40 Burst results for "Trump Administration"
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on Buck Sexton
"So You mentioned Carmen, which is very, very important to point inflection point because that that tragedy happened. 32 years ago. It should have been a very strong lesson for us to basically treat China as a separate entity instead. We took the wrong way That is we We embrace China. This Marxist Leninist regime without any devotion from marketing message mechanism. Into the global system of free market, Uh, economy, and we make China a full member of international trading system and not enormously benefit the Chinese Old to answer a question. I would say One of the most important price China has to pay is to reorient our policy toward China. And, uh, two biscuits, uh, make China not only follow the rules of the international Primark system if it doesn't which has never shown any evidence that China should be take about this. So this is the why that we, China is much more difficult to deal with than the Soviet Union because China is integrated with within our system, and there are here while the Soviet Union you can basically condemn it. You can contain it, but it will be far away. And this is this is what China are China partisan. We're bonding, and I think you know it is the Trump Administration. The first time since return, Nixon Uh and, uh, to reorient our China policy to have a much better understanding of the the kind of the intention of the challenge comes a party wolf more with miles you on the Trump Administration's China strategy right after this quick break. Wall Street has been lying for years, saying 7% is a good return on our stocks. It's not and that trading is so complex. You need a financial advisor. You don't real people are making 30% 50% even 100% a year on their money trading stocks even when the market is tough. Carnivore. Trading is an anonymous team of elite Wall Street strategists. There are legends among Wall Street heavy hitters, and now they've gone a bit rogue. They're allowing everyday folks like us to see and mirror their explosive trades..
300 Million Shots in 150 Days, Biden Declares 'Summer of Joy'
"In just 150 days the U. S. Has administered 300 million doses of the covid vaccines. The announcement from President Biden. We're heading into God willing this summer of joy. Summer of freedom. The vaccine contracts secured during the Trump Administration laid the groundwork for doses delivered in the early months of the Biden administration. As the vaccination rate drops. The president is likely to fall short of his July 4th goal of giving 70% of adults. At least one
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on News, Traffic and Weather
"Off leading the Dow Jones industrial average with its worst week since October. Today, the Dow tumbled 533 points while the S and P. 500 shed 55. The NASDAQ composite dropped 131. New report says Google could very soon face its biggest ever regulatory threat, citing people familiar with the matter. Writers says European Union antitrust regulators are set to open a formal investigation into Google's lucrative digital advertising business later in the year. It would mark a new front by the EU competition enforcer against the alphabet unit. Boeing's new 7 37 Max 10 had its maiden flight today, taking off from rent and municipal airport. While it has gotten several orders for the 230 seat jet, Boeing still needs to complete safety certification of the plane under a tougher regulatory climate following those fatal crashes of the smaller 7 37 Max eight. That's your money now. I'm Jim Chess. Kokomo News. Here. Your political insights from ABC News in just 150 days the U. S. Has administered 300 million doses of the covid vaccines. The announcement from President Biden. We're heading into God willing this summer of joy. Summer of freedom. The vaccine contracts secured during the Trump Administration leave the groundwork for doses delivered in the early months of the Biden administration. As the vaccination rate drops. The president is likely to fall short of his July 4th goal of giving 70% of adults. At least one dose. The president today also responding to a move by Catholic bishops, potentially to block him and other politicians who support abortion rights from receiving communion. That's a private matter, and I don't think that's going to happen. President Biden is a devout Catholic church in South Carolina denied him communion back in 2019 for his abortion stance. Juneteenth celebrations continue through the weekend across the country. The federal government observed the new June 19th the national holiday on Friday Commemorating the end of slavery. Faith, A boob. ABC NEWS Washington Democrats are condemning the racial slurs that disrupted the Seattle City Council candidate Zoom meeting, The Seattle Times reports District nine candidate Brianna Thomas was conferring with campaign volunteers. We are not known participant post of the N word in the comments. BOX. 50 Times in a statement, State Democratic Party chair Tina Pablo Taos Ski calls the Zoom bomber, a quote, disgusting online troll, adding quote, Democrats have a duty to lift up and support black women running for office and make sure that we have their backs when things like this happen. Traffic from the Dubin Law Group Traffic Center. I'm Max Tucker in the Coma Traffic Center in Puyallup. Big changes will be happening for the new I five Puyallup River Bridge crews will be working through the weekend to open the bridge to one lane of traffic, phasing out the temporary collector distributor land. Crews will be working near the port of Tacoma offer him to South bound five with around the clock closures. Starting now until midnight Sunday. During this time, the CNN five exit 1 35 to Portland Avenue will be closed as well as part of the Tacoma on ramp. So expect some delays. Max Tucker como.
Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare After Republicans Attempt to End It
"The. Us supreme court though increasingly conservative in makeup rejected the latest major republican led effort to kill the national healthcare law known as obamacare thursday preserving insurance coverage for millions of americans. The justices by a seven to two vote left the entire of care act intact in ruling texas of the gop led states and to individuals had no right to bring their lawsuit in federal court. The biden administration says thirty. One million people have health insurance because of the law which also survived to earlier challenges in the supreme court the laws major provisions include protections for people with existing health conditions. A range of no cost preventative. Services expansion of the medicaid program that ensures lower income people and access to health insurance markets offering subsidized plans. The affordable care act's remains the law of the land. president. Joe biden said celebrating the ruling. He called for building further on the law that was enacted in twenty ten. When he was vice president also left in place is the laws now toothless requirement. That people have health insurance or pay a penalty. Congress rendered that provision. Irrelevant in two thousand seventeen. When it reduced the penalty to zero. The elimination of the penalty had become the hook the texas and other. Gop let states as well as the trump administration used to attack the entire law. They argued that without the mandate a pillar of the law. When it was passed the rest of the law should full to and with the supreme court that includes three appointees of former president donald trump opponents of obamacare hope to majority of the justices would finally kill the law the have been fighting for more than a decade but the third major attack on the lower at the supreme court ended the way the first two did with the majority of the court rebuffing efforts to gut the law or get rid of it altogether.
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on News, Traffic and Weather
"A ton of interest out of your pocket. Some kind of emergency tripped and you know that might be something I hesitate to endorse, taking on any sort of debt for discretionary purchases. I tend to be more of the mind that we should be paying for non essentials out of savings. So I really think that you need to consider your personal circumstances but also think about alternatives. Do you already have a credit card with a lower rate with all of this? You need to tread carefully because this is that you do need to pay it back and there can be consequences. That's Ted Rossman, senior industry analyst with credit cards dot com. Her voice bomb KOMO news. Your money at 20 and 50 past the hour on KOMO News, sponsored by Propel Insurance stocks sold off leading the Dow Jones industrial average with its worst week since October. Today, the Dow tumbled 533 points while the S and P. 500 shed 55. The NASDAQ composite dropped 131. New report says Google could very soon face its biggest ever regulatory threat, citing people familiar with the matter. Writers says European Union antitrust regulators are set to open a formal investigation into Google's lucrative digital advertising business later in the year. It would mark out new front by the EU competition Enforcer against the alphabet unit. Boeing's new 7 37 Max 10 had its maiden flight today. Taking off from rent and municipal airport Wallet has gotten several orders for the 230 seat jet. Boeing still needs to complete safety certification of the plane under a tougher regulatory climate following those fatal crashes of the smaller 7 37 Max eight. That's your money now. I'm Jim Chess. Kokomo knows Here. Your political insights from ABC News in just 150 days the U. S. Has administered 300 million doses of the covid vaccines. The announcement from President Biden. We're heading into God willing this summer of joy. Summer of freedom. The vaccine contracts secured during the Trump Administration laid the groundwork for doses delivered in the early months of the Biden administration. As the vaccination rate drops. The president is likely to fall short of his July 4th goal of giving 70% of adults. At least one dose. The president today also responding to a move by Catholic bishops, potentially to block him and other politicians who support abortion rights from receiving communion. That's a private matter, and I don't think that's going to happen. President Biden is a devout Catholic church in South Carolina denied him communion back in 2019 for his abortion stance. Juneteenth celebrations continue through the weekend across the country. The federal government observed the new June 19th national holiday on Friday Commemorating the end of slavery. Faith, A boob. ABC NEWS Washington Several top candidates for Seattle, mayors say to reduce carbon emissions and traffic congestion. Public transportation should be free. I absolutely and with a great amount of enthusiasm, agree with this goal best former state representative Jessen Farrell at an online candidates forum Thursday. Candidates Lorena Gonzalez, Andrew Grant, Houston and Bruce Harrell agree. Harold pointing out the city will end up paying we will have to do is by the hours. Lance Randall favours continued Fair enforcement. Colleen Winter Hawk and Casey six killer did not attend the forum. Cuomo traffic.
Lawyer: US Drops Lawsuit, Grand Jury Probe Over Bolton Book
"The justice department has dropped its lawsuit against former national security adviser John Bolton who had written a book about his time in the trump administration the trump administration sued last year to block the release of John Bolton's book the room where it happened and to recover copies that had already been distributed saying it contained classified information the book painted a behind the scenes unflattering account of former president trump's foreign policy dealings with China and Ukraine alleging he made requests for political assistance from leaders of both countries the blighted ministrations filed a document in federal court dismissing the lawsuit against Bolton whose lawyers say a grand jury investigation into the book's publication also has been dropped Jackie Quinn Washington
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on Bloomberg Best
"S effort to grow the U. S semiconductor industry. And she tells our David Westin. She really sees progress on trade issues, including aluminum and steel tariffs, so some great perspective as well on what's involved here for the Biden administration, including job creation. Let's listen in. As the president says, You know, America is back and we are back in the business of working with our allies here in Europe, So tell us about the larger canvas here of the work that you're getting done and let me ask you another specific, which is aluminum and steel tariffs that's been pending. Is there any estimate when that might get resolved as it relates to the tariffs? You know, the Trump Administration put those in place? As I have said, in a number of occasions in a way, they've been very helpful and protecting our steel industry and our steelworkers. But We want to stay at the table with the EU to try to resolve the tariffs, while also, um dealing with the real problem here, which is over capacity of excess steel and aluminum, mostly driven by China. So we were going to work as hard as we can between now and December, 1st to see if we can come up with a resolution. Why that timeline because the EU Has suspended the retaliatory tariffs for the next six months. And that gives us some breathing room in order to see if we can make progress. As you know, Madam Secretary. Excess Steel capacity has been a problem in the world for a long time. Are you hopeful you can make enough progress with Europe, at least by December, 1 to actually take those tariffs off? I am hopeful. Uh, we have to be realistic. This is this is complicated. It's a complex issue. Steel is a critical industry in America and our steelworkers are obviously vitally important to us. Having said that I've spent hours in meetings with my counterparts here. They are committed to finding a solution, as are we and the president has directed all of us to Really reinvigorate our relationships with our allies in the EU, So we're going to work as hard as we can. And and at this point, I'm optimistic. It's in both of our interests. I think whether it's trade technology, cybersecurity, steel, aluminum tariffs, semiconductors It's in our mutual best interest to work with our allies to find solutions. Well, I'm finding solutions. I want to come back to something. The president has emphasized time and time again, Ambassador Tie has you have which is jobs and putting really jobs and creation and maintenance of US jobs at the center of US Trade policy? Typically, we think of their as being a tradeoff. Protectionism creates jobs, but it really damages trade. Is it a trade off? What can you do over there in Europe will actually facilitate trade and create jobs back United States at the same time? Yes. So it's not a trade off in so far as in the long run, you know, we have to create jobs. We have to grow both of our economies. We also to recognize their different kinds of jobs, which is why we need to really have a focus on Re Skilling both in the EU and in America. But I would say is, if you think about technology and the digital economy, you know, massive job creation will occur in the EU in America in the coming years in the digital economy. If it's incumbent upon America and the EU, which which have shared values to set the rules of the road. And we certainly don't want countries like China setting the rules of the road. So if you think about artificial intelligence and the digital economy America and Europe, which share the same values share the same values around privacy protection. For example, we need to set the standards and the rules of the road, which will promote job growth. And also do it in a way, which is consistent with our values across the Atlantic. One of the things Madam secretary that is getting in the way of us jobs right now is some supply chain problems specifically semiconductors, although not limited to semiconductors. I know you're part of the president's task force with secretaries, Buddha Judge and Vilsack. When do we expect to make some progress on that? This is another perfect example where we have shared interest in this job creation opportunity. Right now, Both America and Europe are facing a supply shortage in semiconductors. And quite frankly, we are both vulnerable insofar as we're overly reliant on Asia for two mantra verse supply of semiconductors, so if we can re sure semiconductor manufacturing to America or to our ally countries in Europe It protects our supply chain increases our supply and creates jobs. So that is an area where working on every day all day every day. Semiconductor. You can't do anything without semiconductors. If you think about From the moment you woke up this morning until the moment you go to bed, you're relying on semiconductors. And so this is the top focus. We are making progress, and I'm extremely confident that we'll be able to work with the EU and our allies on this topic. So explain that if you can, madam Secretary I understand how re showing to the United States of semiconductor production, design and production. Would really help our supply chain here. How would re shoring to Europe? How would make sure that we had access to those semiconductors being manufactured over in Europe? Well, Europe are longstanding allies. I think we can all agree that we Much prefer to be reliant on a factory in Europe than in China, uh, in Europe than in other places around the world, so Our primary focus, of course, is making semiconductor chips in America creates jobs, and it's on our shore..
Rep. Devin Nunes on the Irony of Recent DOJ Invesitation Into Democrat Leaks
"Ironies here are really troubling. Your phone records were stolen, fleeced put out there for the media, Um, to embarrass you by Adam Schiff and others They were taken from you. Nobody made a big stink about it because your Republican congressman who's been on the side of Donald Trump and against the spy gate scandal from the start. And now we see this new quote Scandal congressman where the Trump Administration may have been looking at the actual violations of the law and leaks, and it may have been some subpoenas issued for phone records and all of a sudden it's a huge media story. Uh, any well coming to look at it. First of all, it's a It's a faux fake news narrative. To begin with. This launch is on a Friday. From the same exact reporters. The New York Times reporters who took the leaks in the first place and continue to take leak, right, so then they write a story in the most favorable life. Oh, my God, there's you know, gambling in Casablanca. As if you know, investigations don't occur when the leaks of classified information leak out. So so, Dan, you you know this. If if there is a leak that comes from anywhere within the government, the agency itself Has to call for an investigation. So we get notified all the time about investigations that are occurring, you know from you Name the three letter Agency. D o d CIA, NSA, etcetera. Get notified. Look a lot of times. It's a notification about just where it wouldn't even involve Congress. It might just involved. You know some some contractors or some military personnel. And as you know, those people get prosecuted. So that's point number one is they would have been well aware of whatever investigation was occurring. They might not have known They were the targets of the investigation, but Anyone that was read into any of the programs that leaked are a target of an investigation.
Fresh "Trump Administration" from The Daily
"Dive into a story that's making news and changing lives. It's been called the new Silk Road losses, constructing expensive new infrastructure projects around the globe. China is building roads, ports and airports all over Africa. Lanka has signed a billion dollar deal with China for the lease and development of the southern port of Hambantota. This is the main road connecting Pakistan with China. The new highway is being built with the help of a Chinese loan. It's part of a broader series of Chinese funded infrastructure and energy projects in theory. It's meant to improve global transport links and boost economic prosperity. But in practice, critics say countries that sign up for the new roads, railways and ports on offer Risks struggling to repay the debts from Pakistan to Paraguayan from Sri Lanka to Sudan, China's belt and road initiative, or MRI has been pouring concrete and building infrastructure for years, and that sparked fears in Washington that the West is being sidelined were competing at the stage for you know the future of international order, and that includes the economic rules of the road and When we lean back diplomatically, it just seeds the field to China. We should be confident enough in the attractiveness of American commercial investment to actually play in the game that there's no one out there trying to, you know, hold them to higher standards. They're going to be able to basically set the standards at whatever level they want. Those concerns were flagged during the Trump administration. Now Joe Biden occupies the White House, and he has used his first overseas trip to announce a whole new approach. Program.
The Real Story Behind The Don McGahn DOJ Subpoena
"Great website. Theresa Munro Hamilton reports that the Department of Justice under the Trump administration secretly subpoenaed information. And former White House counsel Don McGahn, a Democrat. Rep. Adam Schiff, it was leaked to The New York Times, of course, seem to be falling apart. There's no real spying allegedly took place. The story was written by Michael Schmidt. He's a hack Charlie Savage, a hack. Reported quote that the DOJ secretly subpoenaed Apple for personal information on again and his wife in February, 18. And then barred Apple from telling them about the reported move during that time period under a non disclosure agreement. The devil appears to be in the details here, and this may not be the breaking story. The media are apparently running with Schmidt tweeted quote New DOJ secretly subpoenaed Apple for personal info of Trump's then White House done council dime again and his wife in February, 18. The O. J. Bard Apple from telling them at the time, But three years later, May 21 Apple told them. It's unclear what investigation it was related to Clarifying an interesting tweet was then issued by Savage. The co author. Quote, Apple recently told Don McGahn, Trump's former White House counsel. That the Justice Department had secret collected data about his account of a February 2018 subpoena. Caution. You can't conclude from this fact them again was intentionally targeted. It began was not intentionally targeted. Then the whole story is evidently not what was purported to be, You understand, folks. That is for investigating a leak, and there's a whole bunch of people that they're looking into. They're not supposed to investigate a leak. Apparently, that's the case, particularly if it That benefits the Democrats and hurts the country. The accusations do not go into detail about the DOJ investigation. It's unknown what federal investigators were looking into. Even if McGann himself was their primary focus, or whether it was somebody had contact with Apple reportedly did not inform again what they had turned over to DOJ. Report did state that Apple received them again subpoena weeks after another subpoena was issue that was connected to leaks and the Russia probe. The subpoena involves records belonging to California Democratic representatives, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. Again. The subpoenas were ostensibly an attempt to identify individuals who leak classified national security information. During Trump administration and were not specifically targeting shift. So they're throwing a
Attorney General Garland to Strengthen Rules on Obtaining Lawmaker Records
"Will die. Attorney General Merrick Garland says the rules will be tightened at the Justice Department for getting records from members of Congress during the Trump administration. It was revealed the Justice Department secretly seized records from Democrats and
Media Leaders to Meet With Garland to Discuss Leak Investigations
"General Merrick Garland, the nation's top lawyer, is planning to meet with major media outlets Monday to discuss the Trump administration's leak investigation. Garland has reported meetings with leaders from CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post. The meeting comes after the New York Times revealed Trump's Department of Justice sought phone and email records from journalist.
Don Mcgann, Justice Department And Don Mccann discussed on AP News Radio
"An AP source says the justice department secretly subpoenaed don McCann's records apple informed former trump White House counsel don McGann and his wife that the justice department had subpoenaed information about accounts that belong to them in twenty eighteen that's according to a person familiar with the matter the disclosure comes days after two house lawmakers disclose they to have their information secretly subpoenaed it's not clear yet by the trump administration sought them against records but the others were part of a leak probe related to the Russia investigation I'm Shelley handler
Dems Demand Trump Officials Testify on Reported Records Seizure
"US Democrats are demanding that top officials from the Trump administration testified before Congress to explain why the phone records of leading Democrats were secretly subpoenaed in 2018. Democratic leaders in Congress have described the seizure of data as an abuse of power.
Biden to Return Diverted Border Wall Money, Spend Down Rest
"Hi Mike Rossi a reporting the bite administration plans to strip away much of the funding for wall construction on the southern border the bike that ministration plans to cut off much of the funding former president Donald Trump was using for his border wall project while also taking away the fast track status that allowed the wall project to bypass environmental regulations the Biden plan calls for returning more than two billion dollars diverted by the trump administration back to the Pentagon also the buy did ministration will not request new money for wall construction in the department of homeland security's twenty twenty two budget trump vowed to build a virtually impenetrable wall that would be paid for by Mexico but his administration put up only about four hundred fifty miles of wall including fifty two miles of new construction Mike Rossio Washington
US to Seek Automated Braking Requirement for Heavy Trucks
"Hi Mike Rossi a reporting federal regulators will seek automated braking requirements for heavy trucks the department of transportation says US auto safety regulators will move to require or set standards for automatic emergency braking systems on new heavy trucks the decision is a departure from trump administration policies that allowed similar regulations proposed in twenty fifteen to languish in the regulatory process after former president Donald Trump took office the department of transportation which includes the national highway traffic safety administration will also require rigorous testing standards for autonomous vehicles and set up a national database to document automated vehicle crashes the department made the announcements when it released its spring regulatory agenda Mike Rossio Washington
Congress, Justice Dept. probing Trump seizures of Dems' data
"The justice department's internal watchdog is now looking into what top Democrats call a shocking abuse of power by the trump administration the department's inspector general is investigating after revelations that the trump era justice department secretly seized phone records from at least two house Democrats in the leaks probe intelligence committee chair Adam Schiff and panel member Eric Swalwell say apple told them last month the department subpoenaed their metadata and received it three years ago as the committee investigating trump's Russia ties subpoenaing lawmakers private information is extraordinarily rare the Senate's top two Democrats are demanding former trump attorneys general bill Barr and Jeff sessions testified Sager mag ani Washington
Trump Administration, House Democrats House Intelligence Committee And Eric Swalwell discussed on AP News Radio
"The justice department once an internal probe of revelations that the trump administration seized phone data from house Democrats house intelligence committee members Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell have been told the trump era justice department sees the data as part of an aggressive crackdown on leaks while the department routinely investigates leaks opening such a probe into lawmakers is extraordinarily rare a senior justice department official tells the AP deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco was asking the department's watchdog to investigate that comes after the Senate's top Democrats demanded trump attorneys general bill Barr and Jeff sessions testified about the seizures Sager made Ghani
Trump DOJ Seized Apple Data From Top Dems, Their Family Members
"That the Department of Justice during the Trump administration subpoenaed Apple for the accounts of Democratic members and staff of the House Intelligence Committee as part of an investigation into leaks of classified information that pertained to contacts between Trump aides and Russia. As part of the probe accounts of some family members and Children, including at least one minor were also subpoenaed. Apple only turned over metadata, not emails, photos or other content coming up. Today's a big day
Trump Secretly Subpoenaed Records of Democrats on House Intelligence Committee
"Breaking news tonight about the trump justice department's abusive power to investigate its enemies new york times reports. Prosecutors subpoenaed apple for data from the accounts of at least two democrats on the house intelligence committee aides and family members. One was a minor all told the records of at least a dozen people tied. The committee were seized in two thousand seventeen and early twentieth eighteen including those representative. Adam schiff of california then the panel's top democrat and now it's chairman katie. Benner covers the justice department from your times is one of the bylines on this story and she joins me now on the phone and thank you. Katie on short notice for joining us. Just walk us through what we know here. Sure the investigation really begins in two thousand seventeen soon. After donald trump became president as we all know there were several stories very unflattering to him also involve the leaks of sensitive or classified information. Jim komi talking. About memo's how. The president had pressured him to drop an investigation to michael national security adviser news about michael finn in michelson conversations with the russian ambassador and whether or not there's a questionable story after story basically detailing things about the trump administration that were highly questionable stories about the ongoing russian investigation which about with new to the public and the white house was determined to figure out who was the source of these leaks. Now people in the all the time administration's best all the time but we also saw as as these leaks were on and prosecutor started to think that they were hitting dead ends that they just never really
Biden Touts US Vaccine Donations, Urges World Leaders to Join
"President Biden says the U. S. is taking a giant step toward helping struggling nations beat cove in nineteen and he's urging global leaders to join him in England for the G. seven summit the president announced the U. S. will donate a half a billion Pfizer vaccine doses our values called us to do everything that we can to vaccinate the world against covert ninety saying it's in the interests of the world and the U. S. to end the pandemic he says other G. seven nations will outline their own donations tomorrow it's a stark change from a year ago when the pandemic was so bad in the U. S. the trump administration had to cancel the sub ID which it was set to host we know the tragedy we also know the path to recovery Sager mag ani Washington
Email Exchange Between Mark Zuckerberg and Dr. Fauci Included Trade Secrets
"Here It is right here. Here's the email from Mark Zuckerberg. To Dr Anthony Fauci. You need to date folks. March 15 2020 12 18 pm That West Coast time doesn't really matter. Probably not. He says calls him Tony. They must be buddies, Tony, not Dr Fauci. Not Anthony. Not Dr Anthony. Tony. A tone like he's gonna go over for dinner, and I'm gonna have Connolly's or something. Hey, Tony. He says. Hey, listen, it's a Zuckerberg again from Facebook doing a series of livestream Q and A's with health experts and, you know, we need some authoritative information. I'd love to have you do one of these Q and A's. He said, could be a video We put out in the harbor different thing we distribute separately. But I think it could be effective as well. Talking about authority of information from reliable sources, was anybody you know, from the Trump administration that had alternate views to Dr Fauci. Given an opportunity by Zuckerberg to I just I'm just asking a question. Again, in case you're under the mistaken miss belief here. That Chuck Todd is interested in hearing both sides are getting to the facts he's interested in protecting Protecting like a praetorian guard. Dr. Anthony Fauci is reputation because, Fauci said, a lot of things that did damage to Donald Trump. That's his only purpose. We have the email right here. And the interesting about this. They think about this email is the redaction. Interesting about this email thing about this email is what's not in this email. Zuckerberg says the Fauci get ready. He says, finally, comma. You're waiting for the rest. Well, you'll wait forever because there isn't the rest. The redactions the whole paragraph. Finally, comma redacted. There it is right
Biden Drops Trump's Ban on TikTok and WeChat
"Wednesday president. Joe biden rescinded a series of executive orders from the trump administration. That had tried to ban the chinese owned app. Tiktok and we chat here in the states. The orders had been blocked by federal judges. Instead the biden administration plans security review of those and other
"trump administration" Discussed on GovExec Daily
"Generally former president. Donald trump left office last month. In the national archives and records administration is now tasked with preserving trump's record while he was president. This task may not be easy due to the amount of records as well as report document management during trump's term in office. Courtney kube blazer reporter for us here zach and she has a story on our site right now. About the challenges the national archives administration will face in preserving the trump white house documents. She joins me now to discuss her story. We'll come back to the program. It'd be here so let's set the scene. Why does the national archives and records administration needs to preserve and archive the white house records. Well it's required by law. The presidential records act on specifically this was one of the post watergate government reforms that congress stayed after president. Nixon wanted to destroy records in the white house. So this law says that all records from the white house with very few exceptions have to be preserved for transparency purposes historical purposes and starting five years after a president leaves office They can be made public and eventually will wind up in a presidential library. A i was tweeting all the time. That's a lot of records Your story is sort of a little bit what the size lift is here so size. Wise what is the national archives and records administration looking at a to preserve as compared to the previous presents of obama and george w bush. So nar told me that it's received approximately four thousand seven hundred cubic feet of textual records from president trump and his white house Which is about one or eleven million pages of records and the expect to take up to five hundred terabytes of electric records on now for comparison. The george w bush white house had a bad twenty nine thousand cubic feet of textual records and eighty terabytes of electronic records. And the white house had about fifteen thousand cubic feet of textual records in about two hundred fifty terabytes of electronic ones. As you noted Electronic records tweets are under this act. There was a twenty four team. Aw that clarified that The federal records Single talk about in a minute. In the presidential records act Do have to collect on electric records. Because they obviously noticed the rise of social media and email and the internet You may be in the twenty years prior and that's how a lot of work is conducted. Today i know that's often trails. The technology the legislation trails technology. And that's how we ended up with Agency heads using their accounts for example in the case of colin powell when he was secretary of state which was I remember reporting on that when When the conversations what say about former secretary of state hillary clinton's emails were part of the news cycle We had that delay in the transition. I was a few weeks. How did that transition delay affect the national archives efforts just to recap the general services. Administration didn't ascertain biden is the apparent winter Which thus let's the formal transition begin in. Funds made available until november twenty third. Meanwhile the networks news networks called the election sixteen prior. We've covered it on the show many many times all of the calls. Jay got to ascertain beden as the winner. But you know because of the president or former then presidents lawsuit challenges. It wasn't immediately clear that you know she could do this anyways. nora told me quote. They hated the process of completing the transfer of trump's presidential records into norris physical custody to be still ongoing now because the the funding that they needed from the office of management and budget..
"trump administration" Discussed on Marketplace Morning Report with David Brancaccio
"Schmidt at aviva in.
"trump administration" Discussed on 1A
"This is one a. I'm jen white in washington. This year there have been ten federal executions and three more scheduled to take place before the end of next month. The last time the government executed that many people was an eighteen ninety six putting the trump administration on track for the most federal federal executions in modern history. Last year attorney. General bill barr announced the resumption federal executions. After a sixteen year hiatus the executions will continue right up until president elect. Joe biden takes office. Why is the justice department pushing through these executions. Does it align with public opinion and are the state's using capital punishment in the same way here to discuss is lily. Ns aguirre she's a senior reporter at the intercept covering the us criminal justice system with a focus on harsh sentencing and the death penalty liliana. Welcome to one a. Thanks so much for having me. Also with us robert dunham executive director at the death penalty information center. That's a nonprofit organization that studies capital punishment. Robert thanks for being here having so let's start with what we're seeing overall with capital punishment. Robert what are the trends. We're seeing at the state level and the federal level there's a long term trend at both Both levels away from capital punishment. At least up until this year's executions There were an average of more than three hundred death sentences a year in the nineteen nineties. This was going to be the sixth consecutive year under fifty even before the pandemic and we have fewer. New deaths is now This year than ever in the modern history of the death penalty and we know why. That's the trend. Well there are a number of factors One is that evidence has grown over the course of time. The death penalty continues to be administered in an arbitrary and discriminatory way we also have one hundred and seventy two documented exonerations Innocent people who were wrongly convicted wrongly sentenced to death and we're now seeing about one exoneration for every nine executions which is a horrific error rate on top of that conservatives are beginning to say that the evidence shows the death penalty is not a deterrent. It doesn't do what it's supposed to do. And it costs a whole lot. More than a system whose harshest punishments along prison term or life without parole well jordan posted on facebook without even getting into the racial disparity. We have evidence that the death penalty is more expensive than life without parole precisely because we have an imperfect government. I can abide such a system in power to kill anyone robert. Can you explain more about the expense when we compare the death penalty to life in prison. Sure most people think that the cost of the death penalty is the cost of drugs to carry out an execution But that's simply not the case Death penalty trials cost more far more than any other trial. In fact the data shows that it costs more to charge a case as a capital case and resolve it with police. So you don't even go to trial than it does to charge a case non-capital yet conviction and entirely through the appellate process the cost also of the death penalty isn't just the cases in which the execution occurs. It's all the cases in which the death penalty is sought and not returned all the cases in which the death penalty is sought is returned and is turned and all the cases that result in exonerations so You end up with a small portion of capital cases actually becoming Death penalty verdicts And wants a death. Penalty verdict is returned. The single most likely outcome of that case is that the conviction or death sentence will be overturned. So it's very wasteful system. It doesn't do what it aims to do for the most part and the appellate process takes years. It's it's taken in some instances as much as forty years both to execute somebody and to exonerate somebody so the length of time you're in the court system has nothing to do with the quality review. Or whether you're getting it right liliana there's the federal system and then there's the state system. How those systems work will you know they. They work similarly You know. And i think that one of the things that has been surprising to many americans with the return of federal executions is is that they've learned first of all that the federal system exists. The it's important to note that bill barr didn't bring back the federal death penalty. I've seen that and headlines a lot. It's important that people understand that the federal death penalty never really went away executions. Were just on hiatus so to speak and so so Before as you noted execution at the federal level had been in two thousand and three when when the death penalty returned after the nineteen seventy-six landmark decision in gregg versus georgia. Which kind of what. We understand to be the the modern death penalty era so to speak. The federal government didn't reinstate the the federal death penalty a for many years until for many years after that and and when it finally did it was really as part of the expansion of the war on drugs. You saw in one thousand nine hundred eight. What we what we call the drug kingpin act which expanded the federal death penalty to apply to of a narrow set of crimes that were committed in the context of of drug trafficking and we prosecutions under that that law. But it really wasn't until the nine hundred ninety four crime bill that added some sixty new crimes that were now death eligible that we see the kinds of the huge wave of new new federal prosecutions and these are carjackings their kidnappings resulting in indepth. And they're all kinds of other crimes that previously could have been and still could be prosecuted at the state level so so the systems are actually similar in many ways and i think more similar than i think americans realize well one of the criticisms about this latest spate of executions is that they will take place during the president's lame duck period on the first time a president has done this and more than a century. We did get a statement from the doj on the timing of this decision which says quote the department intended to resume executions in december twenty nineteen however due to litigation. The process was suspended. Once the supreme court ruled in favor of resuming executions. The department has proceeded month with the exception of october since july. Twenty twenty robert sounds like this wasn't meant to happen on the president's way out. Is this something that people had been expecting from the trump administration. I think the people expected that the trump administration would attempt to carry out executions. But the manner in which they have done so Is so out of step with the rule of law out of step with american history. And then i think you've got to take what they say with a grain of salt and look more at what their actions are There had been no federal executions at all for seventeen years and most of that time The reason there were no executions because there was litigation ending in washington federal district court challenging the method of execution and the legality of the way in which the federal government adopted. it's what's called an execution protocol. That lawsuit was in place when The federal government said that we don't have drugs to carry out the executions. Let's put it on hold at that time. The federal district court issued a briefing schedule To make sure there was an orderly way of making a checking to see that. If they're going to executions they were going to follow the law and what happened was The trump administration said that it located new execution drugs in twenty twenty nineteen and instead of complying with the orders of the federal court It announced its new protocol. It filed that in the court and then it immediately issued death warrants directed at individuals who are not parties to that lawsuit trying to get the executions to take place before the court could determine whether they're lawful the that the.
"trump administration" Discussed on 1947: The Meet the Press Podcast
"From washington. I'm chuck todd. And this is the chuck. Todd cast sometime in the future. If you wanna remind yourself what life was like. During the trump administration you can think back to today and have a good sense of how washington operated. Let's go through the last twenty four hours. We receive new reporting. The president is talking about partying pardoning himself and his children federal judge until documents outlining a potential bribery for pardons ski. Meanwhile almost a month after the election the attorney general rebuffed the president's claims of voter fraud while also squeezing in an announcement that a politically motivated investigation into russia. We'll continue into the next administration decision. Mr barmaid in october but didn't announce until after the election.
"trump administration" Discussed on The Chuck ToddCast: Meet the Press
"From washington. I'm chuck todd. And this is the chuck. Todd cast sometime in the future. If you wanna remind yourself what life was like. During the trump administration you can think back to today and have a good sense of how washington operated. Go through the last twenty four hours. We receive new reporting. The president is talking about partying pardoning himself and his children federal judge until documents outlining a potential bribery for pardons ski. Meanwhile almost a month after the election the attorney general rebuffed the president's claims of voter fraud while also squeezing in an announcement that a politically motivated investigation into russia. We'll continue into the next administration decision. Mr barmaid in october but didn't announce until after the election.
"trump administration" Discussed on Fresh Air
"What are some of the things you learn covering local policing? That are helping you in covering the protests now and the trump administration's response to the protests. Question I've been actually thinking a lot about my time in Prince. George's county and even covering police, shootings and I think when I covered that videos sort of weren't quite as prolific as they are now and I think back to some of the police shootings I cover where witnesses or the family members of someone shot would say one thing and police would say another thing, and there just wasn't quite quite the level of unrest, and and I sort of reflected in wondered. What happened if what would have happened if there were? were videos of all these incidents that I reported on that could've you know put to rest any dispute and was the account I was often given from police. Was that accurate? Because I think you've seen here? as unrest has swept the country, you've seen example after example of police, saying one thing and a video showing another thing I've also thought a lot about that. In the context of some of these deformed or abolish the police efforts I think some of those might be a little bit of a misnomer that. That that that language though it seems to suggest that means we won't have police. The what the people using that language has no. No, no, it would just change. Police functions. Police wouldn't be involved in things other than basic law enforcement, they shouldn't be involved in response to mental health crises, and that sort of thing, and I have to say I remember covering police and police officers complaining to me, look, we have to respond to everything, and we always get people at their worst moment, so we get in the middle. Middle of domestic disputes we get in the middle of mentally ill. People who don't have a home and are on the are on the street, and we have to handle that you know so I think it's interesting to see this now. Become a national conversation about you know our police being asked to do too much. Are we giving police too much responsibility and authority and I think back to some of the conversations. I had with police then and think, would you?.
"trump administration" Discussed on Fresh Air
"I don't know exactly what that means since we have no idea what trump anticipated. So, I haven't been on the ground are are very talented. Local staff has been handling that by. They're telling the crowds Numbered still in the in the many thousands they have been much more peaceful. You haven't seen in recent days. The fire setting that you saw I guess it was. More than a week ago now in Lafayette Park but their size has not diminished at all I think notably. You've even seen people out there when we've seen thunderstorms passed through the area albeit less when that occurs, but it's not as if the protests have kind of died away. I think it's certainly fair to say. Some of the violent unrest has gone down, but but Peru the account of our many reporters who are on the scene of these things. The size has not diminished. What are some of the things that? Trump or William bar have said in defense of the actions against protesters. Things that they've said that are not accurate. Will particularly referring to this Monday pushback. The controversial pushback of protesters outside of Lafayette Square bar has claimed that no tear gas was used. Our reporters and demonstrators were hit with a gas that induced pretty severe, coughing and tearing of the eyes. So that does not seem to be true. Bar has claimed things were thrown in his direction. There is a video that shows him on the scene, and you don't see anything visible of that though I can say that our reporters at times saw water bottles thrown. So that may be rings as half. True Bar has also made this very unusual can claim that pepper spray is not at all a chemical, even though it is marketed that way to kind of defend polices use of pepper Paul's to. To clear the demonstrators, and just all he this seems to be an effort to characterize this crowd on Monday as not peaceful. When in fact video shows they were. You know certainly there was a lot of yelling right, but when the police moved in on them, you saw line of people standing with their hands off. It was the police that move towards them, not the other way around and by bars, telling you know bars, telling just allies what happened? Let me reintroduce you if you're just joining us, my guest is this Petoskey? He covers the Justice Department for the Washington Post We'll be back after a short break. I'm Terry Gross, and this.
"trump administration" Discussed on We The People
"Is re-elected than being a year or two guests come back to the court with another hundred thousand people in Dhaka makes even harder to to wind down and if Elizabeth Warren Arnor someone else's elected at that juncture she can just reanimate Daca. And then we're back to game where the doctors legal so whether it's a ruling justiciability or a ruling on We need more evidence. Were back in court. This issue will continue lingering with dreamers having this cloud over them so every attempt to have a judicial minimalist minimalist approach will simply prolong this sort of uncertainty ran. One last. Beat on Channeling Roberts give it given that Reality that the uncertainty would be prolonged concern that several of the justices voiced Do you think that the chief will vote either to hold it. It's not just issue. Were the we need more evidence and come back a few years. I mean I think it's entirely possible that the court could say that you know the reason that game was not right and they need to go back and look at it again and in some ways you know that it's back to the trump administration. Decide what they want to do that with some sense from some of the justices that. Oh what's the the point in sending it back you know. We know what the administration will do. We have these subsequent memoranda that they did they issued. But I think it's important don't really know what the trump administration will do. You know there was the reason why they decided to upset that. Their hands were tied in the first place. And you know what I don't think the courts should do is enor- The way you administer view normally works because if the court were to say here we don't have to look at the reason that day just gave initially active. We can look at these subsequent region- reasons yeah that would have major implications not only for Dhaka And you know it's future but for the way agency review happens more broadly and that that would be something that I think would be a really troubling results of this case. Well it is time for closing arguments in this fascinating discussion and Josh the first one is to you tell us why you believe that the trump administration's decision to rescind DACA GEICO was consistent with the laws and the constitution. All thank you again to Jefferson. Also thank you to Brad. so He's good to spar with you and have it reasonable discourse I think the trump administration has had its hands tied the weights litigated cases. Based on an unusual compliments of events at the time uh-huh when trump wanted to end Daca the acting Homeland Security Director. Name was Elaine Duke. refused to go along with president the trump she said I am bound by attorney general. WHO said illegal but I will not offer any policy? Justifications Daca In other words. DOJ walked into this case of his hands tied behind his back. which makes it very difficult fight? But ultimately I think the administration will prevail fairly simple idea if president Obama's able to create Daca through executive action without going through the courts than president. Trump's you're allowed to do the same. I don't know that. The trump administration's position is entirely coherent. I think they've made some arguments. That are strange. Brad mentioned a few of them. I think they've also withheld arguments. That are much stronger ones on advancing. So they win this one it will not because of the strong argumentation because the law a general grant discretion it's making source of decisions to the President But I I think they the the S G is also journal. Had his hands tied his back based on the habit. Facts were given to him. Brian the last word is to you. Tell are we the people listeners. While you believe that the trump trump administration's decision to send Daca was not consistent with the lawn. Sure well thanks again Jeff for having me. Thanks Josh for this conversation you know. I think it's just important to think about DACA. In context in the context of decades decades of Congress making the consider decision that given that immigration is a complex field dynamic field. It makes sense for the executive branch to have discretion to determine how best to implicate mate implement the nation's immigration laws and of course into that particularly important in this context because Congress hasn't even appropriate and sufficient resources to allow the removal of all undocumented individuals and so the government necessarily has to make discretionary decisions ends up about a whose removal to prioritize. and WHO's knives up and I think the administration's decision to put in place. The DACA policy was an entirely permissible exercise of the discretion that the executive branch has long enjoyed. I'm a Whiz in keeping with past practices of administrations administrations of both major political parties It was in keeping with the types of policies that Congress has consistently indicated it's affirmative normative approval of. And you know I think what's really important here is to look at the reasons that the trump administration gave for terminating the policy policy You know if you look at its initial memoranda. The Generals Memoranda The initial D H S Miranda. I think there's no question that they were acting because because they viewed this policy as unlawful at justice powerfully said the argument yesterday if you look at their nose and they're saying This is a law It's not about their policy choices and given that the question for the court is whether Daca was law four nines and given the significant discretion the executive branch has immigration law given the way that discretion Russian has been exercised in the past DACA is plainly lawful and therefore the trump administration can't terminate it on the ground that it wasn't thank you so much Josh Blackman and Brian Garage for a really eliminating unpacking of the complicated legal Statutory and Administrative Law questions at the heart of the DACA case. I now understand all of them much better as a result of your contributions and I know our listeners. Ours will to Josh Brand. Thank you so much for joining. Thank you jack thanks. Today show was engineered by Kevin Kilburn and produced by Jackie. McDermott determined research was provided by Lonzo Rick and the constitutional content team homework of the week. dear people friends. There's a good Scotus blog log symposium on the case with contributions by our to champion. Today Josh Blackman Garad check it out at SCOTTCLARK DOT com please rate review and subscribe to we the people on Apple podcasts and recommend the show to friends colleagues or anywhere everywhere. Who's hungry to understand? Not only the DACA case but all aw nutty constitutional and legal questions and always remember that. The National Constitution Center is a private nonprofit. We rely rely on the generosity passion engagement and devotion to lifelong learning of people..
"trump administration" Discussed on We The People
"From our podcast on a gundy cases aces hotly contested before the court today. Perhaps five justices at least four Believed that this non delegation doctrine which has been dormant since the nineteen thirty. You should be revived and Congress's power to delegate important decisions to the executive should be restricted of the liberal justices. Strongly resist that justice. kagan against this would mean the end of government So so this is a cutting edge question. My question to you Brianna is It just didn't seem much appetite for confronting not directly directly at the court. Justice or at the argument said she didn't understand how this policy was illegal. She said that the administration has frequently adopted class based discretionary relief policies. And she and Chief Justice Roberts debated how many people have been covered by these policies in the past. He said it was more like fifty thousand people and she said it was more like one point. Five million so BRIANNA. My question is to. What degree does the legality turn at? How many people were affected? Eight hundred thousand under under Dhaka as opposed to maybe four point. Five million hundred OPPA and more broadly. What's your response to Joshes argument? That DACA is as an unconstitutional delegation of authority from Congress and the President and for that reason is illegal and unconstitutional one of the most interesting aspects of the the court argument with how little time the trump administration's lawyer spent making the case that Daca is unlawful. And I think that's because it's actually a really difficult difficult argument to make you know Congress as I mentioned earlier. His long conferred discretion on the executive branch to implement the nation's immigration laws the Supreme Court. It has in the past recognized that deferred action is. They've said a regular practice that the executive branch engages in for humanitarian reasons or simply for its own convenience since and Congress over the years has repeatedly taken affirmative steps that demonstrate its ratification of its reliance on these exercises of executive expression Congress has for example passed legislation that presumes that the executive will continue to grant a production or expressly directs. The executive have to continue doing so. And there's not been any suggestion in the past that the legality of these programs should turn on the exact number of individuals who were affected but even if other than what the fifth circuit up considered the Darpa case a couple of years ago. But even if you consider consider that you know I think the lawyer for California at the argument you made a very persuasive case that there are instances that are on par with Dhaka. You he pointed wanted to the family fairness program which was a program that was put in place under the Reagan administration at allow. Ins district directors to choose. Not to remove you've some children in south of immigrants who status had changed under a recent change in the nation's immigration laws. He told the court the executive branch at the time told Congress that program would apply to forty percent of the undocumented population at the time and I think against that background the the decision to put in place Daca seems entirely keeping with what administrations have done in the past and what Congress has approved in the past us as a valid exercise of the significant disruption that Congress has given to the executive branch and I think it was telling the argument. The Justice Kagan asked the Francisco this Lizard General the lawyer for the trump administration to identify what particular provision of the way. He was saying that Daca violated Ed and he knows that they were not saying that there was a specific provisions that it conflicts with you know they were pointing simply to a lack of authority. But when you look at the immigration laws you know Congress. Congress has authorized the second home security to establish regulations issue instructions from other He's for carrying out his authority under the IRA and end. Congress has also directed. The secretary established National Immigration Enforcement Policies and priorities and all that does is a factual wait those immigration policies and priorities making clear that those who arrived with countries children who have not broken the law or not are not priorities ready for removal and should be allowed to work legally while they're here Josh. Show one more beat on the legal and constitutional arguments is just to confirm in your viewed dude. The DACA program is illegal. Because it's unconstitutional. There's not a separate statutory violation and then my question is did you detect any appetite for ruling DACA illegal at the Supreme Court. The constitutional provision at play is. What's knows the take care clause that that clause has got a lot of attention the last couple years because the president trump but even for the electric seen Kato and I we briefed the take care clause. We argued that the decision to Grant deferred action to such a large class of people amounted to a suspension or abdication immigration. Laws there were zero briefing. This issue I don't think it will even even come up Indeed this is important The attorney general sessions letter which which argued a doctor's legal reference constitutional defects They did not explain what those defects were until We prodded them In our brief one sentence where he said hey government what's the constitutional defect effect and the gene is replied breeze had a hop the the console defect refers to an excess delegation of power which is the non delegation doctrine. The only way the government argues persuasively that this that this policies illegal is premise the non delegation doctrine but he has secret Jeff. They don't WanNa argue argue that generally the government does not want to argue that there's doctrine which gives court the powers to set aside federal laws. They're very hesitant. And when Justice Kagan pose questions Dole. Francisco I the same reaction branded Francisco Com Ogden. We've the question. I really hope that the court appointed Texas is an Amicus they requested. There were denied died because any Texas cooking a lot better arguing that this law is unconstitutional But ultimately I don't know that the court has an appetite to rule the legality of Dhaka. I think the former likely sleep path is something that won't be satisfied to almost anyone. The girls simply hold at the decision to cancel. DACA is not one that review by the courts. What does that mean well will? The policy might be shut down in six months or so. We have election coming up real soon. So it's very likely that in January of twenty twenty one where the president is gets to decide the fate of Dhaka. Does it can keep it out of the can get rid of it In the event that let's say present Elizabeth Warren Oxides to reinstitute DACA Then texts will come right back and sue them So we're the same exactly's were in today. I would much rather have ruling yes or no or in this sort of Punt based on whether the courts can review it since you introduced this question of non reviewability I will ask Brown to illuminate the rather wonky and complicated arguments about reviewability Ludi and degree with Josh or not. That the court may find the case to be non reviewable yes. This is one of the big questions that was disgusted. The argument Ed's this week which is whether this termination of Daca is something. The courts can even look cats and I think that there are really strong arguments that the termination daca is something. That is reviewable. You're there is a strong presumption that when an administrative agencies on Federal Agencies Act that Congress intends the courts to to be able to review that action. There's this narrow exception for agency actions that are quote committed to agency discretion by law. But here you're on justice. Ginsburg actually pointed out the irony in the administration's argument. It's really difficult to understand how this could be an action. Committed to agency discretion by the law when the agency has said wasn't acting as an exercise of discretion it was saying that he thought the law required it to take this action and imports consider whether agency actions revealed worn out. One thing that they often consider is whether there's historical tradition of these sorts of agency actions of being reviewed by the courts. And they're simply no stoorikhel tradition of allowing executive agencies to do what they did here to say that their hands were tied by the law that they didn't have love the legal authority to continue Daca and to say that that decision is free from review by the branch of government. That's tasked with clearing what the law is the courts. So you know when courts consider this question there couplings they look at just one with. There's any watch apply with any meaningful standard against what to judge the agency's exercise of discretion. And you know here because the question we've been discussing already know whether Daca is lawful is the quintessential sort of question Ashton that the courts are well suited to engage in. I just don't think that there is a strong argument. That the action here isn't reviewable. And you know there the lot of discussion about it at the core. It's your the Assembly a couple of justices who were pushing back on the argument. That this is reviewable They wanted to know why it is. They want to understand with limiting principle would be but at the end of the day. It's dangerous to predict what the court will do My guess is that the court will conclude lead. This is Rubio Ball. But but I don't think I wouldn't surprise me if there is a little bit of disagreement with the quarterback question Josh Brown say that the standard for whether or not a a agency decision is reviewable is whether or not it's committed to agency discretion by law and brand says that because this was ultimately not a a discretionary policy decision but judgment about Dhaka's illegality then that doesn't meet that now view ability exception Do you agree or disagree and do you believe that the court will find the case to be reviewable. This litigation is basically like groundhog day. Everything thing is the same as wasn't twenty sixteen but in reverse In Two thousand sixteen. The defenders of Dhaka argued that President Obama's decision to enact DACA was not subjects review and maybe in groups arguing that the decision to cancel it is subject to review on the flip side. A today others were challenging the recision a argue that it is subject to review. And everything's basically flipped. I think everything subject to review I think in two thousand sixteen eighteen doc was subject to review adding twenty twenty nineteen. I think the recession is subject to review so I think it does affect tangible benefits But the fact that it does affect effect review a me that does not really discretionary policy has substantive. Wait that cannot be supported by the statute The reason why I suggested that the court may a punt on this or justiciability factor Is Because the court we know my tip. According to John Roberts the court doesn't like getting involved often messy situations and it'll be all too easy for the courts just ducked decisions. Our you guys figured out But this this punt would not be very effective for simple reason The dreamers are not going anywhere they're here and even if you say that the policy is not subject to review if the election comes out for the democratic side. We'll be right back in court to having side legality. I so I think it's a mistake. Let this linger any longer. I'm just as Gorsuch had one. Line Racer that. There's a cloud of uncertainty that that's been around for years. Why this cloud stretching longer and I I hope that the court finds it's either rule? Yes no thumbs up or thumbs down. Don't give us a short demoted Kon. It just just just decided case. Thank you for that and I'm going to look up the shrugging murder convict. I haven't seen but it would be a good motto for the Avoidance Doctrines Before the Supreme Court so that brings us back to the question of the legality of the recision and beyond is it right that turns on whether or not the agency policy was reasonable and adequately defended Ju Justice Ginsburg oppressed General Francisco at the beginning of the argument and he conceded. We're making two arguments want one. Is that we you know had to rescind the policy because we thought it was illegal in the other we had discretion to do so Tell us about His argument that the decision was justified by the Attorney General's Memoranda Maranda and the skepticism of the liberal justices who believed that the bare bones attorney general's memoranda did not adequately balance interest and therefore was is not sufficient to defend the program onto law. There are a couple of interesting things that were going on. At the argument. You know one was the question of what documents the courtship you considering considering when a determines what the agencies rationale explanation was you know it was interesting. You Know Francisco did not I think. Want Rely Shirley on the Attorney General memo or the initial D. H. S. memo because it is really really difficult to see those documents any indication that this decision was was based on anything other than the administration's conclusion that the law required them to terminate the policy so instead he trying to draw the court attention to a subsequent..
"trump administration" Discussed on We The People
"I'm Jeffrey Rosen. President and CEO of the National Constitution Center and welcome to we the people a weekly show of constitutional national debate. The National Constitution Center is a nonpartisan nonprofit chartered by Congress to increase awareness and understanding of the constitution among among the American people. This week the Supreme Court heard challenges to the trump administration's decision to end the deferred action for childhood arrivals program or Dhaka Dhaka was enacted by the Obama Administration to defer the deportation of undocumented people brought to the US us as children now. The court will decide whether president trump's decision to rescind DACA. Almost two years ago was lawful and possibly unconstitutional `institutional or whether it even has the authority to review the question to begin with joining us to dive into this crucially important question into unpacked. The complicated complicated legal and constitutional issues at the core of the case are two of America's leading Supreme Court commentators and two great friends of the we the people podcast. Josh Blackman is associate professor of law at the South Texas College of Law Houston and an adjunct scholar. At the Cato Institute. He has testified before the house. Judiciary Committee the and is the founder and president of the heart institute and he blogs Josh Blackman Dot Com Josh. It is great to have you back on the show. Thanks Jeff and Brianna garage is chief counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center. She has served as attorney advisor in the office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice. And clerked for Justice Steven Briar Bran. It's great to have you back on the show me okay so I want our listeners to understand the complicated facts and unpack unpack these legal issues. I is the case. reviewable by the court second Is it illegal third. Is it unconstitutional. National and fourth was the administration's decision to rescind the policy Consistent with the law so Josh let's begin with the facts as professor King's field said there were two programs here Dhaka and Dhaka which was the deferred action for parents. Can you as concisely as possible. Tell us how this Daca case got to the Supreme Court Jeff. This case is many years in the making The story begins in twenty twelve Congress considered a piece of legislation. Don't ask me Matt. This law would provide a pathway to citizenship chip for certain young immigrants who came to this country As miners who have gone to school state of trouble and and lived. upstanding lives This this bill was not didn't have support in the Senate and had failed after a Dhaka films or after the Dream Act failed in the Senate The Obama Administration announced policy known as Dhaka. DACA deferred action for childhood arrivals DACA was not amnesty. To not give citizenship instead of graduates knows waffle presents the aliens. What does this mean that? The dreamers would be de prioritize deportation and would also receive certain Federal Oh benefits for example social security They could legally work and the other a benefits as well The DACA policy was challenged in a few courts. But not meaningfully. It was pretty popular across the board And that policy has been in effect now for the better part of Seven Years Years Fast forward to twenty fourteen. A congress considering the comprehensive immigration reform bill the the gang of eight bill if you will This bill actually passed the Senate of but in the House. The speaker John Bainer did not bring it up for a vote. Didn't bring for votes so it never went anywhere. Legislation died After that happened President Obama announced that he would take executive action. The second policy was known as Dumb Pot. DAP CNN dot com the cloudy not daca super deferred action for parents of Americans and lawful permanent residents. This policy of grand differed action to the parents citizens as well as parents of lawful permanent residents that is green card holders while Daca was quite popular. Dabo is not considered popular and it was challenging challenge in court Texas and other conservative states sued up for a injunction and they were able to block by the District Court That that injunction was affirmed firm by the Fifth Circuit. Court of Appeals in two thousand sixteen. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court. However that time? The court shorthanded because justice. Scalia's untimely death As a result the court split four four simply affirming the lower court but not Reaching the merits I'm at that juncture Daba was more more or less enjoined but doc remained in effect fast works twenty seventeen. President trump is elected. He announced that he will suspend Dapo. Abolishes no big deal. It never went to effect but DOC remained in effect Texas once again threatened to sue the trump administration for continued to enforce Daca in response sponsor trump administration said we are going to wind down Daca and suspend the policy because we decided that it was a legal base on the fifth circuit decision also immediately. After President President trump announced he would suspend DACA The administration was sued across the country in various courts and various court ruled that the suspension memorandum was not lawful. Awful that is The the memo said we are killing this policy. 'cause it's illegal and of course you're wrong. The policies perfectly legal Therefore your justification was incorrect rectal arbitrary capricious and we can halt the recision and so the supreme considering whether the memoranda that justify the recision provided a unreasonable invalid basis and the policy. I think that's everything. Shift got everything in one in one. One breath beautifully done. Thank you so much for that Our Best of concision and and and but brand. There's always more to say and my follow up question on the facts is and what exactly did the memorandum recinding. DACA say it said. It was both illegal and unconstitutional. What what previous memoranda did it rely on? And what did the lower courts that held Daca to be illegal hold. What was the basis for the reasoning? That Dhaka was illegal. Sure so you know when the administration decided to terminate Daca on the first memo explaining decision actually came from the attorney general all Jeff sessions. who was that Attorney General? Who wrote to advise that the Department of Homeland Security shouldn't his words should resend the June fifteen in two thousand twelve Random entitled exercising prosecutorial discretion with respect individuals who came to United States as children. What the Attorney General said was the DACA wasn't his view affected by the previous administration for decorative action without proper statutory authority and with no established end days and so in his view? The DACA policy suffered from legal and constitutional defects in fact said that they were the same legal constitutional defects effects that the courts recognized as Sadaka. And that's really important because it provides the background against which D H S issued. Its memo a formally formally terminating the program in that memo. The Jess explained that taking into consideration the Supreme Court of the Fifth Circuit's rulings Of in the case and the letter from Attorney General Sessions They concluded that the program should be terminated and again really important the reasons that the attorney general and d h s gave when decide to terminate the program because the bedrock principle of administrative law that that when an agency acts the courts review that action based on the explanation the agency gave at the time that it acted and because the administration said that it was acting. It was terminating the program because it concluded the DACA was unlawful. That decision attorney the program whether it itself was legal really turns on the question of Dhaka's legality because if the courts who the DACA was legal then their conclusion that they had to do it that the law bound their hands that it forced to terminate it was itself unlawful under the federal law that Governs Agency action. And so that's why in the lower court cases that have been considering this question. The fundamental question that they were all asking is whether the DACA program was itself lawful whether when the Obama Administration put it in place it was permissible exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Josh started the story with the dream. Act And in fact you know the story story in some sense begins long before the dream. Act Because for decades Congress's conferred discretion on the executive branch. Determine how best to enforce our nation's immigration laws over decades ministries. Both parties have put in place these kinds of deferred action policies and when the Obama Administration put in place Daca. It was acting against against that background so as lower courts have considered this. They'd ask the question whether Daca was lawful and almost uniformly. They concluded that it wasn't lawful awful and the administration's decision to terminate it on the ground that it wasn't was itself unlawful. Okay we've distinguished between Dhaka and DA As Josh put it publicly. And we understand the Tacoma covers about almost eight hundred thousand people. Da covers far far more up to four point five million almost half of the unauthorized population of the US. And we're going to jump in for our first question into the arguments for and against Dhaka's being illegal Josh You believe that Daca is not legal illegal. So focusing on the legal and statutory arguments rather than the constitutional ones. What are the arguments that Daca is illegal? And how did they fare at the Supreme Court. Well I filed an amicus. Brief Ambi- asked the Cato Institute in Dhaka case and I filed a nearly identical brief reef couple of years ago on behalf of the student adopt case when position has been largely consistent I think Dhaka's our policy a minding dream act should have been enacted. Did I truly feel for the situation of the dreamers These are people who a should have their status permanently adjusted by statute Although not By executive action the answer to this question of wide Dhaka's legal relies on a fairly esoteric but a pretty important element of constitutional law would soon as a non delegation doctrine The NON delegation doctrine suggests that Congress cannot give the president power to make laws laws and everyone more or less degrees in the abstract. That is bad of the difficult part becomes at what point has congress given too much authority. Our brief takes the position position. That immigration law gives the president a lot of power but it's somewhat bounded right. It's somewhat limited. I'll give you I'll give you an example There is a statute that says the attorney general can give work authorization to certain people on deferred action. It's there and and and we can't deny that it's there When that statue was first enacted and when regulations were inactive pursuant to members of Congress asked how many people do you expect to gain work authorization through this regulation? A mantra given was such a small number. That's not worth statistically recording. It just a tiny number Because generally the the issue of giving work authorization to immigrants is fairly controversial. It's a it's an issue which Congress has a lot to say about Daba and DACA relied on. He's fairly mundane provisions designed to help a very small number of people to grant work authorization to up to a million perhaps one point five million individuals and we argue that the laws Congress enacted cannot support such a broad delegation authority. That is if Congress intended to give the present this much power the statute cell phone constitutional. The better way is to avoid the constitutional question and say that Congress would resolve these major questions itself. This this is what's called the major questions doctrine after the best way of reading these various statutes is that Congress did not give these authorities the president and it goes beyond what Congress intended and because the statutory authority. The Statutory Authority is lacking the executive branch cannot lend this policy Now I don't know how much appetite there is for this argument the court. I didn't cure many questions along these lines yesterday of this argument that we advanced Texas advances similar Arctic argument a couple years ago and the did circuit didn't cite Mike Brief but they definitely read it in their decision from two thousand fifteen That is that the Congress has delegated a precise authority used to grant the work authorization air just one point to clarify a Texas and myself. We've never debated the issue prioritization. That is the president can prioritize some be proposal over others of the debates always been about the ancillary benefits like work authorization. And that's where the key is towards the president. Just said we will not remove you. I think it's a much much tougher question but it's we will not remove plus communities benefits. That's what the statute conflict comes from all right Brianna. If I understand joshes argument argument I it was quite influential. It was the basis for the fifth circuit's argument and the NON delegation doctrine deer with people listeners. You'll remember.
"trump administration" Discussed on Marketplace Tech with Molly Wood
"Law enforcement. Officials generally are not fans of what's called end to end encryption messages that cannot be read by anyone except the sender and the recipient they call it quote going dark and argue that encrypted communications make it harder to investigate or uncover crimes the trump administration. Australia has held meetings about proposing a ban on end to end encryption and last week Attorney General Bill Bar said companies should have to give quote lawful access to encrypted communications basically a back door but security experts and even been some other government officials say that's not a good idea. Moxie marlins bike is the founder and C._E._O.. Of Signal Messenger private chat APP I asked him what a ban on encryption or a back door to messages might mean what it would mean is that <hes> people's personal data and communication would be insecure that it would be <hes> foreign hackers or just data leagues large compromises and but I think even within the United States government that that's well understood which is why it's sort of confusing that the trump administration is sort of murmuring about this and the only thing that I can think of is that trump and the trump administration particular have a certain amount of insecurity about Silicon Valley and Tech Company. C._E._O.'s goes and stuff like that. Do you think that's really it. I mean like it seems like there is at least some to play the devil's advocate here legitimate law enforcement arguments about how it's a lot easier to catch bad guys if you can see what they're saying the thing that's confusing appeasing about that. Is that technology's signal. You know we did not invent cryptography. We're just making an accessible that cryptography that genie is out of the bottle and so people who are engaged in high risk criminal activity are always going. Going to be able to avail themselves of photography if they want to you know <hes> just making it available to people like you and me you sound like you don't think that there's a serious threat at least from the United States government in terms of attempting I'm to force loopholes or weaken and encryption well. I I mean I am not a policy expert but at this point does seem clear that public sentiment is definitely in favor of more privacy and security. It's very clear that you know national national security and the United States government itself benefits from these technologies and so it would make sense to take a step back there at this point right so if you had to characterize the split in the argument like on the one hand you may have law enforcement this law enforcement argument that says you know these APPs provide a place for criminals to hide on the other hand you might have some of the same law enforcement people saying it also protects our secrets just to put a fine point on it sure you you know I think it's possible that there elements within law enforcement that are just less focused on protecting or protecting national security or protecting our own secrets or protecting you know industrial secrets <hes> and so they're not looking at the bigger picture. Are The policies Australia a problem for you. They've taken steps to banner. We can attend decryption. What does that mean for? How signal functions there it doesn't mean anything I mean? That's I think the you know that legislation was also. Also you know very confusing to people at the time and so far. It seems to have just weakened Australia. You know that there are start ups and tech companies who are now reconsidering having offices. There and fewer people are probably being hired as a result and you know it doesn't seem to have resulted in any clear benefit from a law enforcement perspective. How much of this conversation ultimately is GONNA come down to trust and who people want to associate with like it's one thing for facebook owned? What's APP to say that it's encrypted or even apple to tell me that I message is but if I'm a consumer who doesn't know that much about how this technology works does it at some point? Come down to WHO I'm decide. I'm going to believe yeah. I mean that's actually that's a really interesting question. I mean the idea the fundamental idea behind cryptography and these types of technologies like intended Grip Shen is that you don't have to trust anyone one. It's the idea is to try and remove. <hes> trust in people are an organization that if something antenna encrypted you don't have to trust the people who are hosting that data in order to do the right thing with it because the way the technology is designed. There's literally nothing they could do. I mean they just it's just opaque data that tells them nothing. You know. I think what's complicated. Is that it's it's difficult for people to conceptualize. Is that even if experts in the field tell them and that's the case and you know there is also like sort of popular media perception of technology and cryptography that sort of anything thank can be like cracked or whatever you know that it's like you get smart person in the room and they like typed on the keyboard and you know the information is available really fast to be fair clicky clack you know so there's there are a lot of questions around public perception and trying to communicate exactly what's going on to to users <hes> but on the other hand you know like you know our objective as an organization just to make private communication accessible and ubiquitous and so from our perspective our largest goal is just to have as many people using this technology as possible even if they don't even know that it's there <hes> <hes> because you know at the end of the day that's what's actually going to protect people's either data Moxie. Marlin Spike is the founder and C._E._O.. Of Signal Messenger Politico reported in June that any legislation banning encryption was unlikely to pass in Congress but the issue isn't going dark anytime soon and now for some related links you can read that politico story on our website marketplace tech dot org. It.
"trump administration" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes
"Health and safety, and you need good smart people to work in government. So we're guardless of what your political agenda is you should want government work effective way. The second. Would you tell people I want to would you tell someone to go work in the Trump administration right now, Chris Liu I would not again, you mentioned the chances Pena's? It's not clear how this helps you in your resume. We've heard the countless stories of people leaving the White House from good jobs in the White House. Unable to find good jobs in the private sector. So this is not seen as the way to kind of put the boat on your resume that it's been another ministrations. If I could just jump in there there many vacancies and commissions that could. I think if they had that's where the fragility of the Trump White House really becomes exposed as our positions. Look at all the vacancies at the Federal Election Commission. I think at the office of personnel management. Now, actually, these are jobs that if you do them, even as a political appointee, you might help yourself, you might as if you're Commissioner have an appointment at last past Trump, and they're about to one of the things that's happening right now is they've gotta fill this cabinet level position. The ambassador to the UN, which is a very serious job and very serious representational job. In generally depends on some serious executive experience or international experience and try to sell to Senate an individual who is the spokesperson for a year and a half. I think a perfectly decent job as folks 'person. But that's real different that being embassador the UN Chris. Well, exactly, right. And you you have seen the way that Republicans have tried to talk about now. It's qualifications that she was there for two years. She did a lot of trips with. Peyot? She did a lot of briefings. None of that suggests go toe-to-toe with other countries and diplomatic settings that doesn't even clued. The deputy secretary of defense whose only experience in government has been the time that he is served. He has no military experience. He has no other government experience. And that's frightening. Chris Liu inland. Sweet. Thank you. Both for being with me coming up new polling puts the blame for the shutdown squarely on Trump. That's not stopping congressional Republicans from defending his wall. One of them joins me next..
"trump administration" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes
"Tonight on all in and we have I mean, we have many people lined up for every single position any position everybody wants to work in this White House, dozens of unfilled positions on team Trump and no takers. This is a hot White House. We are a White House that people want to work with tonight, the anti of a Trump administration with a new year new congress just days away. Then I got a call from Mark Burnett is a great guy from survivor cetera et cetera. And he's the guy would we did this thing together how the guy who did the apprentice pave the way for the Trump presidency? The apprentice was tremendous success. Plus new reporting a Michael Cohen and Prague the mystery mother subpoena and the supreme court and day six of the government shutdown. The Senate stands the journ an all in starch right now. Good evening from New York. I'm Chris as it is day. Six of the Trump shut down. And a Senator did derby noted today. There is no end in sight the house and Senate did technically gavel into session today, but they didn't do much both chambers. Journ less than five minutes and with more than eight hundred thousand federal workers, either furloughed or working without pay. Basically nothing is expected to change before the new year when Democrats take control of the house. But here's the thing. Even if the Democrats do manage to reopen the government, and that will be an interesting fight. It will not change the fundamental fact that the Trump administration has been and will remain in its own kind of quasi permanent shutdown many top positions in the Trump administration or either temporarily staffed or not staffed at all she news. Presidential historian Michael Beschloss says the situation is unprecedented. Get this in the new year, the secretary of defense, the attorney general and the EPA ministry ter- will all be quote acting. Which means they have not been confirmed that position by congress and whoever replaces disgraced secretary the interior Ryan Zinke, who's resigning amid numerous candles will be acting as well. Even the incoming chief of staff. Mick Mulvaney, will be an acting chief of staff sources telling him you see that movie himself asked for the acting titles..
"trump administration" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast
"Ideally gets an exceptional read it is written with the rigor of first rate academic which stephen is but also the pros the penmanship is really that of a first rate non fiction writer so kudos stephen on that book and i pick it up i was also just impressed with how much he wanted to understand the reality policymaking which i feel like was something that is often hard to find in academic book so that's that's very useful back to the three part framework that laid out which i think is really useful and thinking about the the drone policy at least as was practicing the among ministry shen as best we can discern how it's being implemented in the trump administration i worked on the development part of it at the pentagon the actual drafting of it somewhere between the pentagon and the white house and the implementation at the white house kind of orient my involvement in this and i think if you think back and look at what the obama administration was trying to calm clich it's helpful to think of kind of where the world of counterterrorism was at the time that presidential policy guidance or the was developed ultimately roll out prisoner bomb comes in very clear guidance that we need to focus on the right war the right war as it were as is both afghantistan as well as the broader fight against all qaeda it's not a globe worrintary it's it's a war against all qaeda it's phillies and it's here it's in he enters that war with the capabilities from the military inventory community that have been refined over the past seven years mostly in the iraq theater but also in the afghantistan theater and so we have highly developed special operations forces highly developed ways of actually identifying and tracking terrorists and then the emerging drone technology has actually developed quite a bit at that point and gives us a lot of capability to go after and conducts parted strikes against those who would do as harm and so the theater's kind of emerge.
"trump administration" Discussed on PBS NewsHour
"This weekend president trump once again reached out to democratic leaders on capitol hill to explore a new way to men or end president obama's affordable care act senate democratic leader chuck schumer says he rebuffed mr trump's overture but like the president's previous deal with democrats on the federal debt ceiling this is a sign of friction between the trump administration and the republican party join me now from santa barbara california to discuss these internal party battles as newshour weekend's beshir correspondent jeff greenfield so jeff map out where the battle lines are we can clearly say the democrats are onesided outside his opposite to president trump it inside the republican party well you've had president trump expressed displeasure with senate leader mitch mcconnell for awhile what you're seeing now is something altogether a different you have for instance the vice president's chief of staff telling donors don't think seriously about undercutting incumbent republicans who aren't cooperating with the president you have steve bannon one time senior adviser to the white house the selfproclaimed champion of trump celebrating the loss of trump's own endorsed candidate for senate in mississippi and openly threatening several republican incumbent senators with primary battles and when you when you look at this in a normal situation you know when the party might say well this might threaten or slim hold on on the house and the senate the president might say cut it out but we are in an altogether different political environment now and ahead of the the tensions with sector tillerson play into this and also well somebody who wanted to be secretary of state will at one point is president says is a senate bob corker.
"trump administration" Discussed on Vox's The Weeds
"Bizarre failures of the trump administration is it he is not receiving legislative cooperation from the sort of four to half a dozen senate democrats who are holding incredibly imperilled seats in states where he's incredibly popular and like it's not a politics problem relic he remains very popular in west virginia in missouri in north dakota in indiana the senate democrats represent the states have a strong incentive to work with him on something but the he has to give them you know you'd have to come up with something for them to work with him on rate and his just like instinct to fight with people all the time is fine but you've just in a world where you need sixty votes to do things and you have democratic senators who would like to work with donald trump on quote unquote something you have to be able to like kraft something for them to work with you on otherwise you can't get anything done like just at all and i don't trump is clearly frustrated by this right i mean he could he could use some help right and that's like you've got to have a meeting with clear mccaskill unlike work something out do something do a bill in instead these kind of like spinning their wheels uh you know if you've got a company or a team at at a bigger company you probably know that like the thing that makes our breaks of success is the talent that you're able to higher but other people know that too and that means it's really hard so that's where ziprecruiter comes in it's it's an online search service that makes a difference so you can post your job ziprecruiter to over 100 jobsites with just one click about what really matters is their powerful technology matches the right candidates to your job better than anyone else so unlike other sites they don't depend on candidates finding you ziprecruiter finds them over 80 percent of jobs that are posted ziprecruiter get a qualified candidate within 24.
"trump administration" Discussed on PBS NewsHour
"The us war in afghanistan has been underway for almost sixteen years and now a third president is facing a policy decision on how to handle america's longest war with at least ten more american deaths on the ground there this year and more than twenty four hundred since the war began the trump administration's next moves are in the spotlight pj toby ah begins our coverage helicopters raced across the afghan sky transporting wounded from yesterday's taliban attack near kandahar city in southern afghanistan on the ground the charred haas of an american armored vehicle destroyed by a suicide bomber to us service members were killed and four others wounded for months a new afghan strategy has been the subject of divisive debate among the president and his national security team we're going to be getting some ideas because we've been there it's our longest war who delivered four many years we've been there were now close to seventeen years and i want to find out why we've been there for seventeen years how it's going and what we should do in terms of additional ideas progress has been slow mr trump is apparently grown frustrated with his advisors nbc news reported yesterday mr trump suggested that secretary of defense james mattis and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff marine general joe dunford fire the top commander in afghanistan army general john nicholson nicholson assume command more than a year ago the pentagon was reportedly considering extending his term.