40 Burst results for "Trump Administration"

Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on The John Phillips Show

The John Phillips Show

00:27 sec | 10 min ago

Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on The John Phillips Show

"7 90 ABC News at 1 30. I'm Kevin Crap. The White House's this afternoon officially sending the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Cockney Barrett to the U. S. Senate. Democratic candidates Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are today releasing their 2019 tax returns. Parents of students who died in the Saugus High School shooting last year are among plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed today by California Attorney General Javier Becerra and others against the Trump administration. They want the CF to change its interpretation of what qualifies as a firearm to cover unregistered so called ghost guns like the one used at Saugus on Wall Street. All the.

Saugus High School Saugus Amy Cockney Barrett Kevin Crap Attorney General Javier Becerr Kamala Harris Joe Biden Abc News Supreme Court White House U. S. Senate California
What to know about the first 2020 presidential debate

Bloomberg Daybreak

04:14 min | 9 hrs ago

What to know about the first 2020 presidential debate

"Preparations for the first debate tonight between President Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Bloomberg Politics editor Kathleen Hunter joins us for more on all these stories. A CZ Michael mentioned in the news report. Plenty of anticipation for these two candidates just to be on a stage together for the first time. What are you going to be watching for this evening? Cape? Well, I agree. I think that's one of the most interesting dynamics and it's kind of an intangible, but I think it's one of the most important things every time we have the first of the presidential debate in the season, the general election debate And I think it's just going to be interesting to see the dynamic between Trump and Biden how they play off to each other. And so that's going to be something that I think everyone is going to be watching for. I also think obviously we're going to see the residents that these recent series of stories from the New York Times about Trump's tax record the degree to which Biden is able to use those to try to land some You know attacks on Trump during the debate. I think the you know expectation is that certainly it gives him some some additional fodder in a chance to sort of paint a contrast between you know himself and the president in terms of their upbringing and background of perspective, You know, Biden has often talked about Trump as Park Avenue candidate, whereas he's someone that you know, grew up in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and had a very middle class upbringing and I would expect it to continue that narrative in the context of these recent tax reports. But, you know, I think that whether or not he's really successful in getting any ground on that remains way have to think that hey, could find some avenues for that. Giving some of the topics Fox News anchor Chris Wallace. So the moderator tonight has said he's going to lay out a TTE this debate this evening, including the economy when it comes to domestic policy, which Is going to be much of the focus this evening. Is there a sense that the Trump campaign is on the defensive right now given the handling over the corona virus pandemic and the racial protests going on in the country right now? I think that's absolutely true. Certainly from the Biden campaign's perspective, I mean, not when it comes to the economy, not the campaign that Trump wanted to be running. You know, if you think back to January when he spoke of the elbows, and he talked about You know how economy was doing so well under his watch, obviously, in March that all changed with the Corona virus. But I would expect Trump to continue to beat the economic drum and talk about the recovery that he expects America to see in the coming months and talk about the need, as he has on the campaign trail for him to continue in his role to tryto help nurse that recovery forward And so I think that that's going to be an important message from the Trump campaign. If you look at the polling It's insignificant to note that Trump filled its relatively high marks, at least compared to other topics on his handling of the economy. And so I think that that's an area where he's certainly going to try to focus and that's why you know, it may be significant. That Biden, you know, has a daughter now about the tax records in order to try to attack him with that. Interestingly, the day before this debate, of course, as the world crossed the million death mark from the Corona virus, the Trump Administration held this event at the White House Rose Garden yesterday, talking about rapid testing, potentially Trying to show that it's getting more of a handle on the pandemic is some of that at play here. Oh, I think absolutely. I mean, I think that the reality of the current virus pandemic globally and specifically in America, where you know which has the highest number of deaths of any country from the pandemic, I think is one that is certainly a huge liability for Trump reelection bid. So anything that the Trump administration, Khun Beauty try to counter that, you know, I think it's certainly something we continue to see them to Dio see them to see them do And I think that one of the front on which they Tried to counter that is by talking about increased text testing and increase access to testing. And so I'm not surprised that doing that I'd expect that to continue, but I think that that you know has to be weighed against, you know, I I think a lot of what the Trump administration talked without when it talks about testing is an increase. From a fairly low base level of testing. That's been done, so they like to talk about how more testing is happening, But you know if you start out with very low level testing, it's not hard to say that. You think that exponentially wants to get to in

Donald Trump Joe Biden Trump Administration Bloomberg Michael Chris Wallace Kathleen Hunter Editor Scranton America Cape New York Times Pennsylvania White House Rose Garden President Trump Khun Beauty
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on WTOP 24 Hour News

WTOP 24 Hour News

00:39 sec | 59 min ago

Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on WTOP 24 Hour News

"This afternoon. A lawyer for former Trump administration, National security advisor Michael Flynn tells a judge. She asked the president not to issue a pardon for her client. Attorney Sidney Powell was initially reluctant to discuss her conversations with the president or the White House, saying she believed they were protected by executive privilege. But under persistent questioning from U. S District Judge Emmet Sullivan She acknowledged having spoken to the president within the last few weeks to brief him on the case and argue against Flynn's pardon. Utopia. 3 40 campaign 2020 Now on double D T O P. Okay, get your popcorn ready. The first presidential debate of the 2020 campaign will be held tonight in Cleveland. President Trump 74.

President Trump Michael Flynn Emmet Sullivan Sidney Powell Advisor Cleveland White House U. S District Attorney Executive
US official: 2020 census to end Oct. 5 despite court order

AP News Radio

00:56 sec | 17 hrs ago

US official: 2020 census to end Oct. 5 despite court order

"The nation's commerce secretary says the twenty twenty census will end next week despite a federal judge's ruling that it continue through the end of October in a tweet commerce secretary Wilbur Ross announced the self response and field data collections operations are targeted to end October fifth last week a California judge issued an injunction to prevent the census count from ending early with the intent to revert back to a previous deadline of October thirty first she ruled the trump administration's efforts to shorten the schedule would likely produce inaccurate results agreeing with those who argue minorities and others in hard to count communities would be missed if the counting ends this month but this new October fifth date does not necessarily violate the judge's order a hearing was under way to determine a cut off date Jackie Quinn Washington

Wilbur Ross Jackie Quinn Washington California
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on Pat Thurston

Pat Thurston

03:19 min | 1 hr ago

Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on Pat Thurston

"You know when you don't know, And there's a mystery that makes for good television people. I saw a great mim about that, too. Is that if there is some sort of a president enhancing drug out there, I want my resident to be taking it. Oh, listen. Remember that movie limitless? I don't remember who the actor was. But, yes, a little When you took this drug and I asked my brother who is a position I said there's a struggle really existed. No, he said that a role may make you a little more alert, but it's not gonna make you smarter. No, no, like caffeine for the rest of us in a cup of coffee is every mornings are limitless, struck any field? Our ABC news correspondent, So Andy, you mentioned some of those other races. That Sometimes we don't pay real close attention to until it's it's time. How much how big of a deal is the debate as Faras, you mentioned momentum, maybe enthusiasm for some of the down ballot races do the down ballot candidates. Benefit from a good showing by the by the presidential candidate of their party. They have in the past, you know, were they? It's referred to his coattails, You know? Can you ride the top of the ticket's coattails? And, uh, I don't know how all the ballots set up. Sometimes you will see well, including this Democrat. Maybe I'll vote for the Democrat from that sure didn't really pay attention. You know, so bad is somewhat helpful, and there's a lot of fear among Republican candidates, which is why you're not seeing a lot of Republican candidates and very tight races. Even mentioning the main Donald Trump because they know how divisive he could be in insert areas And so they're tryingto almost walk away like Donald Trump doesn't existence some of these tight races in other cases, they're embracing him fully. They realized that those are the that is the base of the Republican Party now released Donald Trump Party. And they need those votes to win, so they are embracing them. So yeah, that's a That's a really good question. What's going to be interesting? Tonight is the question too. They're definitely the $750. Factor attorney is going to come up. Their policies. How do they see the world civil unrest in this world Covert. How are we going to deal with all these? These were things that are on top of everyone's mind. Now the president I have been making this case almost daily about what a terrific job he's done in managing the covert crisis now. If you had someone has gotten sicker die from this, you know that the actual reality is quite different. So you know, it's going to be Joe Biden's job to go after him and say, Look, we left you guys the playbook. We left you guys a department. That was the early warning radar for this type of thing. You got rid of both of them. How can you say you're doing a good job? And of course, Donald Trump's gonna come back and say you left the cupboards bare. You leave us a vaccine now, if it isn't supported off He's going to come back and go. We leave because we didn't know this thing existed at the time. You know, there are certain that the Trump administration so that they're just uncertain and but no one called So there's that's the followed then is how does how does Joe Biden effectively debate and fact check? All of the same time. It is he is he going to be able to do such a thing? I know his campaign is saying all is not really his job. But if the president is throwing out some really egregious Claims it doesn't behoove Biden to jump on those the falsehoods. It does, and I'm sure he will. That's why he's not campaigning for the last several days here, he's been Has the president elect to say in his basement? Uh, practicing for this event doesn't appear. Donald Trump has been doing the same. He brought up really Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie the other day. Andi said. These are the guys who help people. Parents of this And then Rudy Giuliani said something bizarre till you said he thinks President Trump can can literally rip Biden's head off in this debate. We're not sure if he's going to do it. Not quite sure, even with that begins, but we'll see. Rudy's He's beginning. Nuttier and nuttier. Everytime Giuliani opens his mouth. You're just left going. What? What did he just say? S O. That's Ah, That's fantastic. Alright, Andy Field, our ABC News correspondent out of Washington, Andy, Thank you so much for your time and enjoy. Enjoy the fireworks tonight. Much appreciated. Thank you. Good to talk to you. I'm thinking about this. I'm thinking about Biden and his tactic going into this and I have to tell you, I get so tourney when I think about it. I remember watching four years ago when it was president Trump and everything that he did candidate Trump at that time I just remember, especially during the Republican primaries. He's such a doofus. Sergeant doofus. A couple of things stuck out at me. First There was a moment where remember Jeb Bush was leading the Republican primary for long time 20. It would have been 2015 before Jeff dropped out. But Jeb At one point jab and Donald Trump had been going back and forth at each other. Then there was this moment where I think Jeb got a zinger in on somebody else. And Trump reached out. To give like a high five. And Jeb was like, Yeah, High five. Hey, buddy. And I thought Jeb did exactly what I would have done, which would have been totally wrong. Donald Trump knows howto be the bully. And this is this is very basil. This is this goes back to what we did in elementary school. If the if the bully is the popular kid in off, oftentimes a popular kid is a bully. Not always, but it's It's that whole. Ruling out of fear thing, you know? But if the popular kid is a bully And that bully shows you some favor. In front of someone else. Senate Bully is bullying somebody else and you jump in. Now. Now you're on the bully's side of the bully shows you favor. You accept your Yes. Thank you. Suddenly. Yeah. You're not standing up possible anymore. You're joining the bully. And then it doesn't make you look any better. And Jeb did that when he was like, all right, high five. I thought at the time I thought Jeb. I get why you did it. I would have done it too. It would have been, like, all right. You know what we're we're not so different. You and I But in hindsight, I say jab You had an opportunity to leave this off hanging. All right. Leave him hanging. Let him stick out his Hey, Give me five. Give yourself £5. Keep the change, right? He had this opportunity. But Donald Trump knows, And this is what I'm taking away from me. Now. Is that look in retrospect. He knows how to control the room knows how to control people. So there's where I worry about Joe Biden tonight. Going into this. That was just an example. I'm not worried about Joe Biden giving Trump Donald Trump high fives. I'm just I'm concerned that Donald Trump is going to be able to control the room. This guy is the human thermostat. I mean, he can set the temperature in the room. And if things start to get too hot for him, he could bring it down. He just turns around, he starts bullying somebody else. And I want you to watch tonight. How much bullying goes on. Joe Biden if he's smart, I'm going to focus all of his bullying and Donald Trump Donald Trump. Will naturally and I don't think this is a bad plan..

President Trump Joe Biden Donald Trump Jeb Bush Rudy Giuliani Republican Party Andy Field ABC Caffeine Faras Abc News Senate Attorney Nuttier Andi Jeff Chris Christie Washington
Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham

Noon Report with Rick Van Cise

04:17 min | 1 d ago

Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham

"In federal income tax is the year he ran for office and paid zero income taxes at all in many other years. Threatened to undercut his campaign. But the allegations go to the very heart of Mr Trump's appeal, especially among blue collar voters in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin in Michigan, who propelled him to the presidency in 2016. Joining us now is a B C's, Adam, Kelsey and first off How did Mr Trump get away with not paying his taxes? Well, Jeff what it comes down to is ah lot of reductions in the amount of taxable income that President Trump has because he takes so many loans because of so many investments in companies that that Are not necessarily under his name. He can write off. Ah, lot of the income that ends up coming back into him. So what you've got here is 10 out of the past 15 years for which The New York Times had these tax records from 2017 going all the way back to 2000 to 10 of those 15 years, President Trump As you mentioned did not pay federal income taxes. There was ah, year or two in which he did pay tens of millions of dollars in taxes to the IRS actually returned that to trump upwards of $70 million in a refund that he claimed he was due again, based on some risky investments that he made the the IRS rules and regulations allow into claim those as Boston coming. Those were returned. So now that $70 million is the subject of an audit, there's a debate between the president. Oh, and his own federal government over how much you may have to pay back. But the bigger picture that you were mentioning is that this really strikes at the heart of what's so many Trump supporters liked about him that he was a successful businessman, a self proclaimed billionaire and looking through these financial records, it would. Actually it paints the picture of somebody who, instead of being worth billions of dollars could oh, upwards of billions of dollars to several different Ah, loners of money. You've got hundreds of millions of dollars and Loans for buildings that President Trump owns in New York City and across the country that are going to be coming due in the next couple of years. It's raising some questions today about whether or not it's such a good idea to have a president United States it would be on the hook for such a big deal coming up. Is anything in the president's tax is illegal. What did we find any legal wrongdoing? There was all hit all his deductions and everything he did above board. Ah, lot of it is above board. And that's that's one of the major criticism that's being levied today Is that the same Ah senators, congressmen who are criticizing President Trump for pains so little were in some ways the architects of the affluent tax loopholes that he and his accounts were able to take. But there are some questions about some of the moves. He's made one in particular, that's been getting a lot of traction and social media for the past 24 hours. His payments that President Trump me do his daughter Ivanka. She's obviously an employee of the Trump administration. She was receiving a regular salary, but in addition was receiving money for consulting work that President Trump then turned around and tried to take off his taxes basically as a refund, So there's some questions there. About whether you know that this double dipping is potentially fraudulent, and whether either Ivanka Trump shouldn't have been receiving those consulting fees or of President Trump shouldn't have been writing those off tax. How is the president defended his actions. All the kneejerk reaction yesterday was that this was fake news to which critics of the president said. Well, if this isn't true, if these aren't your tax returns, all you need to do is turn over your realtor tax returns and proved that the New York Times is wrong on this. Obviously, the president hasn't done this and then The resulting hours we've seen, you know a lot of deflection. We've seen the president and his Children going on television and talking instead about Joe Biden and his son, Hunter and Hunter Biden dealings with With Russia and with businesses in the Ukraine so instead of kind of head on addressing these issues, trying to distract the media if you will to talk about different matters instead. But I wouldn't anticipate that with the first presidential debate coming up about 24 hours from now, Tuesday evening, we're certainly gonna cure President Trump have to answer for this situation. All right. That's a B, C's and Kelsey. Thank you so much for joining us. Come on

President Trump Kelsey The New York Times Ivanka IRS New York City Pennsylvania Adam Michigan Boston Joe Biden United States Jeff Wisconsin Hunter Biden
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on 10 10 WINS 24 Hour News

10 10 WINS 24 Hour News

00:47 min | 1 hr ago

Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on 10 10 WINS 24 Hour News

"On East Fourth Street. The teachers union is on board while the principal's union gave the plan and the mayor of vote of no confidence, So who's right and who's wrong? Who knows? Says Governor Cuomo And he says, we'll find out when the state gets the testing data. And I say to every parent in the city of New York If those schools are not safe. I will not allow them to operate. Harry. How do we justify the principal's Union? Versus the teachers union versus the mayor. We get the facts. Middle and high schools were set to open on Thursday. Well, his families have struggled with whether or not to send their kids back to class for in person learning, a new report says the Trump Administration intervene to manipulate Corona virus data regarding students. A New York Times report out now claims top White House officials pressured the CDC to downplay the risk of sending Children back to school. Olivia Troy, a former top aide to vice President Mike Pence, saying in a statement to ABC News during my tenure on the task force, I saw senior political staff actively undermined the CDC by attempting to manipulate the scientific data on the virus. Troy telling The New York Times, she was repeatedly asked to get the CDC to produce reports showing a decline in cases among young people. Correspondent Line on Boys. An 82 year old woman is hospitalized in critical condition after being hit by a scooter near Columbus Circle. She was in the crosswalk at West 60th Street, Broadway at about 7 30 this morning when this happened 23 year old on the rebel scooter remained at the scene and investigation is underway. Rebel shut down its operation in the city for a few weeks over the summer after three fatal scooter accidents, one took the life of.

Teachers Union Olivia Troy CDC Principal The New York Times New York Governor Cuomo Columbus Circle Trump Administration Mike Pence Harry Abc News Vice President White House
TikTok: US judge halts app store ban

Kevin McCullough Radio

00:30 sec | 1 d ago

TikTok: US judge halts app store ban

"Federal judge gives a temporary reprieve to TIC TAC following an emergency hearing yesterday. The ruling postpones the Trump Administration order that would have banned the popular video sharing out from US smartphone APP stores of midnight last night. More comprehensive ban remains scheduled for November, about a week after the presidential election. Ruling sided with lawyers for TIC Tac, who argued that the administration's APP store ban would infringe on First Amendment rights and do irreparable harm to the business.

Tic Tac United States
Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on Newsradio 950 WWJ 24 Hour News

Newsradio 950 WWJ 24 Hour News

01:56 min | 2 hrs ago

Fresh update on "trump administration" discussed on Newsradio 950 WWJ 24 Hour News

"It's another lawsuit over absentee ballots in Michigan just over a month before Election Day. We'll have the details just ahead. Both candidates prepping ahead of tonight's debate from Cleveland will have the latest Also coming California's proposed ban on gasoline engines not sitting well with the Trump administration. I'm a little beat reporter Jeff Gilbert. These stories and more coming up. Good afternoon. I'm Jason Scott. And I'm Jackie Paid for W W. J news radio 9 50 right some afternoon baseball is Jeff Lesson's going to join us with the postseason action at 2 45. And it to 55 will check your money as the Dow was down, but not as much as earlier Today we'll have the latest again coming up to 55 cloudy skies in 63 Warren, the full forecast to 38 w W J News time to 31. Michigan's Democratic secretary of state, Jocelyn Vents in being sued by Republican predecessors after failing to challenge a decision that orders the state to count absentee ballots up to 14 days after the election. A lawsuit filed in federal court in West Michigan, which is the latest step by Republicans to block an order from the court judge that would could keep some races unsettled long after election Day. A judge, citing chronic male delays during Corona virus, said ballots postmarked by November, 2nd can be counted if they're received within 14 days after the election. Critics say Secretary of State Johnson Benson must defend a state law which states absentee ballots cannot be counted if they're received after election night. Democrat Joe Biden and his running mate, Senator Kamala Harris, releasing their 2019 tax returns, as Biden is now calling on the president to do the same. Biden and his running mate, Senator Kamala Harris, are releasing their 2019 tax returns, and Biden is calling on the president to do the same. This. In the wake of reports that President Trump paid only $750 in taxes in 2016 and 2017. Biden's campaign says this is an historic level of transparency meant to give the American people faith once again that their leaders will look out for them, and not their own Bottom lines report coming out of New York times Sunday evening. W W J M w W J.

Joe Biden Senator Kamala Harris Michigan President Trump W W J M W W J Jason Scott Jeff Gilbert Donald Trump Jackie Paid West Michigan Jeff Lesson Jocelyn Vents Reporter Cleveland California
Judge halts Tiktok ban hours before it was set to go into effect

America First with Sebastian Gorka

00:30 sec | 1 d ago

Judge halts Tiktok ban hours before it was set to go into effect

"A federal judge gave a temporary reprieve toe TIC TAC following an emergency hearing yesterday. The ruling postpones the Trump Administration order that would have banned the popular video sharing out from US smartphone APP stores of midnight last night. More comprehensive ban remains scheduled for November, about a week after the presidential election. Ruling sided with lawyers for TIC Tac, who argued that the administration's APP store ban would infringe on First Amendment rights and do irreparable harm to the business.

Tic Tac United States
Tribal plaintiffs claim victory in U.S. Census lawsuit

Native America Calling

03:53 min | 1 d ago

Tribal plaintiffs claim victory in U.S. Census lawsuit

"This is national. Native News Antonio Gonzalez leaders of the Hilo, River Indian community and the Navajo Nation say they scored a victory in litigation to make sure there's a complete and accurate US census count the tribes another plaintiffs requested census operations continue through October thirty first instead of the end of September last week Federal Court ordered the twenty twenty cents count to continue until the end of October governor. Steven. Rayle Lewis in a video message to his community decisions to complete the census in September due to an appeal that could give us some more time for us to keep working together count up. But the United States has already appealed that ruling and it may end up going to the supreme. Court. So data extension is far from certain and counting could come to an end as soon as thirtieth. So we have to go by what we know. That we have until September thirtieth for anyone who has not completed the census to fill out there for the census was initially planned through. October thirty first. But in August the trump administration shorten the time setting a new deadline in September Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez in a statement praise the ruling and said, the pandemic has been a setback creating many challenges to get people counted especially in rural areas. As of Thursday the Navajo nation's response rate for the twenty twenty cents. This was only twenty point five, percent thirty percent of he'll river Indian community members have not completed the census this summer the Census Bureau reported the National Response Rate was more than sixty percent. Last week the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia determined. Alaskan. Native corporations are not tribal governments under the cares act and not eligible for funds. The ruling is a win for tribes sued over Alaskan native corporations getting a share of the eight billion dollars in cares act funds for tribes tribes, which filed the litigation and include some Alaska tribes. Claim only tribal governments should be allocated cares act dollars. The court held that an sees are not federally recognized tribes and include some of the largest and most profitable corporations. Alaska an appeal is likely. The AMC's have the support of Alaska's congressional delegation about five hundred, million dollars in cares act funding remains for tribal governments, how it will be dispersed if tribal plaintiffs. In to be determined. Hopi Tribal Chairman Timothy New von Jemma is asking you senators to reauthorize the Special Diabetes Program for. Indians. He testified virtually last week before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs the Hopi tribe in Arizona has utilized the program for more than twenty years to provide diabetes prevention through education fitness and finding ways to address food insecurity. The community health approach also incorporates Hopi Culture. The pandemic has impacted in person services which are now virtual. We're currently offering the wide array of online fitness classes for Monday through Friday including native fitness which incorporates traditional Hopi Song and dance. In addition ages DP is hosting the fitness books challenge were participants earned fitness bucks by completing a virtual fitness class. Classes. That are held in hope you wellness centers facebook page they just DP also modified to programs that celebrate the hoagies long standing tradition of running. The Twenty Eighth Annual Hundred Mile Club. Event just wrapped up and despite it being virtual, there were nearly eight hundred participate participants, ages five and up legislation introduced. The summer seeks to reauthorize the special diabetes, program for Indians for an additional five years and increased funding to two hundred million dollars per year I mean Antonio Gonzalez.

Special Diabetes Program United States Federal Court Antonio Gonzalez Alaska Census Bureau Jonathan Nez Hopi Tribal Us Court Of Appeals River Indian Community Rayle Lewis Hopi Culture Jemma Hilo Hundred Mile Club Steven AMC President Trump District Of Columbia
Judge halts Tiktok ban hours before it was set to go into effect

10 10 WINS 24 Hour News

00:22 sec | 1 d ago

Judge halts Tiktok ban hours before it was set to go into effect

"Temporary reprieve for tiptoes than four hours before the Trump administration's ban was to take effect, A federal judge gave Tick talk a little more time on the clock. But the Commerce Department still plans to render the Chinese own video sharing up unusable for US users on November 12th unless TIC TAC manages to complete a deal with Oracle and Wal Mart that U. S and Chinese regulators can live with correspondent

Trump Administration Wal Mart Commerce Department Tick United States Oracle U. S
Court temporarily blocks Trump order banning TikTok from US app stores

WSJ Tech News Briefing

01:23 min | 1 d ago

Court temporarily blocks Trump order banning TikTok from US app stores

"A federal judge has temporarily blocked the trump administration's ban on downloads of the Chinese own social media APP Tiktok the ruling came just hours before the ban was scheduled to go into effect last night, the judge will release his official ruling in the coming days. So we don't know his exact reasoning just yet, but we do know that TIKTOK had a chance. To make its case before the judge yesterday here's a reporter. Katie such Eric. He did hear arguments early, Sunday morning from Tiktok that the national security concerns that the administration had were not pressing enough to override the free speech protections that constitutional free speech protections that are afforded social media platforms like Tiktok Tiktok had made note several times we have a national. Election going on that this is a format they called it a the modern town square place where a lot of people talk about their opinions and argue that it was really valuable to preserve that right now, the administration has given tiktok until November twelfth to sell it to you operations or face a full ban that would make the APP completely unusable for. US users, you might remember the tech talk actually has reached a tentative deal that would have the company partner with Oracle and Walmart to become a US company. But some of the specifics are still up in the air and it's not clear by the regulators on either side of the Pacific will approve the final version much less in time for the

Tiktok Tiktok United States Reporter Katie Walmart Official Partner Oracle Eric
Why a private section of the border wall is allegedly failing

Dr. Lee Yardley

05:12 min | 1 d ago

Why a private section of the border wall is allegedly failing

"By Iraq war veteran Bryan Cole Fatchett, triple amputee. They wanted to raise a billion dollars to quote build Trump's wall. The targeted mission Texas in the Rio Grande Valley, one of the busiest illegal border crossing areas in the country, all on the border. We're here building. You gotta help out. They had started producing the video's promoting this project and they were on the property. They started clearing the property before anyone really knew what was going on The company Clearing the riverbank to build the private wall was Fisher Sand and Gravel. Tommy Fisher, the company's CEO, had been trying and failing to land a lucrative border wall contract from the government. Since 2017. When the Trump administration began soliciting Wall design concepts. Fisher was one of the companies to put up a prototype. Officials of the Department of Homeland Security said it had design flaws. A second bid was also rejected. Frustrated Tommy Fisher took another approach. We really believe with our patent pending system, we could bring sexy. Back to construction. He became a fixture on Fox News, the president's favorite network at the time, people time sounding less like a contractor and more like a contestant on a reality show pandering to an audience of one, You know, hopefully the president will see this as well. And he's a guy who says he can cut through bureaucracy two weeks after that appearance on Fox In April of 2019. I don't know if you heard about this contractor that said he could build the whole wall for a lot cheaper than anybody else. Yes, I have. We're dealing with him. Actually, Fisher Comes from North Dakota. Recommended strongly by a great new senator. As you know, Kevin Cramer, by May of 2019 Tommy Fisher had the president's attention but still couldn't land a contract to build the government's wall. The Army Corps of Engineers, which oversees border wall construction, pointed to the company's lack of experience building border walls to prove they could fissure teamed up with we build the wall. First in New Mexico and later here on the banks of the Rio Grande admission. On the banks of any rivers difficult. But building on the raging Rio Grande is especially challenging, made more complicated because the U. S Mexico border but straight down the middle of it. So any plans to build on it must be approved by the International boundary and Water Commission for I, B. W C. Sand and gravel didn't get that approval before they started. Bulldozes. What steps did they skip? All of them. What should they have done? They should have gone to the I B W c to the A and presented their plan an actual plan. What about this idea that you know this is private money being used on private land and a landowner could do whatever he wants. They absolutely can do whatever they want on their property. As long as it doesn't affect other people's property. And you think the wall infringes on other clearly does. The way the bollards were built is gonna cause clogging of that wall, So those followed the trash or debris could get stuck in there and then the waters. It's a giant break, just like a rake in your yard. It's going to catch all that debris and redirect that water. Penna filed a lawsuit on behalf of a neighboring wildlife refuge called the National Butterfly Center, which feared the wall would cause flooding to its property. U. S government also suit on behalf of the I. B. W C. Good walls make good neighbours. But this wall did not. We've got rogue priest running around anti Trump anti Won't we build the walls? Bryan Cole fragile, launched attacks against anyone who opposed their wall. Falsely saying the national Butterfly Centre was the site of a rampant sex trade and that the Army Corps of Engineers was part of the deep state even took game and Father Royce Nights a local priest to oppose the Trump wall. Accusing him of promoting child trafficking. Also not true. We build the wall people came after you personally and that's something I didn't even know who they were. They're coming after the local priest. Yeah, I guess you're not from around here comes from around here. We can. Even Mom and Dad can disagree about things without being mean and nasty. Last December, Brian Colfax bragged in an interview that we build the wall had a direct line to the White House. We have Crispo back and Steve Bannon A lot of people that are tied in with the Trump administration, so we're able to back channel things to the Trump Administration and let them know what we're doing, But what they were doing was falling apart. A recent engineering inspection after summer storms revealed deep gashes under the foundation of the wall. That's Mariana Trevino, right, who runs the Butterfly center line underneath it. This was a normal seasonal rainfall and what happened to the wall the foundation washed out from under enormous sections of it, His attorney said after this, that this is just a normal part of new construction if you walked out of your new house And had a 30 FT hole under your home foundation. Would you consider that normal? There's the end of the hall right

Tommy Fisher Trump Administration Trump Wall Army Corps Of Engineers President Trump Fisher Sand Rio Grande Valley Rio Grande Bryan Cole Fatchett Donald Trump Texas Iraq Fox News New Mexico Kevin Cramer Department Of Homeland Securit Bryan Cole Mariana Trevino
Trump's tax revelation, what are the highlights?

The Daily Beans

09:00 min | 1 d ago

Trump's tax revelation, what are the highlights?

"Donald J trump paid seven hundred and fifty dollars in federal income taxes the year he won the presidency in his first year in the White House he paid another seven hundred and fifty dollars. He had paid no income taxes at all in ten of the previous fifteen years largely because he reported losing much more money than he made. So that's the lead. In this is in reporting from New York Times Sunday afternoon by investigative reporters Russ Butner Suzanne Craig, and Mike Macintyre now Russell Suzanne incidentally or two of the three that dropped the huge story on trump's finances in October of two thousand, eighteen ahead of the midterm elections. and that was fueled by the financial documents provided by Mary trump who is now suing the president and his siblings by the way for defrauding her out of millions of dollars. But back to today's story from the New York Times quote. The New York Times has obtained tax return data extending over more than two decades for Mr Trump and the hundreds of companies that make up his business organization including detailed information from his first two years in office. It does not include his personal returns for two, thousand, eighteen or twenty nineteen. This article offers an overview of times findings. Additional articles will be published in the coming weeks. So this one, hundred and ninety two paragraph long story is an overview of the times findings. this is the sparks notes the abridged version the Reader's digest abridged story. And I'm GonNa go over the key highlights with you. Hundred Ninety two paragraphs is the overview of what they found. And they're going to be releasing multiple stories in coming weeks for details about what they've uncovered an important caveat here by their very nature, the filings will leave many questions on answered. These tax returns that they got many questions will be unfulfilled. They comprise information that Mr. Trump has disclosed to the irs not the findings of an independent financial examination they report the trump owns hundreds of millions of dollars in valuable assets, but they do not reveal his true wealth nor do they reveal any previously on reported connection to Russia? This kind of makes sense why Sivan's needs the documents, right These data simply report revenue not profit in two, thousand eighteen for example, trump announced his disclosure in his disclosure that he had made at least four, hundred, thirty, four, point, nine, million dollars. The tax records deliver a very different portrait of his bottom line forty seven point four, million dollars in losses. So he announced his disclosure, he made four hundred and thirty, five million. In here it says he lost forty seven point four million. To that's what he filed his taxes as. All of the information that times obtain was provided by sources with legal access to it. So we can. Try to guess. WHO This to the New York Times prior to the election maybe somebody on the case who knew that the case wouldn't be Sort of we wouldn't see any fruits of that until after the election. I don't know I'd be guessing. These tax data examined. by The Times, provide a roadmap of revelations from write offs for the cost of criminal defense lawyer a mansion used by the family retreat to a full accounting of the millions of dollars that the president received from the twenty thirteen Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. So that's kind of a Russian dealing. The apprentice may trump a total of four, hundred, twenty, seven, point, four, million, which he then invested in a collection of businesses that we're failing mostly golf courses. They steadily devour cash much as the money he secretly received from his father the and how that financed spree of quixotic overspending that led to his collapse in the ninety. the picture that perhaps emerges most starkly from the mountain of figures and tax schedules prepared by Mr Trump's accountants accountants. MAZAAR. Clue. Probably got this from the Manhattan Da Somebody there. This is the picture that emerges starkly is of a businessman president in a tightening financial vice. Most of trump's core enterprises from his constellation of golf courses to conservative magnet. Hotel in Washington I guess it draws conservatives. They all report losing millions if not tens of millions of dollars year after year. His revenue from the apprentice and from licensing deals drying up and several years ago he sold nearly all the stocks that now might have helped him plug holes in his struggling properties and tax looms. And within the next four years more than three, hundred, million in loans and obligations for which he's personally responsible personally will come do. Over the next four years. And these records show the actual and potential conflicts of interest created by trump's refusal to divest himself of his business interest. While in the White House his properties have become havens for collecting money directly from lobbyists, foreign officials, and others seeking facetime access or favors. The record for the first time, put precise dollar figures on these transactions. Here's some examples at the Mar, a Lago Club, a flood of new members starting in two thousand fifteen allowed him to pocket an additional five, million a year from the business people paying for access at his Durrell Golf Course in Miami. The roofing materials manufacturer GIF spent at least one point, five, million in two, thousand, eighteen even has as its industry was lobbying the trump administration to rollback egregious federal regulations conflict. In two thousand Seventeen Billy Graham vandalistic association paid about four hundred thousand dollars to the Washington Hotel where the group held at least one event during its four day World Summit in defense of persecuted Christians. Then when he took office Mr Trump said he would pursue no new foreign deals as president. Even. So in his first two years in the White House is revenue from abroad till seventy three, million dollars. And while much of that money was from his golf properties in Scotland and Ireland some came from licensing deals in countries with authoritarian leaning leaders or thorny geopolitics. For example, three million from Deteriora- from the Philippines two point three, million from India and one million from Turkey. Now the data also contains. Revelations about the one hundred, thirty, thousand dollars payment to Stephanie Clifford Stormy Daniels. The, which is one of the focuses of the Manhattan da Subpoena for trump's tax returns. Another financial information another clue that that might be where they got this. However. They say that it has no new revelations, but there is kind of a revelation because trump has acknowledged reimbursing cohen. Who made the? Payoff. But the materials obtained by The Times did not include any itemize payments to Cohen. The amount however could have been improperly included in legal fees written off as a business expense which are not required to be itemized tax returns that says to me. That trump. Didn't make the payoff where he would have had to have itemize it. Which says to me. It was improperly recorded. As a business transaction. At for legal fees, which is another thing to Manhattan as looking at. Business fraud. Falsifying business documents. Now, no subject has provoked more intense speculation about trump's finances than his connections to Russia while the tax records revealed no previously unknown financial connection and for the most part lack specificity required to do. So they did shed light on the money behind the two thousand thirteen Miss Universe pageant in Moscow at the subject of Enduring Intrigue Because of subsequent investigations into Russia's interference in two thousand sixteen. So basically what the time saying here is that there's nothing itemized here about Russia, but there wouldn't be because it's not required to be in tax returns but boy, did we see something interesting about the? Miss Universe Pageant in twenty thirteen. The records show that the pageant was the most profitable Miss Universe during trump's time is co owner and that generated a personal payday of two point three million dollars made possible by the Aguilara F- family at least in part who would later help set up the infamous twenty sixteen trump tower meeting. For. Officials seeking dirt on Clinton with Veselnitskaya who is now we know connected directly to the Kremlin. The record show that in two thousand thirteen to paget reported thirty one point six, million in gross receipts. That's the highest since at least the nineties allowing trump and his co owner NBC's split the profits of four point seven million by comparison trump and NBC lost two million on the deal the year before. Moscow and made three point eight million from the one the year after. So it appears the Russia one. Made money and made a lot of money a lot more money than it ever has before. So did. Russia overpaid trump for this event. Wonder why? In Two thousand, thirteen?

Mary Trump Donald Trump Donald J Trump President Trump Russia The Times Manhattan Moscow The New York Times White House Cohen Washington NBC Russ Butner Sivan Mike Macintyre Stephanie Clifford Stormy Dani Paget
New rule may strip pollution protections from popular lakes

KYW 24 Hour News

00:41 sec | 1 d ago

New rule may strip pollution protections from popular lakes

"Say a little notice provision in the Trump administration rule could lead the pollution of some man made lakes. Provisioned classifies reservoirs created to provide cooling waters for power plants is parts of waste treatment systems, which are not covered under the Clean Water Act. It was part of a significant rewrite of the law that took effect earlier this year. Environmentalists challenging the rewriting court say the provisions strips protections from some large reservoirs that are popular fishing spots such as sudden Lake in Wilmington, North Carolina. Utility industry says that critics were exaggerating the effect of the new rule in that state laws still protect the lakes.

Sudden Lake North Carolina Wilmington
Judge halts Tiktok ban hours before it was set to go into effect

Sean Hannity

00:16 sec | 1 d ago

Judge halts Tiktok ban hours before it was set to go into effect

"Judge is blocking the Trump administration's ban on TIC Tac from going into effect. The temporary injunction came just hours before downloads of the video sharing APP or set to be banned due to TIC Tac's parent company's links to China. Matt Matt Anson, NBC News radio.

Tic Tac Matt Matt Anson Trump Administration NBC China
Judge Halts Trump Administration TikTok Download Ban

Sean Hannity

00:23 sec | 1 d ago

Judge Halts Trump Administration TikTok Download Ban

"In Washington has temporarily blocked the Trump Administration order banning Apple and Google from offering Chinese owned video sharing APP TIC TAC for download it was to go into effective midnight. Lawyers for TIC Tac argued the ban would infringe on the First Amendment and irreparably harmed the business. The judge declined to block additional restrictions that air set to take effect in November.

Tic Tac Trump Administration Apple Google Washington
TikTok fate in the balance as judge weighs app store ban

Kim Komando

00:14 sec | 1 d ago

TikTok fate in the balance as judge weighs app store ban

"Lawyers for tech talker asking a US judge to delay the Trump Administration's midnight tonight ban of the video sharing program from being downloaded from APP stores. The judge's decision is expected sometime tonight.

United States
UN General Assembly: US-China tensions flare over coronavirus

Weekend Edition Saturday

03:34 min | 3 d ago

UN General Assembly: US-China tensions flare over coronavirus

"Pandemic is a test of international cooperation. One, the U. N secretary general says the world is failing is NPR's Michelle Kellerman reports that failure Was on display at the ongoing General Assembly. The secretary general is trying to use this virtual General Assembly to get countries to work together to fight the pandemic and many other global challenges. But one Security Council debate showed just how hard this will be. You know shame on each of you. I am astonish, and I'm disgusted. That's the U. S ambassador to the U. N. Kelly Craft accusing her colleagues, though not naming, which ones of playing politics with covert 19 members of the council who took this opportunity to focus on political grudges rather than the critical issue at hand. My goodness Craft defended the Trump administration's decision to pull out of the World Health Organization and said China should be held to account for quote, unleashing this plague onto the world. China's Ambassador John Joon, says the US is just trying to blame others for its own failings. The United the States has been spread in political virus on this information. And for 18 confrontation on division. Up to that point, it had been a rather dry Security Council meeting about global governance in the wake of covert 19. There was a lot of talk about multilateralism and a few veiled swipes at the Trump Administration's America first approach, Kraft said. The U. S has given you n agencies $900 million to counter the pandemic and compared that to others on the Security Council. NYU's year 4.6 million South Africa 8.4 million Indonesia five million. The US does give more to the U. N than other, says Richard Gallon of the International Crisis Group. But this is not just about money. Foreign diplomats had grown accustomed to trump attacking. Yuen arrangements like the Paris climate deal on mechanisms like the Human Rights Council. But they were genuinely shocked the Washington would walk away from the W. H O during a global pandemic. Speaking via Skype, he said diplomats are worried about what he calls a nasty fight between the US and China as Beijing tries to increase its influence in the world body on a day to day basis, Chinese diplomats in New York are often Very assertive, increasingly hard line and sometimes bullying colleagues from smaller countries. The reality is that for most members of the U. N, neither the US nor China Is offering an attractive vision of the future of multilateralism and the world needs multilateral solutions on a range of issues beyond the pandemic, says Latisha Courtois, who represents the International Committee of the Red Cross. She's raising the alarms about the forgotten conflicts from Yemen to this, the hell region of Africa has a triple threat of climate conflict and called it mansions. And for that they need to be a collective approach. The U. N Secretary General Antonio Guterres made the same appeal all week, reminding diplomats that the World Sol a previous period of fragmentation a century ago. The result was the first World War. Followed by the seconds. Over. 19 is casting a dark shadow across the world. And he called the band eh Mika warning that must spur US toe action. Michelle Kelemen. NPR news, the State Department

United States Security Council China Trump Administration General Assembly Dry Security Council Secretary General Antonio Gute Richard Gallon World Health Organization Michelle Kellerman NPR Human Rights Council U. N. Kelly Craft Michelle Kelemen Latisha Courtois NYU
Court revives House's challenge of Trump wall funding

Red Eye Radio

00:37 sec | 3 d ago

Court revives House's challenge of Trump wall funding

"For a lawsuit by House Democrats against the Trump administration over its attempt to use Defense Department funds for border Wall construction, a legal challenge from House Democrats over the Trump administration's allocating defense funding for border wall construction. Move forward. An appeals court in D C has revived that lawsuit after a lower court judge dismissed the case over a lack of standing in the ruling. The appeals court says the House has constitutional claims over congressional e approved Appropriations House Democrats say the administration broke the law by transferring funds approved for the Defense Department. For construction of a southern border wall.

Border Wall Construction Defense Department
Mark Meadows Speaks with Reporters

C-SPAN Programming

12:52 min | 3 d ago

Mark Meadows Speaks with Reporters

"Today outside the White House chief of staff Mark Meadows spoke to reporters for a little over 10 minutes on issues, including the replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the U. S. Supreme Court. The president said he needs nine Justice Supreme Court election challenge because he asked me of potential nominees how they will vote. No, he hasn't. Actually I've been in those interviews and I could tell you it would be inappropriate for us Ask those kinds of questions. I think his comments were more just an indication that we need a a full panel on the Supreme Court. You don't want to ever provide a a situation where there could be Tie a 44 ty not to suggest that this should be a 44 tie. I think it should be more of a unanimous decision on some of the facts that I have seen. But obviously I'm not a justice. They would have to hear That case would be highly inappropriate. We wouldn't want to ask a question that would perhaps for some potential nominee to recuse themselves. Should they have to hear this waste but with him out there, saying he needs to have this justice because there might be a challenge. That create bags of a conflict of interest for whoever you well, I know no more than any other judge that has been nominated by Donald Trump or Barack Obama or anybody else. I mean to suggest that just because they were nominated by somebody that they would have an inherent bias, I think we've seen from the court rulings already by the Supreme Court. They're an independent body, and they don't necessarily vote the way that you might think they should. I can tell you that That particular issue is eyes, Probably the least of potential nominees. Worries that it makes you effective profits were kind of expecting a second question. The president will have confidence. I can't speak to the second question in terms of the confidence in director Ray, I can tell you that I was Very, very disappointed to see some of the text messages and emails that came out yesterday. And some of the discovery that was put for from my previous job is a member of Congress. I know that I've asked for exactly those kinds of documents and never got them on that was under the previous director and also under this director on so it is time for direct array to quit in my mind playing footsie with transparency and Deliver those documents. The second part of your question was more that I think. Well, I think if past is prologue, I mean, we've got all kinds of indications that the Democrats are. We're going to use the next 30 days to try Tio shame. Whatever nominee we put four for their faith for their record for who they are, and Troubling. I mean, we've got it. We see even today that way don't have AH continuing resolution passed because Chuck Schumer is playing games with procedural aspect based on a potential nominee. We took down a election security hearing today because Chuck Schumer's playing games that's minor. That's that's child's play compared to what we will see over the next 30 days, But we're prepared for the fight. What we will see is, I think Be thorough Vetting but hopefully done in expeditious way way. I didn't say it was Judge Merrick Isa. Good leading question. You can say that the president's confidence in director, I haven't talked to him about it. Well, I can tell you that we have a number of people that continue to serve at the pleasure of the president that he has different degrees of confidence in on DSo Tio directly speak to that question. Without actually talking to him would be inappropriate about healthcare. Big announcement guys today the president wanted to executive orders now the U. S government policy that preexisting conditions should be protected. Forced the affordable care act right now is that five lost? What are Americans make policy of already existing protection? Well, Peter, you as you know, there's a court case going through as it relates to the affordable care act and what the president Wanted to make sure I was clear not once not twice. But now a third time in signing that executive order is to make sure that preexisting conditions are covered that insurance companies can price people out of their coverage just because of the illness that they have or could have come down with, And it was just a commitment and say that if the court strike that down any future legislation under a Trump administration would guarantee that preexisting conditions are covered. And so From his perspective, It's just trying to make sure that the message is clear. He's been very clear in the Oval Office, You know, Sometimes the campaign rhetoric in the ads that get place do not match the private conversations in the Oval. White House chief of staff Mark Meadows outside the White House earlier today. Scepticism of some because obviously the president president for four years, But they say that it's that they should be protected his only a policy. It's not along. We've never seen a plan. Peter, this is not your first rodeo. And you know how Congress has the inordinate and unbelievable ability to obstruct, especially when you have a divided Congress. I don't know of a single Democrat that would be willing to take down on Obama care piece of legislation haven't served in the car. It's almost like they're Holy grail. Now they'll admit there's all kinds of flaws and all kinds of problems with it that they won't fix, but they won't repeal it. And so it's all about making sure that the message to the American people gets covered. One of the interesting things that no one seems to be picking up on too much. Well, is the $200 copay that's actually is going it is coming from the savings from the executive order on most favored nation big farmer would push back on that. Pushback on that, But we're going to be able to save tens of billions of dollars were actually going to use a demo. Ah, demo for to be Medicaid CMS demo project that will actually allow us to use about $7 billion to pay for those. But those will be offset with savings from from Pharma as we enacted most favorite nation, money way have we have a 10 year? Window on that for those savings, and we're actually working on those final rules. Those proposed rules now to put forth But just like the Obama administration used the same program in the previous administration were going to use it now to make sure that seniors get the benefit of those savings today and that they don't have to wait for those you already prepping initial Supreme Court nominee for confirmation questions and Wilder wise guy sort of Urfa. Person around Capitol Hill with numbers on DSO in terms of prepping any particular nominee that we have. No, we have not started prepping those. We won't until the nomination is full on I see me mean by wise guy could be wise guy or a gal, a cz, a Sherpa, and so as we wait guys in a plural and generic sense I would have seen on so as we look at that. I don't know that we'll be using Sherpa as much we've been working with leader McConnell, in a very direct way of had daily conversations would leader McConnell a number of senators because of covert and the inability of senators to actually engage more on a office by office faces? We're looking at modifying that if there is a need for a Sherpa, we've actually have asked the leader for some recommendations. There were certainly open to that. But I think next week what you'll see Is Patsy polonium myself, making sure that we make the nominee available to a wide variety of senators. Political question. You aware that Amy Kony's merit worked on foot vs board and you know what was her role? Apparently, she was in Florida working for Stuart Levey. According to her question. Yeah, I I'm certainly aware of every nominees record, whether it's Amy Comey, Barrett or anybody else. I can't say I don't think that this is a hanging Chad problem. This's more a mail in ballot. Unsolicited mail in ballot with delays in collection of those ballot issue. Hopefully, we're not gonna have a hanging Chad problem when my last question was president, felling three of your quote, By the way, I think you owe guide okay. Yeah, that sounds like a good stand. Wise wise guys. Okay, campaign. Apparently, the RNC are telling Republican voters essentially that they need To vote absentee necessary. Isn't that sort of out of line with the president's message going to be male in front? And I mean, I think absentee ballots if they've got a normal process, perhaps auntie ballots like we had in North Carolina. I don't know that that process is one that is new or different. I can't speak to every state. All I can speak to is North Carolina, but but I can't. Say you that solicited ballads with absentee requests or certainly something that has been the norm eyes the unsolicited ballots mailing to ever registered voter that he has a bigger problem with and that most Americans should have a problem with that theory is she's been radio programming from Friday. Well, I don't know That's how I'm basing the acceptance. Of the election here is a valid point here is what we want to make. Sure of is that laws are not changed by a few judges making it like in North Carolina consent decree. Don't change the laws that are on the books just so that you can extend the election time. Most states, North Carolina and others have a very long time for them to be able to cast their ballots either in person or by mail leading up to November. 3rd s O to suggest that we should have November 3rd. It's a week plus two weeks like has been mentioned in some states is not. There is not something that I think is necessary. The other is is when you have secretaries of states in a partisan manner, potentially certifying election results. We want to make sure that they do this on on away that's credible and they can with stand the scrutiny of of the public eye on allow a partisan process to get in. I don't know if you're following what's happened. In North Carolina. But it's very troubling where you have a a Democrat group, filing suit against a Democrat, Board of elections and then doing a consent decree. That's not what the American judicial system is all about. It's in my opinion gaming the system. Hopefully, that judge will not go ahead with that consent decree but is very problematic and it disenfranchises voters whether they're Republican, unaffiliated or Democrat. We want to make sure every vote counts. But We want to make sure that on ly one vote count ceremony, I I'm I'm assuming that we were invited. I don't know about the best. You know the invite list. Obviously, yesterday we wanted to make sure before he left town. He paid respects and so way actually adjusted his schedule so that he could do that. Yesterday I travelled with him and, as you know, way made that a priority. Thanks, guys. White House Chief of staff Mark Meadows outside the White House this morning,

President Trump U. S. Supreme Court North Carolina White House Mark Meadows Chief Of Staff Director Barack Obama Democrats Congress Chuck Schumer Executive Peter Ruth Bader Ginsburg Donald Trump Judge Merrick Isa TIO Supreme Court
Judge says 2020 census must continue for another month

World News This Week

00:29 sec | 3 d ago

Judge says 2020 census must continue for another month

"The once a decade US census count will not end a month early this year as the trump administration ordered, a federal judge has ruled that the shortened schedule would likely produce inaccurate results ABC News legal analyst Royal Oakes by directing the federal government to keep counting heads through October, the court could. have an impact on the political landscape the more people in the state, the more seats in Congress that state gets the judge also suspended an end of year deadline for the stats meaning number crunchers get more time

United States Royal Oakes Federal Government Congress Abc News Analyst
"trump administration" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

11:37 min | 3 months ago

"trump administration" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Good. Let's get to the interview. And we are joined by the Legal Eagle Himself Devon Stone Devon. How're you doing? I am doing fantastic as as Andrew does apparently as well. And I mean you've stolen everything else from our show, so you might as well take that as well. I'd like to. Have adversely possessed it. Can tell things are tense also because Devon is represented by counsel. Welcome. Kelham clinic and how you doing. I'm doing well how Ya doing? I'm represented by counsel to mine. Is Andrew Torres so? Let's proceed with the with the hearing. Well, that means that only can talk, right. The court reporter will identify themselves for the record. That will be fantastic. Deva. We were super excited to have you on to talk about how Legal Eagle is doing political activism, so you've sued the trump administration like why? And how on this? I do need to start a gofundme page or something yeah legal. Eagle is branching out to no longer just on on Youtube, but now I r. l. with. Our very own lawsuit against a large portions of the trump administration, you know the like many people I think we were all sort of aghast in January and February, when John Bolton was supposed to testify with respect to the impeachment proceedings and then. unceremoniously declined and then decided to make what appears to be a cash grab in putting his information that he gleaned as a result of. His position as the National Security Adviser into a book which. is in some form or another being published as we speak, and it seemed like the sort of thing that would be ripe for a foia suit that. The information and the process that went into the pre publication review. May Not have been on the UP. And, up and. Some friends and I got together and we filed suit to. Seek information related to the book itself the original. unredacted portions of the Bolton book, the process that went into the pre publication review that may or may not have. Removed unclassified or classified information from John Bolton's book, and in general, what process was used? And whether there was a political machinations with respect to what John Bolton can or cannot now published so that that is the high level overview of the lawsuit that legal has has filed. Well. Let's let's unpack that we You did a video on this week. We did an episode on Bolton's book, but to sort of summarize kind of the the relevant background it is, it is very common greatly you hear trump and nondisclosure agreements. Andy, as and we all think to stormy Daniels. We think to an administration and a person who prior to taking office. was heavy handed. Handed in his use of NDA's to four, what would charitably be described? Nefarious purposes but but I don't even think this is a devil's advocate argument like it is, it is sort of well established that lots of people work for the government and come out of high level positions and write books right. They write the kind of policy walk. I got Madeleine Albright's book on my shelf rightly. It, Geeks like me. Who read books like that are the typical audience. And Its end its well. Practice, dating. You know going back decades. Path a century that when you sign on for example to be national security adviser. You sign a very detailed nondisclosure agreement that basically says hey, before I publish my book because I'm the kind of person that gets access to classified information. I'm agreeing to submit that book for Pre. Publication Review By. The agency so that they can make sure that I'm not inadvertently like. While I'm telling stories, you know. oops, I'm revealing top secret classified information so so within that context right is. A you agree with that so far and be how did John? Bolton follow? Fail to follow that process. As you can imagine, there is real tension between the governments need to keep secret information secret, and the first. Amendment and often governments don't necessarily want certain information to reach the public while. Often. Having an informed democracy is. An informed electorate is necessary for a functioning democracy so. There was a particular Supreme Court. Case called snap. In nineteen eighty that held that a pre publication review process. is narrowly tailored way of dealing with balancing those particular needs. There are certainly lots of limits associated with that, but that's one of the ways that the government deals with that particular difference in an interest is to require certain government officials to sign nondisclosure agreements into go through this this particular pre publication review process, and I am not an expert in this particular area, and so I defer to my in this case, actual lawyer, Kelly, mcclanahan who? is He would never be so bold as to say, but I think one of the the recognized experts in this field that as it happens around the time that Bolton was explaining that he may, in fact, be work shopping a book I cur cal. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you wrote an open letter saying that he really really needed pre publication review council because of all of the pitfalls associated with this particular arcane part of First Amendment and and national. Security Law my correcting that well, calling it in a letter might be a bit too generous it with a tweet are. A tweet thread, but attacked him. So you should call it an executive order then I. Guess Right but yeah, back in back in January January twenty six. Shortly after this happened I. Did this whole know here's here. Everybody's GonNa get wrong about this. I'm just GONNA get get out in front of that and say here. Here's some issues, and here's some really big issues that are going to come up and at and but John Bolton. Suggest that you hire a pre publication review specialist because you're GonNa need a pre publication review specialist to do this. Because of all the sort of more than art more art than science things that go into this because it's really jumped. Kangaroo Court Star Chamber, whatever analogy you want to use it, if not anything close to a well-defined system with well defined roles while, and is that under normal circumstances? Let alone with the trump administration in which there are no rules. It seems like right I mean that. The PREPO, the problem with pre publication review system, and there are myriad problems with the current system transcend politics and back in the only reason that you see real k. flaw about this back in the eighties with snap in another case card, Marquette, eighty and cases like that. Is that back then? The agencies thought they could get away with doing a lot more and sort of really really strongly pushed. The envelope on what they could do, and so they took that to the Matt in court now that it's pretty well established that the system exists and that it is. Judicially approved at least on paper. You never see it. Come up in much litigation anymore and as a result. Agencies get more and more arbitrary if they go along and the the only time you really see it, come up is there's two situations either when an author Light Bolton or a guy named Mark Bissonnette Does what they did here and just go ahead and publish it without the pre pub review at which point they get hammered by the court system, or when someone affirmatively challenge, if it like goes to court and file a first minute lawsuit, late Tony Schaffer did for the no easy day book, and even then the standard. The courts employee is so deferential to the agency that basically the agency Jeff to show. We classified it and we properly classified it because we properly classify things that we're supposed to classify properly in the judge says okay sounds good to me. Well well. That's what I wanted to ask about because it seems to me as a distinct non expert in this area that we have a it, it is a an obvious inference to draw that the government of and executive agencies. Dealing with national security have used. Overly broad classifications sort of since time immemorial to try and shield things that are critical right like in so the classic example that are lay audiences familiar with as the Pentagon papers case right like this. This is something that absolutely had no strategic value by the time that it came out, but it made the Kennedy and Johnson administrations bad and I guess the Nixon Administration by implication for staying there. And and we're familiar with it. As, an example of overreach, and so I I guess there's kind of a two two two part question there to the first is. If that's our history of executive agencies, a you know a connected to national security, being highly aggressive in designation, even pre trump out of a sense of of embarrassment Then you have. Any information. Get out from the government. Right like added. These books contain five hundred pages of blacked out A. Sorry we've. We've censored everything so I would I would say that is. Part of the the basis for the suit. Is that number one were going after several different categories of documents, which probably is interesting in its own right, but also the purpose of the suit and the foia requests in general is to aid in transparency that. This is shouldn't be something..

John Bolton executive National Security Adviser Andrew Torres Bolton Legal Eagle Devon Stone Devon Devon Supreme Court Kelham clinic Youtube Madeleine Albright Light Bolton Nixon Administration Kangaroo Court Star Chamber reporter Andy
"trump administration" Discussed on Fresh Air

Fresh Air

04:16 min | 3 months ago

"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

Fresh Air

02:51 min | 4 months ago

"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

We The People

07:14 min | 11 months ago

"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..

Daca DACA trump president executive Dhaka Josh Blackman Josh Congress Brad. Brian Garage Elizabeth Warren Arnor Roberts National Constitution Center Josh Brand GEICO Statutory and Administrative L DOJ
"trump administration" Discussed on We The People

We The People

13:32 min | 11 months ago

"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..

Congress Daca executive Supreme Court Justice Kagan Dhaka General Francisco Josh Brown President Ju Justice Ginsburg attorney Justice Roberts trump Brianna gundy Ed Texas
"trump administration" Discussed on We The People

We The People

14:05 min | 11 months ago

"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.

Daca Congress Dhaka Supreme Court president DACA Obama Administration attorney President trump Dhaka Dhaka executive Fifth Circuit Texas Josh President and CEO United States founder and president Cato Institute Court of Appeals
"trump administration" Discussed on Marketplace Tech with Molly Wood

Marketplace Tech with Molly Wood

07:47 min | 1 year ago

"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.

United States Australia Moxie founder marlins politico Bill Bar facebook Attorney Marlin Spike C._E._O. Grip Shen Silicon Valley Congress apple one hand
"trump administration" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

All In with Chris Hayes

02:04 min | 1 year ago

"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 Chris Liu Trump White House UN White House Federal Election Commission Pena deputy secretary Commissioner Senate executive two years
"trump administration" Discussed on All In with Chris Hayes

All In with Chris Hayes

02:12 min | 1 year ago

"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 White House Senate Mick Mulvaney congress secretary acting chief New York Mark Burnett chief of staff Michael Cohen Michael Beschloss Ryan Zinke Senator Chris EPA attorney five minutes
"trump administration" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast

The Lawfare Podcast

02:14 min | 2 years ago

"trump administration" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast

"As well as national security thing you know all kind of tangled up and it's possible that some very very long game being played in the very very small chance that in the next few weeks the mexicans in the canadians will say shall we agreed enough to great of these types have been lifted i i'm i'm skeptical but that's how the politics is going to play out i think it's very very complicated to agree enough to well it looks like mexico and canada have guns pointed to the heads effectively and also you know generally you might think that the point of nafta basically was to give america's trading ponant mexico and canada security that they would not be hit by these random tariffs but by imposing tariffs the trump administration is signaling to mexico and canada oh you foot we had this ideal but i'll actually we can you with tar if we won't so the value of this deal has actually been damaged by the trump administration's decision to distinct everyone and the auto imports investigation that you mentioned this sort of proposed research about auto imports being danger national security will also affect nafta right yeah and you can you can kind of game out different ways in which the trump administration might be playing this i think the point of which we've got a report from the trump administration saying that call imports call inputs are threat to national security and we have the prospect of tariffs on those things i think this is a whole extra level of scary that it's kind of it's difficult to think about how that could play into some kind of nafta negotiations i think the point at which the trump administration is seriously trying to impose those as leverage i just can't see how they could have to face it's a free for all at that point just just throwing out there to this how the how the trump administration is approaching this actually goes along with his rhetoric from the campaign an even before for instance when he discussed nato for instance in the campaign he.

mexico canada america nafta nato
"trump administration" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast

The Lawfare Podcast

02:02 min | 2 years ago

"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.

stephen writer pentagon white house obama administration phillies afghantistan theater iraq seven years
"trump administration" Discussed on AM Joy

AM Joy

02:15 min | 2 years ago

"trump administration" Discussed on AM Joy

"Where did it go you know i wish michael avenue adi our previous guests would tell us what he knows about the media inc as you note he seems always be step into a head of what of what he what he shares with us i mean when you follow the money you follow the money in and you follow the money out right and so we know the least about three to four million dollars in payments here they may have been other payments but until you get both sides of the equation you don't have the full story so telling people like mode closed down now is really saying stop the game and maybe the fourth inning yeah and one wonders if if the playbook that muller is working off of might be the tax returns they because somebody is finding out where all this money is going it'd be today it would be a good day for donald trump to release his tax returns or not malcolm stick around you david court thera kenzi orange coming up on the eve of mother's day the trump administration well they're separating mothers from their children that's the nice trump administration is separated seven hundred immigrant children from their parents since october and they have no plans to stop that's next on joy the vast majority of the people that move illegally into united states are not bad people they're not criminals on ms thirteen but they are also not people that would easily assimilate into the united states there have overwhelmingly rural people in the countries they come from fourth fifth sixth grade education kind of the norm that coming here for a reason and i sympathize with the reason but the laws of the laws john kelly has never been one to shy away from how you really feel about undocumented immigrants make no mistake when it comes to immigration he is a one mind with donald trump but there's one person who apparently has not been on in in on the trump mind meld homeland security secretary kirsten nielsen who oversees ice the new york times report that nielsen very nearly resigned this week after trump be rated her in front of the entire cabinet for failing to sufficiently seal the borders back with me now malcolm nance and joining the panel tara.

muller donald trump united states kirsten nielsen david john kelly secretary new york times nielsen malcolm nance four million dollars
"trump administration" Discussed on Inside the Hive with Nick Bilton

Inside the Hive with Nick Bilton

01:44 min | 2 years ago

"trump administration" Discussed on Inside the Hive with Nick Bilton

"Welcome to inside the hive i am your host nick bilton so we've talked about a lot of different topics on the show recently from facebook to artificial intelligence politics to culture even aliens but we haven't discussed yet is race in america well that's going to change this week i'm really excited to welcome jameel smith to the show and to meal is an opinion writer for rolling stone he was formerly a reporter for mtv news the new republic he's worked at msnbc cnn you name it and he recently wrote the cover story for time magazine on the black panther he's going to join us today to talk about this very topic around race in this country where it's okay and safe to be a black person in america not be arrested or shot a why he thinks that ben carson who is african american might be the most racist person in the trump administration all right well thanks for joining us this week on inside the hive appreciate the last time i saw you we were on loved or leave it together right yes in santa monica i was trying to be funny and was not very good at it and you were a lot funnier well we were on a comedy state show is natural for trials it was natural i try so lots to talk about i wanted to start with an article that you wrote this week for rolling stone cold where can we be black and it's a fascinating week and it's a fascinating article in this context because you have both to african american men who were arrested in starbucks or doing absolutely nothing except sitting there waiting for meeting you have an african american man who wanna pulitzer.

nick bilton facebook jameel smith writer time magazine ben carson starbucks america mtv msnbc santa
"trump administration" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast

The Lawfare Podcast

01:58 min | 2 years ago

"trump administration" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast

"The socalled never trumpers are more anathema to the trump administration even then clinton supporters at this point and that makes it very difficult for them to find tangible itical appointees i think the second thing that is important here is that the trump administration needs people that can actually get through a confirmation process a clearance process and other staffing processes and retired officers have been through those processes at some point in their careers or something similar to them so they can make it through knows practical considerations aside though i think i worry about this use of the military as a political talent pool you know i'm a veteran i serve in the army for nearly ten years i think there are lots of things veterans can and should do in society by civilian control of the military is premised on this idea that civilians will look at not just a military considerations that our decision making but also political ones and and things that are more appropriate for civilian political appointees to consider i think there's a real risk with putting active officers like h r mcmaster in this role there's all this also in risk of politicizing the military when you put recently retired generals in you know whether jim mattis is going to say the republican on in his current role i think is a good question by the choices not just between putting a general are not in that role there are lots of other qualified people who can serve in these roles in and the trump admission ought to be looking to some of them as well right but they just don't seem willing to do that and he can sphere in sweden the bulk of the conservative a republican national security establishment simply refused to be know at least on campaign they said they weren't interested in a reagan strong and then some of them became more interested in every when the presidency within the trump team to seemed completely uninteresting so in that light given that there is very little talent i.

army jim mattis sweden reagan clinton ten years
"trump administration" Discussed on PBS NewsHour

PBS NewsHour

01:31 min | 3 years ago

"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.

senior adviser secretary of state chief of staff santa barbara california president bob corker the house mississippi senate capitol hill steve bannon vice president mitch mcconnell jeff greenfield republican party mr trump chuck schumer obama
"trump administration" Discussed on Vox's The Weeds

Vox's The Weeds

02:06 min | 3 years ago

"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.

west virginia missouri north dakota senate democrats donald trump mccaskill indiana 80 percent
"trump administration" Discussed on PBS NewsHour

PBS NewsHour

01:31 min | 3 years ago

"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.

president afghanistan mr trump secretary james mattis commander john nicholson nicholson pentagon us america taliban kandahar nbc chairman of the joint chiefs o joe dunford seventeen years sixteen years