Tonight we may learn whether Trump means business and whether the Chinese will submit. Stay tuned.
Unlike past presidents, Trump is not a politician and is willing to take the long view and suffer near term pain for true long term results.
My instinct suggests China will relent and then figure out how to return to cheating.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This from a dear friend and fellow memo reader and makes what I attempt so worthwhile:
"Dick, Just a couple of words to thank you for your patriotism to the USA. I really enjoy reading your blog everyday and it really helps to keep me abreast of a lot of important issues that I do not have time to keep up with because I work all day. All of us owe you a great deal of gratitude for keeping us informed. As you know I came to America as an immigrant refugee fleeing Castro's takeover and declaration of communism in my birth country of Cuba. I more than most have a clear understanding of what it feels like to lose your country , your culture and your life's work. I hope that never happens in America (democratic socialism ) as it would be the greatest tragedy the USA has ever seen. God Bless America !
Thank you, A---"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Liberal 9th Circuit sees the light? They must have tired of being over-ruled.(See 1 below.)+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
God, which most radical progressives no longer believe in, will pay the bill. (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If Pelosi and the progressive radicals have their way the next war will be between the sexes and you can kiss the prospect of a united nation goodbye.
The unintended consequences will be hatred between the two. (See 3 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have a liberal friend whose bible is the New York Times and whenever, which is constantly, they write a negative article on Trump he sends it to me.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++05/08/opinion/trump-taxes. html?emc=edit_th_190509&nl= todaysheadlines&nlid= 434573280509&login=email&auth= login-email
Hillary Aide comes clean. (See 4 below)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Liberal 9th Circuit Hands Trump Stunning Victory
The famously liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday it is within President Trump's authority to send asylum seekers to Mexico as they await the U.S. judicial system to adjudicate their claims. (The Daily Caller)
The “Remain in Mexico” policy seeks to curb catch-and-release by denying fraudulent asylum seekers the incentive of being released into the interior of the U.S. while their cases proceed in immigration courts.
The circuit court overruled an earlier decision by San Francisco Judge Richard Seeborg, who blocked Trump’s policy on the grounds that the administration was making the asylum process too difficult and could be putting migrants at further risk by demanding they stay in Mexico.
The Ninth Circuit temporarily issued a stay in mid-April while they reviewed the case, allowing the Trump administration to continue the policy until further notice.
Now, the president can at least temporarily declare victory on “Remain in Mexico.”
A pending lower court decision means the case could still wind up before the Supreme Court.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Three of Warren's major proposals alone cost $2.365 trillion
By David Rutz
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has backed or proposed plans during her 2020 presidential campaign that total up to $129 trillion in spending over the next 10 years, a Washington Free Beacon analysis shows.
Along with backing the Green New Deal ($94 trillion) and Medicare for All ($32.6 trillion), which total an estimated $126.6 trillion in estimated government spending over the next decade according to various studies, three of Warren's major proposals alone cost $2.365 trillion: opioids ($100 billion), canceling student debt and offering free public college ($1.25 to $1.565 trillion), and universal child care ($700 billion).
Warren has won praise on the left for saying she has "got a plan" for various issues, and she has proposed an "ultra-millionaire," 2 percent tax on Americans worth $50 million or more—it rises to 3 percent on Americans worth at least $1 billion—to pay for many of her projects, claiming it will raise about $2.75 trillion over the next decade.
Alongside Rep. Elijah Cummings (D., Md.), Warren unveiled a $100 billion initiative to combat the nation's opioid epidemic on Wednesday. She wrote in a Medium post that the federal funding would be doled out over 10 years to provide state and local governments resources for prevention, treatment, and recovery.
Last month, Warren pitched a plan to offer universal free public college and cancel up to $50,000 in student loan debt for nearly 45 million Americans. Her own campaign found the price tag to be $1.25 trillion, with eliminating tuition costing $610 billion and forgiving debts costing about $640 billion. The Urban Institute guessed the actual cost of forgiving debts was $955 billion, which would raise the price for the proposal to $1.565 trillion.
Warren's plan has been criticized as being favorable to the rich and universities. Among other concerns, some policy analysts fear it could create an "arms race" of sorts that forces people to buy more education in a trend called "credential creep," which would wind up hurting lower-income Americans, particularly blacks and Hispanics. It could also cause universities to hike tuition costs.
"There is one big clear winner, and that's the universities," Heritage Foundation education policy official Lindsey Burke told the Free Beacon.
In February, Warren unveiled a $700-billion, 10-year plan to enact universal child care in which those making up to 200 percent of the poverty level would receive child care for free.
"The federal government will partner with local providers—states, cities, school districts, nonprofits, tribes, faith-based organizations—to create a network of child care options that would be available to every family," Warren wrote.
Warren has also expressed support for the Green New Deal put forward by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), which has an estimated price tag of up to $94 trillion over 10 years from the center-right American Action Forum, the Free Beaconreported:
Though Democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D., N.Y.) plan is vague on specifics, it calls for the "economic transformation" of the United States, a complete overhaul of transportation systems, and retrofitting every single building. A supplemental document explaining the plan, since deleted from her website after it was widely mocked on social media, called for economic security for everyone, even those "unwilling to work," the elimination of air travel, and "farting cows."
"I am a strong supporter of the Green New Deal," Warren said at a CNN town hall last month. "There are two principle reasons for that. The first reason that I'm a strong supporter is that it's a way to say urgency. Now, we cannot wait any longer. We have got to make change. That's how I hear this. The second part about the Green New Deal right now is that it calls for a huge investment in our infrastructure, and I think that's just absolutely critical. And when I say our infrastructure, it's about our green infrastructure, it's about our power infrastructure, but it's also about hardening our infrastructure."
Perhaps signaling that she isn't fully onboard with Ocasio-Cortez's "intersectional" aspects of the plan, Warren acknowledged in March it's in a "very broad" outline "because it's the front end of a conversation."
Warren is also a co-sponsor of Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I., Vt.) single-payer, Medicare for All legislation, which one study estimated would boostgovernment spending by $32.6 trillion over 10 years. She was vague about how she would reach that goal in a CNN town hall in March, saying there could be a role for private insurance companies going forward.
Warren introduced a bill meant to be a bridge to the eventual single-payer goal shared by progressives called the Consumer Health Insurance Protection Act. According to HuffPost, Warren acknowledged private health insurance was unlikely to vanish overnight even with a Democratic White House victory, and the bill was meant to further protections around the Affordable Care Act.
Warren is in the top tier of the crowded field of 2020 Democratic candidates, but she's still languishing far behind former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont senator Bernie Sanders in early polling.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
Nancy Pelosi’s Equality Act Would Undo Trump’s Most Significant Achievements
Back in October, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi told an audience at Harvard University that if the Democrats retook the House, one of her top legislative priorities would be to pass the misnamed Equality Act, a bill that would impose radical sexual ideology on the nation.
Democrats took the House, and Pelosi wasn’t bluffing. She’s now pushing a bill that would undo some of the most significant achievements of the Trump administration. Here’s how.
The Equality Act adds the phrase “sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity)” to our nation’s civil rights laws that ban discrimination on the basis of race. This means the law would suddenly treat people as racists if they dare to dissent from the left’s ideology on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
Here are the major Trump victories that the Equality Act would undo.
The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>
1. The Equality Act would force employers to cover abortion, and medical professionals to perform or assist in performing abortions.
When the Obama administration tried to force this same policy in its very last months in office, a federal judge declared it unlawful. When the Trump administration came into office, the Trump Justice Department agreed with that judge and did not appeal his ruling, which placed a 50-state injunction on that regulation.
Should the Equality Act become law, this abortion policy would become the law of the land, undermining President Donald Trump’s significant pro-life record.
2. The Equality Act would force employers to pay for sex “reassignment” procedures in their health insurance plans, and require medical professionals to perform them.
Think Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters of the Poor, but only worse. If a health care plan covers mastectomies in the case of cancer, but not in the case of “reassignment,” the Equality Act would deem this illegal “discrimination.” So, too, if a doctor chooses to perform mastectomies in the case of cancer but not for sex “reassignment” purposes. That doctor would be guilty of illegal “discrimination.”
Thankfully, when the Obama administration attempted to impose this mandate, a federal judge struck it down, and the Trump administration agreed with the judge and did not appeal the ruling. Should the Equality Act become law, it would undo Trump’s policy of protecting the freedom of medical doctors to not perform “reassignment” procedures if they deem them bad medicine.
3. The Equality Act would force all schools and businesses to open their women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and sports teams to boys who “identify as” girls and to men who “identify as” women.
The Obama administration imposed this transgender mandate on schools in all 50 states, and thankfully the Trump administration reversed the misguided policy during its first weeks of office. But, should the Equality Act become law, it would override the Trump policy and would threaten the privacy, safety, and equality of women and girls across the country.
4. The Equality Act could be used to force the military to pay for “reassignment” procedures and force the military to accept recruits suffering from gender dysphoria who are not combat-ready.
The Trump administration has implemented a careful, nuanced policy that allows people who identify as transgender to serve in the military—provided they no longer suffer from gender dysphoria and serve in accordance with their biological sex. But should the Equality Act become law, this Trump policy could be deemed “discrimination.”
5. The Equality Act would force faith-based adoption agencies to either violate their conviction that every child deserves both a mother and a father or to stop serving children in need altogether.
Thankfully, the Trump administration has taken initial steps to protect adoption agencies from these misguided policies. Additional steps are needed. But if the Equality Act became law, it would force all adoption agencies in all 50 states to either violate their convictions or close their doors.
6. The Equality Act would force a variety of small business owners to violate their beliefs about marriage, sexuality, and gender.
At the state level, this has happened to bakers, florists, photographers, and even funeral home owners.
Thankfully the Trump administration has supported these small business owners as their cases proceeded through the court system. But should the Equality Act become law, it would bring the full force of the federal government against these small business owners, treating them as violators of federal civil rights law.
7. The Equality Act, in general, threatens the freedom of speech, freedom of association, and free exercise of religion rights of countless people.
Anyone who believes we are created male and female, and that male and female are created for each other, will be at risk. This means Orthodox Jews, Roman Catholics, Evangelical Christians, Latter-day Saints, Muslims, and people of no particular faith tradition but who take science seriously will be on the wrong side of federal civil rights law.
Thankfully, the Trump administration has championed freedom of speech, free exercise of religion, and the rights of conscience. All of this would be at risk should the Equality Act become law.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)
Insists that monitoring Clinton’s illicit use of private email ‘wasn’t really part of my job,’ but adds, ‘I wish she had used a State Department account’
4)
Judicial Watch: Top Hillary Clinton
Aide Admits Under Oath that He and
Clinton Used Unsecure Personal Email
for Official State Department Business
Insists that monitoring Clinton’s illicit use of private email ‘wasn’t really part of my job,’ but adds, ‘I wish she had used a State Department account’
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released the transcript of a court-ordered deposition of Jacob “Jake” Sullivan, Hillary Clinton’s senior advisor and deputy chief of staff when she was secretary of state, in which the top staffer admits that both he and Clinton used her unsecure non-government email system to conduct official State Department business. A full transcript of the deposition is available here.
Judicial Watch’s court-ordered discovery centered upon whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system and whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.
In the questioning, Sullivan admitted that he had used his personal Gmail account at times for State Department business but denied that he had sent classified information to Secretary Clinton’s unsecured personal system.
After Judicial Watch pointed out that on January 26, 2010, Sullivan sent a classified email with the subject line “call sheet,” Sullivan testified: “When I sent this email, my best judgment was that none of the material in it was classified, and I felt comfortable sending the email on an unclassified system. The material has subsequently been upclassified but at the time that I sent it, I did not believe that it was classified.”
Sullivan said in the deposition that he had not been concerned about Clinton’s use of a non-government email account, because it was not part of his job:
Like Secretary Clinton has said herself, I wish she had used a State Department account. It wasn’t really part of my job to be thinking about Secretary Clinton’s emails so I don’t think I sort of fell down directly in my job, but do I wish I had thought of it during the time we were at State. Of course. I mean, what human being at this point wouldn’t have thought of that?
Sullivan’s deposition is part of United States District Judge Royce C. Lamberth’s order for senior officials — including Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Jacob Sullivan, and FBI official E.W. Priestap – to respond under oath to Judicial Watch questions.
A video of the Sullivan deposition exists but is under seal after the Justice Department and State Department, which opposed any discovery, objected to their public release. The court denied release of the video depositions for now and left the door open for reconsideration.
[T]he Court does not foreclose future releases of audiovisual recordings – in this or other cases. Judicial Watch may move to unseal portions of these recordings relied upon in future court filings. So too may it use the video recordings at trial, consistent with the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Judge Lamberth made the ruling in Judicial Watch’s July 2014 FOIA lawsuit filed after the U.S. Department of State failed to respond to a May 13, 2014 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)). Judicial Watch seeks:
Copies of any updates and/or talking points given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency concerning, regarding, or related to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Any and all records or communications concerning, regarding, or relating to talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency.
“A federal court wants answers on the Clinton email scandal and Mr. Sullivan is one of many witnesses Judicial Watch will question under oath,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is shameful that the Justice and State Departments continue to try to protect Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration on the email scandal.”
U.S District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides, as well as E.W. Priestap, to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”
Judicial Watch previously released interrogatory responses given under oath by E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, in which he stated that agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment