins) <a href="https://twitter.com/KrisjanBerzins/status/1133776514175197185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Jesus Christ. This guy set himself on fire outside the White House. <a href="https://t.co/IIXAoGS6ia">pic.twitter.com/IIXAoGS6ia</a>
&#8212; Mariaaaa (@bedolla_maria) <a href="https://twitter.com/bedolla_maria/status/1133797975094960130?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>

UPDATES: Man Who Set Himself On Fire Near White House Dies; Identity Revealed

Washington D.C.

Menu