Rep. Matt Gaetz apologized late Tuesday for comments many regarded as threatening to Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former personal attorney who is set to testify Wednesday in front of the House Oversight Committee.

“While it is important 2 create context around the testimony of liars like Michael Cohen, it was NOT my intent to threaten, as some believe I did. I’m deleting the tweet,” Gaetz wrote on Twitter.

The Florida Republican and Trump ally came under fire for a tweet earlier Tuesday that asked Cohen, “Do your wife & father-in-law know about your girlfriends? Maybe tonight would be a good time for that chat. I wonder if she’ll remain faithful when you’re in prison. She’s about to learn a lot…”

Gaetz later defended his comments, telling reporters, “We’re witness testing not witness tampering. And when witnesses come before Congress their truthfulness and veracity are in question and we have the opportunity to test them.”

Cohen, who pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, is expected to testify Wednesday about Trump’s knowledge of leaked Democratic emails and negotiations for Trump Tower Moscow during the campaign, along with the hush-money payments to two women who alleged affairs with Trump that led to Cohen’s guilty plea for campaign finance violations.

Gaetz’ apology was in response to a statement from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who had issued an admonishment after Gaetz’ initial tweet to members about comments that “can adversely affect the ability of house committees to obtain the truthful and complete information necessary to fulfill their duties” — comments she said should be monitored by the Ethics Committee.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/matt-gaetz-apologizes-for-tweet-alleging-michael-cohen-has-girlfriends

Some reporters barred from dinner event

Ahead of the president’s dinner with Kim, some reporters who were supposed to go into the dinner — including ones who asked questions in the previous appearance — were barred from entering.

At first the White House was not going to allow any print pooler reporters into the room, citing sensitivities of shouted questions. But according to the designated print pooler, a Wall Street Journal reporter, photographers protested, and the Journal reporter was allowed into the room. Wire pool reporters were not allowed into the room.

But Sanders appeared to change her explanation, seeming to cite space as the main issue at stake.

“Due to the sensitive nature of the meetings we have limited the pool for the dinner to a smaller group, but ensured that representation of photographers, TV, radio and print poolers are all in the room,” Sarah Sanders said in a statement. “We are continuing to negotiate aspects of this historic summit and will always work to make sure the U.S. media has as much access as possible.”

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/trump-kim-jong-un-summit-2019-02-27-north-korea-leader-meeting-vietnam-today-live-updates/

<!– –>

What happened?

On Tuesday, India said its Air Force conducted strikes against a militant camp in Pakistani territory. That attack killed a “very large number” of terrorists, trainers and senior commanders belonging to the Jaish-e-Mohammed, according to New Delhi.

India’s response came after the group recently claimed responsibility for a deadly attack in India-controlled Kashmir where more than 40 security officers were killed. That suicide car bombing prompted a barrage of international criticism toward Pakistan for failing to crack down on terror groups operating on its soil.

For its part, Islamabad denied there were any casualties from India’s Tuesday strike.

On Wednesday, Pakistan said its Air Force carried out strikes along the so-called Line of Control to demonstrate its “right, will and capability for self defence.” The Line of Control is the de facto border between the Indian and Pakistani parts of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Then, according to a spokesman for the Pakistan armed forces, Indian planes entered Pakistani airspace and two jets were shot down. One of the aircraft fell on India’s side of Kashmir, while the second came down in Pakistani-held territory, and its pilot was captured, the spokesman said.

An Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesman acknowledged that one pilot was missing and a combat jet had been lost. That spokesman also claimed a Pakistani jet had been shot down in the altercation.

Why does it matter?

Kashmir has always been a sensitive topic for both countries, which have fought two wars over the mountainous region. In 2014, forces from Pakistan and India exchanged fire in border clashes.

Tuesday’s attack was the first time India has used airstrikes inside Pakistan since 1971. Moreover, the area it struck — Balakot — was well outside Pakistani Kashmir and beyond the Line of Control.

Since the terrorist attack earlier this month, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been under pressure from his base to respond with force ahead of a parliamentary election due to take place by May.

“That India entered Pakistan’s airspace is a clear indication that it is willing to do whatever it takes to keep India safe, which, I suspect, caught Pakistan off-guard,” Akhil Bery, analyst for South Asia at political consultancy Eurasia Group, told CNBC on Tuesday.

Dhruva Jaishankar, a fellow in foreign policy studies at Brookings India, said India has faced a series of terrorist attacks since the 1990s from groups and individuals based in Pakistan. The challenge for both sides has always been about how to respond to provocations from its neighbor, especially after each country became a nuclear power.

Jaishankar told CNBC that both countries have tested the limitations of how far they can escalate the conflict before reaching a “nuclear threshold.”

To be clear, escalating tensions to the point of nuclear conflict would be catastrophic for both India and Pakistan and would destabilize the entire region — an option unlikely to be taken by either New Delhi or Islamabad.

For his part, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s sway with the country’s influential military is limited. The way Khan handles this week’s situation will be a big test of his leadership, according to Moeed Yusuf, associate vice president for the Asia Center at the United States Institute of Peace.

“You have a new leader in Pakistan who (has to) show that he is strong and willing to stand up to India,” Yusuf told CNBC. “He must also follow the army’s lead and so if the army decides to escalate, he won’t be able to say much to them right now.”

For Modi, meanwhile, it would be “political suicide” if he walked back on the conflict at this stage — when it may appear to outside observers that India and Pakistan had evenly matched each other’s force, Yusuf said.

What’s next?

Experts have said it is highly unlikely that a war would break out between the two nations — even if the situation escalates further in the coming days.

Eurasia Group’s Bery said New Delhi’s public statements on its air strikes were careful to emphasize that it was an attack on a terror camp that was already planning terrorism against India. Modi may also have electoral politics in mind.

“Modi has already alluded to the strikes in a campaign rally earlier today, and will continue to press the point he is willing to do whatever it takes to keep India safe,” Bery said on Tuesday, adding that the prime minister is positioning himself as someone committed to India’s security to appeal to more voters.

For Pakistan’s part, Jaishankar said it is possible that Islamabad would play up Wednesday’s air strikes as “some kind of a retribution” and that could even lead to a de-escalation of tension between the countries.

The international community may need to get involved in coming days, according to Yusuf, who said the U.N. Security Council should step in and prevent further use of force.

— The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to the report.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/27/india-pakistan-air-strike-claims-what-you-need-to-know.html

As House Democrats vote Tuesday to stop President Trump’s emergency declaration on the southern border, congressional Republicans should ask themselves: Why is it that every other president is permitted by courts to exercise “executive discretion,” and yet Trump isn’t?

A New York Times report on Monday set up the scene for weak-willed Senate Republicans, writing that, “The [Democrat-controlled] House’s vote on a declaration of disapproval will force Republicans to choose between the congressional prerogative over federal spending established in the Constitution and a president determined to go around the legislative branch to secure funds for a border wall that Congress has refused to grant.”

This is, on its face, a false choice, though some in the GOP are stupidly buying into it.

Trump’s emergency declaration earlier this month does nothing more than free up little bits of money already allocated to the executive branch so that he can build more wall barriers on the border, stunting the overwhelming flood of illegal immigration from Latin America.

It’s every bit of a crisis today as it was when former President Barack Obama called it that in 2014, and the media happily played along. Trump’s official declaration only means he’s using his last option to address the issue.

This isn’t an choice between fidelity to the Constitution or blind loyalty to a president; though I’ll note the executive branch is part of that newly appreciated document, and Congress has already given the president the authority to do exactly what Trump is pursuing. This is a choice about relinquishing authority to Democrats to set immigration policy even while a Republican president is in office.

Obama made up his own law in 2012 that said nearly 1 million eligible illegal immigrants in the U.S. would not only be overlooked by law enforcement but could come out, declare themselves to the public, and receive indefinite legal protection.

Take for granted that the program was created out of compassion — plus Obama’s upcoming re-election — for young immigrants who may only know the U.S. as their home, but it should then also be taken for granted that if one president can dictate immigration policy within the authority Congress has given them, the same right belongs to every other president. Or, at the very least, every other president should be able to exercise power in moving to limit the influx of foreigners by erecting limited structures on the border.

Not so fast, says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit!

The federal court ruled in November that the Trump administration could not end the Obama-era program with the argument that it was never legal to set it up in the first place. And yet, in the court’s unanimous opinion, it repeatedly acknowledged that the executive branch has the right to determine enforcement of immigration law by way of “executive discretion.”

Page 10: Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals “was a permissible exercise of executive discretion.”

Page 27: The Reagan administration “exercised executive discretion to defer the deportation of the minor children of non-citizens” and “extended voluntary departure, the mechanism through which these individuals were allowed to remain in the United States is, like deferred action, a creature of executive discretion.”

Page 69: “We therefore conclude that DACA was a permissible exercise of executive discretion.”

Who with a straight face could argue that it’s acceptable “executive discretion” for one president to carve out an exception for up to 1 million people not legally entitled residence in the U.S. but that it’s unconstitutional for another duly elected executive to eliminate that same exception? The 9th Circuit did it.

Now Trump’s emergency declaration is, as everyone knew it would be, tangled up in court. That order didn’t even affect anyone in the U.S., whether legally here or not. It did nothing more than cobble together funds available to the executive so that Trump might add on to the existing walls and barriers at the southern border, slowing down the drug dealers, human traffickers, and child molesters from Central America.

Skittish Republicans can keep this in mind when presented with the fake dilemma that they must either choose between the Constitution and the president. They can instead choose reality.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-is-obama-allowed-executive-discretion-on-immigration-but-trump-isnt

If recent history is any indication, and of course it is, Michael Cohen’s testimony this week in front of Congress is about to make any lunatic ramblings by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., look like the musings of a wise sage.

Cohen, President Trump’s former gofer, will on Tuesday deliver what is expected to be three days of testimony implicating his ex-boss in a series of crimes Cohen has already pleaded guilty to, including campaign finance violations (Zzz…), lying to Congress, and lying to the FBI.

Cohen has admitted that he lied about the timeline of a real estate venture that the Trump Organization has pursued for decades, including into the 2016 election. Cohen also claimed that he acted on behalf of Trump during the election when he paid hush money to women who claimed they had separate affairs with Trump years before.

[Read more: Here’s what Congress wants to hear from Michael Cohen this week]

A federal judge sentenced Cohen to three years in prison for those crimes, which have some relation to Trump, and others, which don’t, including Cohen’s extensive history of tax evasion and bank fraud.

So far, there is no strong evidence that Trump himself was engaged in any legal wrongdoing. The president denies he ever told Cohen to lie about the pursuit of a Trump Tower in Moscow, a project Trump has dreamed about since the 1980s, and he denies that the payments to his alleged mistresses from roughly 12 years ago were made to influence the 2016 election.

And there’s no reason why Cohen’s testimony should carry any weight. He most recently embarrassed himself in a nationally televised interview by insisting over and over again that he was “taking responsibility” for his crimes.

Cohen is “taking responsibility” by going to prison the same way a deadbeat drunk is “taking responsibility” for being unemployed. When you’re fired from your job, “taking responsibility” is your only option.

There has never been a time that Cohen didn’t look like a delusional mess.

On Election Day 2016, after it was clear that Trump had won the presidency, Cohen reportedly told a group of friends, “Nobody’s going to be able to fuck with us. I think I’m going to run for mayor.”

I imagine Cohen’s grandmother nearby offering an encouraging, “Some day you will, baby! You will!”

In March of last year, Cohen referred to himself as Trump’s “Ray Donovan,” a TV character who made the problems of celebrities go away. If that was Cohen’s paid responsibility for Trump as a “fixer,” the president should ask for a full refund.

But classic Cohen is his interview in 2015 with the Daily Beast, which sought comment from him for a story on Trump’s divorce from Ivana. Apparently unaware that Ray Donovan is not real, Cohen nonetheless channeled his fictional persona, telling the reporter, “So I’m warning you, tread very fucking lightly, because what I’m going to do to you is going to be fucking disgusting. You understand me?”

Now that Cohen’s going to prison, though, he’s supposedly gone from Ray Donovan to repentant deacon.

No one took him seriously before, and they shouldn’t take him seriously now.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/michael-cohens-testimony-cant-be-taken-seriously-because-hes-always-been-a-sad-joke

Residents and officials of Budgam district, in Indian-controlled Kashmir, said one Indian plane crashed in an open field there at about 10:15 a.m. local time.

“It was an Indian Air Force jet. The jet is completely charred and we have recovered the dead body of the pilot,” said Syed Sehrish Asgar, the deputy commissioner of Budgam district.

Rashid Ahmad Mir, a resident of Budgam, said he heard a loud crash and looked out his window to find smoke billowing out from a nearby field. He rushed to the scene of the flames and found a charred body.

In the early hours of Tuesday morning, India’s Air Force entered Pakistan to strike what the government claimed was a training camp belonging to the Jaish-e-Mohammed militant group in Balakot, Khyber-Pakhtunkwha Province, resulting in “heavy casualties.” But the Pakistani government and residents of the area reached by telephone said the strikes instead struck an open ravine, resulting in minimal damage.

Those strikes were in response to the Feb. 14 suicide bombing by Jaish-e-Mohammed on an Indian paramilitary convoy in Kashmir, which New Delhi vowed to respond to. The suicide bombing killed 40 Indian soldiers, the worst incident in Kashmir in three decades.

Jaish-e-Mohammed is classified as a terrorist group by the United Nations and blacklisted. Although the group is formally banned by Pakistan’s government, American and Indian officials say it operates freely in the country, which Islamabad denies.

In an effort to diffuse tensions, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called the foreign ministers of both India and Pakistan on Tuesday evening.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/27/world/asia/kashmir-india-pakistan-aircraft.html

As House Democrats vote Tuesday to stop President Trump’s emergency declaration on the southern border, congressional Republicans should ask themselves: Why is it that every other president is permitted by courts to exercise “executive discretion,” and yet Trump isn’t?

A New York Times report on Monday set up the scene for weak-willed Senate Republicans, writing that, “The [Democrat-controlled] House’s vote on a declaration of disapproval will force Republicans to choose between the congressional prerogative over federal spending established in the Constitution and a president determined to go around the legislative branch to secure funds for a border wall that Congress has refused to grant.”

This is, on its face, a false choice, though some in the GOP are stupidly buying into it.

Trump’s emergency declaration earlier this month does nothing more than free up little bits of money already allocated to the executive branch so that he can build more wall barriers on the border, stunting the overwhelming flood of illegal immigration from Latin America.

It’s every bit of a crisis today as it was when former President Barack Obama called it that in 2014, and the media happily played along. Trump’s official declaration only means he’s using his last option to address the issue.

This isn’t an choice between fidelity to the Constitution or blind loyalty to a president; though I’ll note the executive branch is part of that newly appreciated document, and Congress has already given the president the authority to do exactly what Trump is pursuing. This is a choice about relinquishing authority to Democrats to set immigration policy even while a Republican president is in office.

Obama made up his own law in 2012 that said nearly 1 million eligible illegal immigrants in the U.S. would not only be overlooked by law enforcement but could come out, declare themselves to the public, and receive indefinite legal protection.

Take for granted that the program was created out of compassion — plus Obama’s upcoming re-election — for young immigrants who may only know the U.S. as their home, but it should then also be taken for granted that if one president can dictate immigration policy within the authority Congress has given them, the same right belongs to every other president. Or, at the very least, every other president should be able to exercise power in moving to limit the influx of foreigners by erecting limited structures on the border.

Not so fast, says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit!

The federal court ruled in November that the Trump administration could not end the Obama-era program with the argument that it was never legal to set it up in the first place. And yet, in the court’s unanimous opinion, it repeatedly acknowledged that the executive branch has the right to determine enforcement of immigration law by way of “executive discretion.”

Page 10: Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals “was a permissible exercise of executive discretion.”

Page 27: The Reagan administration “exercised executive discretion to defer the deportation of the minor children of non-citizens” and “extended voluntary departure, the mechanism through which these individuals were allowed to remain in the United States is, like deferred action, a creature of executive discretion.”

Page 69: “We therefore conclude that DACA was a permissible exercise of executive discretion.”

Who with a straight face could argue that it’s acceptable “executive discretion” for one president to carve out an exception for up to 1 million people not legally entitled residence in the U.S. but that it’s unconstitutional for another duly elected executive to eliminate that same exception? The 9th Circuit did it.

Now Trump’s emergency declaration is, as everyone knew it would be, tangled up in court. That order didn’t even affect anyone in the U.S., whether legally here or not. It did nothing more than cobble together funds available to the executive so that Trump might add on to the existing walls and barriers at the southern border, slowing down the drug dealers, human traffickers, and child molesters from Central America.

Skittish Republicans can keep this in mind when presented with the fake dilemma that they must either choose between the Constitution and the president. They can instead choose reality.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-is-obama-allowed-executive-discretion-on-immigration-but-trump-isnt

President Trump paid a courtesy call Wednesday to the leaders of Vietnam, the nation hosting this week’s summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

During the visit, Trump and Vietnamese President Nguyen Phu Trong presided over the signings of several commercial trade deals affecting the airline industries of their two countries.

SOUTH KOREA HOPES TRUMP-KIM SUMMIT IN VIETNAM USHERS NEW ERA OF PEACE

U.S. aircraft manufacturer Boeing signed agreements with VietJet for 100 737 MAX planes and with Bamboo Airways for 10 787 Dreamliners as the two leaders looked on Wednesday.

President Trump meets Vietnamese President Nguyen Phu Trong at the Presidential Palace, Wednesday, Feb. 27, 2019, in Hanoi. (Associated Press)

U.S.-based aviation technology company Sabre also inked a deal with Vietnam Airlines.

The White House did not immediately provide details on the agreements.

Trump, who arrived in Hanoi on Tuesday, said he hoped for “great things” from his second meeting with Kim. The president is scheduled to meet with Kim later Wednesday in Hanoi for a second round of nuclear talks.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The U.S. is attempting to achieve denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula following a series of missile tests by North Korea that have worried its immediate regional neighbors, such as China and Japan, and raised concerns that Pyongyang was developing weapons that could reach deep into the U.S. mainland.

The two heads of state previously met in Singapore last June.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/world/trump-meets-with-vietnams-president-ahead-of-hanoi-summit-with-north-koreas-kim

As House Democrats vote Tuesday to stop President Trump’s emergency declaration on the southern border, congressional Republicans should ask themselves: Why is it that every other president is permitted by courts to exercise “executive discretion,” and yet Trump isn’t?

A New York Times report on Monday set up the scene for weak-willed Senate Republicans, writing that, “The [Democrat-controlled] House’s vote on a declaration of disapproval will force Republicans to choose between the congressional prerogative over federal spending established in the Constitution and a president determined to go around the legislative branch to secure funds for a border wall that Congress has refused to grant.”

This is, on its face, a false choice, though some in the GOP are stupidly buying into it.

Trump’s emergency declaration earlier this month does nothing more than free up little bits of money already allocated to the executive branch so that he can build more wall barriers on the border, stunting the overwhelming flood of illegal immigration from Latin America.

It’s every bit of a crisis today as it was when former President Barack Obama called it that in 2014, and the media happily played along. Trump’s official declaration only means he’s using his last option to address the issue.

This isn’t an choice between fidelity to the Constitution or blind loyalty to a president; though I’ll note the executive branch is part of that newly appreciated document, and Congress has already given the president the authority to do exactly what Trump is pursuing. This is a choice about relinquishing authority to Democrats to set immigration policy even while a Republican president is in office.

Obama made up his own law in 2012 that said nearly 1 million eligible illegal immigrants in the U.S. would not only be overlooked by law enforcement but could come out, declare themselves to the public, and receive indefinite legal protection.

Take for granted that the program was created out of compassion — plus Obama’s upcoming re-election — for young immigrants who may only know the U.S. as their home, but it should then also be taken for granted that if one president can dictate immigration policy within the authority Congress has given them, the same right belongs to every other president. Or, at the very least, every other president should be able to exercise power in moving to limit the influx of foreigners by erecting limited structures on the border.

Not so fast, says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit!

The federal court ruled in November that the Trump administration could not end the Obama-era program with the argument that it was never legal to set it up in the first place. And yet, in the court’s unanimous opinion, it repeatedly acknowledged that the executive branch has the right to determine enforcement of immigration law by way of “executive discretion.”

Page 10: Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals “was a permissible exercise of executive discretion.”

Page 27: The Reagan administration “exercised executive discretion to defer the deportation of the minor children of non-citizens” and “extended voluntary departure, the mechanism through which these individuals were allowed to remain in the United States is, like deferred action, a creature of executive discretion.”

Page 69: “We therefore conclude that DACA was a permissible exercise of executive discretion.”

Who with a straight face could argue that it’s acceptable “executive discretion” for one president to carve out an exception for up to 1 million people not legally entitled residence in the U.S. but that it’s unconstitutional for another duly elected executive to eliminate that same exception? The 9th Circuit did it.

Now Trump’s emergency declaration is, as everyone knew it would be, tangled up in court. That order didn’t even affect anyone in the U.S., whether legally here or not. It did nothing more than cobble together funds available to the executive so that Trump might add on to the existing walls and barriers at the southern border, slowing down the drug dealers, human traffickers, and child molesters from Central America.

Skittish Republicans can keep this in mind when presented with the fake dilemma that they must either choose between the Constitution and the president. They can instead choose reality.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-is-obama-allowed-executive-discretion-on-immigration-but-trump-isnt

If recent history is any indication, and of course it is, Michael Cohen’s testimony this week in front of Congress is about to make any lunatic ramblings by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., look like the musings of a wise sage.

Cohen, President Trump’s former gofer, will on Tuesday deliver what is expected to be three days of testimony implicating his ex-boss in a series of crimes Cohen has already pleaded guilty to, including campaign finance violations (Zzz…), lying to Congress, and lying to the FBI.

Cohen has admitted that he lied about the timeline of a real estate venture that the Trump Organization has pursued for decades, including into the 2016 election. Cohen also claimed that he acted on behalf of Trump during the election when he paid hush money to women who claimed they had separate affairs with Trump years before.

[Read more: Here’s what Congress wants to hear from Michael Cohen this week]

A federal judge sentenced Cohen to three years in prison for those crimes, which have some relation to Trump, and others, which don’t, including Cohen’s extensive history of tax evasion and bank fraud.

So far, there is no strong evidence that Trump himself was engaged in any legal wrongdoing. The president denies he ever told Cohen to lie about the pursuit of a Trump Tower in Moscow, a project Trump has dreamed about since the 1980s, and he denies that the payments to his alleged mistresses from roughly 12 years ago were made to influence the 2016 election.

And there’s no reason why Cohen’s testimony should carry any weight. He most recently embarrassed himself in a nationally televised interview by insisting over and over again that he was “taking responsibility” for his crimes.

Cohen is “taking responsibility” by going to prison the same way a deadbeat drunk is “taking responsibility” for being unemployed. When you’re fired from your job, “taking responsibility” is your only option.

There has never been a time that Cohen didn’t look like a delusional mess.

On Election Day 2016, after it was clear that Trump had won the presidency, Cohen reportedly told a group of friends, “Nobody’s going to be able to fuck with us. I think I’m going to run for mayor.”

I imagine Cohen’s grandmother nearby offering an encouraging, “Some day you will, baby! You will!”

In March of last year, Cohen referred to himself as Trump’s “Ray Donovan,” a TV character who made the problems of celebrities go away. If that was Cohen’s paid responsibility for Trump as a “fixer,” the president should ask for a full refund.

But classic Cohen is his interview in 2015 with the Daily Beast, which sought comment from him for a story on Trump’s divorce from Ivana. Apparently unaware that Ray Donovan is not real, Cohen nonetheless channeled his fictional persona, telling the reporter, “So I’m warning you, tread very fucking lightly, because what I’m going to do to you is going to be fucking disgusting. You understand me?”

Now that Cohen’s going to prison, though, he’s supposedly gone from Ray Donovan to repentant deacon.

No one took him seriously before, and they shouldn’t take him seriously now.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/michael-cohens-testimony-cant-be-taken-seriously-because-hes-always-been-a-sad-joke

If you’re a journalist stranded in Vietnam, an Amtrak passenger stranded on a train or a former Trump lawyer stranded in a nightmare of your own making, you’ll certainly resonate with today’s Short List. It’s Ashley Shaffer with today’s most talked-about stories.

But first: Remind me to stop liking my own posts on social media because it’s weirding everybody out, according to these new rules of communicating in the digital era.

Four thousand-plus migrant children say they were abused

Thousands of migrant children who crossed the southern border into the U.S. reported they were sexually assaulted while in government custody, according to Department of Health and Human Services documents released Tuesday. In the past four years, 4,556 children said they were sexually assaulted while in the care of Health & Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement, which takes custody of unaccompanied minors who cross the southern border alone and those separated from their families. The data show the majority of the alleged assaults were carried out by other minors in custody, but at least 178 were carried out by staff. The allegations go back to 2015. 

House blocks Trump’s emergency declaration. Now what? 

The House voted to block President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency along the southern border on Tuesday, but Democrats didn’t win enough support from Republicans to overcome Trump’s threatened veto. The measure now goes to Senate. Trump declared an emergency this month after Congress sent the president a bipartisan funding bill that failed to meet his $5.7 billion demand for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Democrats have said the declaration is unconstitutional and are using a provision from the National Emergencies Act to try to halt the president. If the resolution passes both houses, Trump could still veto it.

Kim Jong Un gave U.S. journalists the boot

One hotel’s not big enough for American journalists and Kim Jong Un. Kim and his team pulled a fast one on the White House, forcing them to relocate the media’s press filing center from the hotel where the North Korean leader is staying. Television crews that spent weeks setting up equipment and establishing camera positions scrambled in the hours ahead of Trump’s arrival to meet Kim at the nuclear summit meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam. The two world leaders, who’ve threatened each other with nuclear annihilation in the past, are set to convene Wednesday. Few details about their agenda have been released, but it’s a safe bet that much of the discussion will center on their denuclearization agreement.

Real quick

Cohen’s about to tell on Trump

Michael Cohen once said he’d “take a bullet” for Trump. Today, he met behind closed doors with a Senate committee planning to accuse the president of ‘criminal conduct,’ according to a source familiar with the testimony. Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and confidant, pleaded guilty to several charges including for paying hush money to women who said they slept with Trump and for lying to Congress about negotiations for a Trump Tower in Russia. The question looming over his testimony: Did the president participate in those crimes? Trump, of course, has said he was not involved. Cohen’s also scheduled to testify for the first time publicly on Wednesday (and yes, it will be televised). 

She says Trump kissed without consent. Now she’s suing.

A former staffer on Trump’s 2016 campaign says he kissed her “on the lips” without consent two months before the general election, and now she’s suing. A lawsuit filed Monday says Trump kissed Alva Johnson on his way out of one of the campaign’s RVs at a Florida work event. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders called the allegation “absurd on its face” and said Johnson’s description of events contradicts “multiple highly credible eye witness accounts.” Three Trump supporters who were present, including then-Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, told The Washington Post they did not witness the alleged incident.

This is a compilation of stories from across the USA TODAY Network. Want The Short List straight to your inbox? Sign up, and tell your friends

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/02/26/cohen-trump-north-korea-chicago-and-vietnam-tuesdays-top-news/2991275002/

WASHINGTON — The Senate has confirmed President Donald Trump’s nominee to be a judge on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a party-line vote.

The Seattle attorney, Eric Miller, was confirmed 53-46, as the Republican-led Senate focuses on reshaping the federal judiciary in the Trump era.

The appeals court oversees the Western states and is often a target of Trump’s complaints about the judicial branch.

Miller was nominated last year but faced opposition from Democrats, in part over his views on issues of tribal sovereignty.

Among those objecting were Washington state’s two Democratic senators. Aides say Miller’s confirmation marks the first time the Senate has strayed from tradition and confirmed a judicial nominee over the dissent of both home-state senators.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC.

Source Article from https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/feb/26/eric-miller-trump-nominee-9th-circuit-court-confir/

Three people were killed in New York on Tuesday night when a Manhattan-bound train struck a car that was on the tracks, officials said.

The vehicle was “trying to beat the gate” at an intersection in Westbury around 7:30 p.m., according to Nassau County police.

The Long Island Rail Road train hit the vehicle, killing all three people inside, officials said. Several passengers on the commuter train suffered minor injuries.

The transit agency said the train was scheduled to arrive at Penn Station in New York City from Ronkonkoma at 7:56 p.m.

Service was suspended in both directions on the Ronkonkoma and Huntington/Port Jefferson branches.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/us/long-island-rail-road-train-slams-into-car-trying-to-beat-the-gate-3-killed

Fourteen candidates are vying to become Chicago’s next mayor, and more than 150 have lined up to run for a seat on the City Council. To win a Chicago race outright, a candidate must win more than 50 percent of the vote. Otherwise each race will go to an April 2 runoff between the top two finishers. Results below are not final.

Follow along with the latest updates and analysis from Tribune reporters in the field as results come in.

Results updated as of Feb. 26, 11:01 PM.
NOTE: This page does not update automatically. To update results, please refresh your browser.

Jump to a race

Source Article from https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/elections/ct-met-viz-chicago-mayor-election-results-htmlstory.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — Thousands of accusations of sexual abuse and harassment of migrant children in government-funded shelters were made over the past four years, including scores directed against adult staff members, according to federal data released Tuesday.

The cases include allegations of inappropriate touching, staff members allegedly watching minors while they bathed and showing pornographic videos to minors. Some of the allegations included inappropriate conduct by minors in shelters against other minors, as well as by staff members.

Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., released the Health and Human Services Department data during a hearing on the Trump administration’s policy of family separations at the border. The data span both the Obama and Trump administrations. The figures were first reported by Axios.

From October 2014 to July 2018, the Office of Refugee Resettlement, a part of Health and Human Services, received 4,556 complaints. The Department of Justice received an additional 1,303 complaints, including 178 allegations of sexual abuse by adult staff.

Health and Human Services officials said the vast majority of allegations weren’t substantiated, and they defended their care of children.




“We share the concern,” said Jonathan White, a Health and Human Services official who was in charge of the effort to reunify children with their parents, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. “Any time a child is abused … is one time too many. We abide fully with the laws this Congress has passed, and we are very proud of our outstanding track record of full compliance including referring every allegation for investigation. The vast majority of investigations prove to be unsubstantiated.”

The Office of Refugee Resettlement manages the care of tens of thousands of migrant children. More than 2,700 children were separated from their parents over the summer at the border, and were placed in shelters. But most of the children in government custody crossed the border alone.

Children are placed in government custody until they can be released to sponsors, usually a parent or close relative, while awaiting immigration proceedings. The shelters are privately run under contracts with the government.

Youth are held for increasingly longer periods of time, currently about two months. As of the first week of February, more than 11,000 migrant toddlers, children and teens were in federal custody as unaccompanied minors, up from about 2,500 detained children three months after Trump took office. Tens of thousands of children cycle through the system each year.

Sexual abuse allegations are reported to federal law enforcement, though it’s not clear whether anyone was charged criminally. In many cases, staff members were suspended and eventually fired.

Deutch said the data were clearly alarming.

“Together, these documents detail an unsafe environment of sexual assaults by staff on unaccompanied minors,” he said.

Health and Human Services officials say all allegations must be reported to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, child protective services and the FBI, and all allegations involving adults to local law enforcement. The department must cooperate with all investigations.

Facilities must provide training to all staff, contractors and volunteers. Background checks are completed on potential employees, and facilities are prohibited from hiring anyone who has engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior.

Source Article from https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/02/26/abuse-complaints-at-migrant-children-shelters-pile-up/23678818/

Three Republican senators — Susan Collins of Maine, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — have said that they will support the resolution, and several others have expressed extreme unease. Vice President Mike Pence and a Justice Department lawyer joined Republican senators on Tuesday for a lunch on Capitol Hill to outline what they maintained was the president’s statutory authority for the declaration.

Some senators emerged from the lunch still reluctant to say how they would vote.

“Any action by the administration must comply with federal law, so I am reviewing and assessing the specific legal authorities and justifications put forth by the administration,” said Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas. “I am very worried about the slippery slope that could occur.”

Some Republican lawmakers and aides said they were unconcerned because they were confident that they could prevent the two-thirds majority needed in both chambers to override a presidential veto, possibly the first delivered by Mr. Trump.

“There will be nowhere near the votes to override a veto,” Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the Republican whip, said Tuesday morning at a news conference. “Ultimately, we’re going to stand with the president in making sure we can secure this border.”

The resolution of disapproval, under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, serves as the easiest mechanism for Congress to end Mr. Trump’s declaration. House Democrats are still weighing the possibility of joining one of the lawsuits that have been filed to challenge the merits of the declaration.

Democrats, who overwhelmingly endorsed the resolution of disapproval, framed the vote as an ultimatum on whether lawmakers would buck party loyalty in order to protect Congress’s constitutionally granted powers. Ms. Pelosi, in a floor speech on Tuesday, listed a number of instances when House Republicans had objected to President Barack Obama’s use of executive power, vowing that “we are not going to give any president, Democratic or Republican, a blank check to shred the Constitution of the United States.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/26/us/politics/national-emergency-vote.html

If recent history is any indication, and of course it is, Michael Cohen’s testimony this week in front of Congress is about to make any lunatic ramblings by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., look like the musings of a wise sage.

Cohen, President Trump’s former gofer, will on Tuesday deliver what is expected to be three days of testimony implicating his ex-boss in a series of crimes Cohen has already pleaded guilty to, including campaign finance violations (Zzz…), lying to Congress, and lying to the FBI.

Cohen has admitted that he lied about the timeline of a real estate venture that the Trump Organization has pursued for decades, including into the 2016 election. Cohen also claimed that he acted on behalf of Trump during the election when he paid hush money to women who claimed they had separate affairs with Trump years before.

[Read more: Here’s what Congress wants to hear from Michael Cohen this week]

A federal judge sentenced Cohen to three years in prison for those crimes, which have some relation to Trump, and others, which don’t, including Cohen’s extensive history of tax evasion and bank fraud.

So far, there is no strong evidence that Trump himself was engaged in any legal wrongdoing. The president denies he ever told Cohen to lie about the pursuit of a Trump Tower in Moscow, a project Trump has dreamed about since the 1980s, and he denies that the payments to his alleged mistresses from roughly 12 years ago were made to influence the 2016 election.

And there’s no reason why Cohen’s testimony should carry any weight. He most recently embarrassed himself in a nationally televised interview by insisting over and over again that he was “taking responsibility” for his crimes.

Cohen is “taking responsibility” by going to prison the same way a deadbeat drunk is “taking responsibility” for being unemployed. When you’re fired from your job, “taking responsibility” is your only option.

There has never been a time that Cohen didn’t look like a delusional mess.

On Election Day 2016, after it was clear that Trump had won the presidency, Cohen reportedly told a group of friends, “Nobody’s going to be able to fuck with us. I think I’m going to run for mayor.”

I imagine Cohen’s grandmother nearby offering an encouraging, “Some day you will, baby! You will!”

In March of last year, Cohen referred to himself as Trump’s “Ray Donovan,” a TV character who made the problems of celebrities go away. If that was Cohen’s paid responsibility for Trump as a “fixer,” the president should ask for a full refund.

But classic Cohen is his interview in 2015 with the Daily Beast, which sought comment from him for a story on Trump’s divorce from Ivana. Apparently unaware that Ray Donovan is not real, Cohen nonetheless channeled his fictional persona, telling the reporter, “So I’m warning you, tread very fucking lightly, because what I’m going to do to you is going to be fucking disgusting. You understand me?”

Now that Cohen’s going to prison, though, he’s supposedly gone from Ray Donovan to repentant deacon.

No one took him seriously before, and they shouldn’t take him seriously now.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/michael-cohens-testimony-cant-be-taken-seriously-because-hes-always-been-a-sad-joke

HANOI, Vietnam — For his second summit with President Donald Trump, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un opted to go retro — riding the rails like his grandfather decades before.

Kim’s decision to take the train all the way across China was probably prompted at least in part by security considerations— his train is built like a tank and almost as slow. But it also marks a major attempt at showmanship designed to bring back memories of North Korean “eternal president” Kim Il Sung’s many travels by railroad.

Kim Jong Un’s journey aboard his forest green train from Pyongyang to the Vietnamese border town of Dong Dang took more than two and a half days. That’s longer than it took Trump to fly halfway around the world, even with Air Force One stopping for fuel along the way.

“Kim Jong Un is already putting on a big show, opting for more than a 60-hour train journey, when he can get to Hanoi in just four hours by flight,” Nam Sung-wook, a former South Korean intelligence official, told Reuters.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/kim-jong-un-s-train-journey-trump-summit-nod-his-n976076

Republican Mark Harris said Tuesday he will not run in the new election for North Carolina’s 9th congressional district, citing his “extremely serious” health condition.

It comes just days after the North Carolina State Board of Election unanimously voted for a new election after the district’s House race from 2018 was marred by claims of ballot fraud.

NORTH CAROLINA ELECTION BOARD CALLS NEW ELECTION IN DISPUTED HOUSE RACE

“After consulting with my physicians, there are several things that my health situation requires as a result of the extremely serious condition that I faced in mid-January,” Harris said in a statement. “One of those is a necessary surgery that is now scheduled for the last week in March.”

Harris added, “I have decided not to file in the new election for Congressional District 9.”

Last week, Harris, who outpaced Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes in the contested race, said in court he has suffered two strokes since the election and was “struggling” to get through the hearing.

McCready has said he will run again.

In his statement Tuesday, Harris threw his support behind Union County Commissioner Stony Rushing.

“The North Carolina Republican Party fully supports Dr. Harris’ decision,” North Carolina Republican Chairman Robin Hayes said. “The most important thing for him to address is his health. This has been a grueling process for all involved, and we unequivocally support his call for a new election.”

Last week, Harris acknowledged a new election should be held after days of testimony in a hearing on ballot-tampering.

“I believe a new election should be called,” Harris said. “It’s become clear to me that public confidence in the 9th District has been undermined to an extent that a new election is warranted.”

In his sworn testimony, Harris said that he was assured by political operative – and convicted felon – Leslie McCrae Dowless that campaign workers would never collect absentee ballots, despite concerns from Harris’ son, John, that Dowless was illegally collecting and turning in ballots from voters.

One of the methods participants said Dowless used was to hire workers to collect absentee ballots from voters who received them, and then turn them over to him, according to an elections board investigation.

State election law prohibits anyone other than a guardian or close family member from handling mail-in ballots. Harris’ team initially said in a legal briefing submitted to the elections board last week the board should certify him the winner — no matter what Dowless did for the campaign.

Harris’ comments calling for a new election came a day after his son took the stand in emotional testimony that left his father in tears.

“I raised red flags at the time the decision was made to hire Mr. Dowless,” John Harris said in his testimony on Wednesday.

Fox News’ David Lewkowict and Andrew O’Reilly and The Associated Press contributed to this report.  

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republican-mark-harris-wont-run-in-new-nc-election-citing-serious-health-condition

February 26 at 3:10 PM

Mark Harris, the Republican nominee in a North Carolina congressional race that was tainted by ballot fraud, announced Tuesday that he will not run in the new election for the seat.

Harris said in a statement that he has decided not to seek the 9th District seat due to health problems.

“Given my health situation, the need to regain full strength, and the timing of this surgery the last week of March, I have decided not to file in the new election for Congressional District 9,” Harris said.

Harris has been recovering from a serious infection that had led to sepsis and two strokes.

He threw his support behind Union County Commissioner Stony Rushing, whose record Harris said has “proven him to stand firm on so many of the issues that concern us, including the issue of life, our national security, and religious freedom.”

North Carolina election officials last week ordered a new contest in the 9th District, ending a dramatic months-long investigation focused on irregularities with mail-in ballots.

The board voted unanimously to throw out the November results between Harris and Democrat Dan McCready.

Harris, an evangelical minister from Charlotte, had led by 905 votes in unofficial returns.

His decision not to run follows four days of hearings last week revealing voluminous evidence that a political operative had led an illegal scheme to tamper with absentee ballots on behalf of Harris’s congressional campaign last year.

Evidence also surfaced that Harris had structured his campaign so that he wasn’t paying the operative, Leslie McCrae Dowless, directly and to avoid public disclosure of those payments.

Through most of the hearing, Harris claimed no knowledge of Dowless’s methods and said there had been no red flags.

That changed last Thursday, after Harris falsely characterized a conversation with his son, Matthew, about whether emails in which he suggested that Dowless’s tactics were questionable and was warned by another son, John, not to hire him, would become public.

Facing potential perjury charges for that testimony — and days of potentially damaging cross-examination about his own role in the ballot scheme — Harris abruptly called for a new election and declared that ballot fraud had sufficiently tainted the outcome in November to warrant a new election.

McCready began a new campaign for the seat last Friday.

Another Republican, former North Carolina governor Pat McCrory, ruled out running for the seat on Monday.

After hinting on Twitter over the weekend that he might enter the race, McCrory said on his radio show that he would look at running again for governor or for a U.S. Senate seat in 2022 instead.

“My fire in the belly is teaching and being a radio host and keeping the option open of running for governor or senator,” he said on WBT Radio.

If Harris had decided to run again, he would have faced a bruising GOP primary.

Usually under North Carolina election law, a new election is ordered as a rematch of the contest that was tainted — in this case, the November election between Harris and McCready. But in December, sensing Harris’s political and legal vulnerability, the Republican-controlled North Carolina legislature passed a law requiring a primary if a new election were called in the 9th District.

McCready has at least one advantage over Republican contenders: he is less likely to have to endure a tough primary, and will be able to spend the spring raising money and organizing for the fall election instead.

However, his chances in the general election are uncertain given the 9th District’s traditional Republican lean and the question of whether turnout in an off-cycle election will match the enthusiasm that gave a big advantage to McCready and Democratic candidates across the country last year.

The general election is likely to be scheduled for October.

In a statement Tuesday, North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Robin Hayes expressed support for Harris’s decision.

“The most important thing for him to address is his health,” Hayes said of Harris. “This has been a grueling process for all involved, and we unequivocally support his call for a new election. There are numerous quality candidates that are discussing a run and although the party will not be involved in a primary, we have no doubt that a competitive nominee will emerge.”

John Wagner contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/north-carolina-republican-in-congressional-race-tainted-by-ballot-fraud-says-he-will-not-run-in-new-election/2019/02/26/b72b292e-39fb-11e9-a2cd-307b06d0257b_story.html