Tag: United States News

  • Encounter starts in north Kashmir’s Kreeri village

    Encounter starts in north Kashmir’s Kreeri village

    [ad_1]

    Baramulla, May 04: An encounter broke out between militants and security forces in Wanigam Payeen area of Kreeri in north Kashmir’s Baramulla district during wee hours on Thursday, an official said here.

    J&K Police, as per news agency—Kashmir News Observer (KNO), said that a gunfight broke out in Wanigam Payeen area of Kreeri after forces launched a cordon and search operation there.

    “As the joint team of forces approached towards the suspected spot, the hiding militants fired upon them, triggering an encounter,” police said.

    The operation was going on when filling this report. This is the second gunfight in last 24 hours in Kashmir. Earlier, two militants were killed in North Kashmir’s Kupwara district—(KNO)

    [ad_2]
    #Encounter #starts #north #Kashmirs #Kreeri #village

    ( With inputs from : roshankashmir.net )

  • Mississippi man charged with threatening to kill U.S. senator

    Mississippi man charged with threatening to kill U.S. senator

    [ad_1]

    senator threatened 13550

    Sappington went to the Hickory Flat residence of George Wicker, the senator’s cousin, on April 26, according to FBI special agent Jason Nixon’s testimony.

    “Sappington reportedly said he intended to kill Roger Wicker because of his involvement in an incident (Sappington) had with law enforcement back in 2014,” Nixon said.

    In February 2014, Sappington was arrested for the aggravated assault of his brother. He tried to flee and was bitten by a police dog. Authorities later transported him to a trauma center hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, to treat injuries he sustained during his arrest, the Daily Journal reported.

    He objected to being taken over state lines without a hearing and felt that he was kidnapped, FBI special agent Matthew Shanahan wrote in an affidavit.

    More recently, Sappington was released from prison in November for the theft of property worth more than $10,000. He tried unsuccessfully to retain an attorney for his objections to how his 2014 arrest transpired, the newspaper reported.

    Wicker has represented Mississippi in the United States Senate since 2007.

    [ad_2]
    #Mississippi #man #charged #threatening #kill #U.S #senator
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Senate sends bipartisan rebuke of solar tariff policy to Biden’s desk

    Senate sends bipartisan rebuke of solar tariff policy to Biden’s desk

    [ad_1]

    congress solar tariffs 11660

    The resolution would use the Congressional Review Act to rescind Biden’s moratorium on new tariffs for solar cells and modules from Malaysia, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam. The rule was issued as the Commerce Department investigates whether companies are circumventing existing U.S. tariffs on China by funneling products through those four countries.

    Commerce issued preliminary findings in December that said Chinese companies were indeed circumventing the tariffs, and its final determination is due later this year. But given the two-year pause, no new tariffs resulting from the probe can be levied until mid-2024.

    The resolution resurfaced long-running tensions on the Commerce probe. Solar industry officials who oppose the resolution warn it carries a threat of retroactive duties that will cost jobs, shut down planned solar projects and undercut the Biden administration’s climate goals.

    “It’s going to send a devastating message to the solar industry and particularly to our independent, small businesses,” Nevada Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen said in an interview.

    Rosen led an open letter Wednesday with eight Democratic senators that argued Biden’s two-year pause on additional tariffs is necessary as the United States works to bolster its domestic manufacturing capabilities.

    But supporters of the resolution — including several Senate Democrats — argue it’s necessary to enforce U.S. trade law and support domestic industry, while ensuring the U.S. clean energy transition is not built using Chinese products.

    “If you vote no, that means you support slave labor,” said Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who sponsored the Senate resolution. “You don’t want more American jobs and you don’t believe our trade policies mean anything.”

    The comment is a reference to the use of forced labor within China’s Xinjiang region — an area of bipartisan concern. The solar industry has vocally opposed the use of forced labor in its supply chain, and the resolution approved Wednesday does not directly mention the topic.

    Rosen rejected Scott’s contention on Wednesday.

    “We’re always going to be against forced labor. We’re always going to be for holding the Chinese Communist Party’s feet to the fire in everything we do,” she said.

    The measure gathered support from nine Senate Democrats on Wednesday: Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Gary Peters and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, Bob Casey and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Jon Tester of Montana and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

    Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the lone GOP senator to vote against the measure.

    Sen. Brown, whose state is home to one of the largest U.S. solar manufacturing companies, said in a floor speech Tuesday he was defending U.S. manufacturing.

    “You can’t say you want American manufacturing to lead the world and then allow Chinese companies, subsidized always by their government, to skirt the rules and dump solar panels into the U.S.,” he said.

    Manchin, the chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, was the only Democrat to attach his name as a co-sponsor of the joint resolution of disapproval. He argued the U.S. cannot continue to let China “get away” with laundering solar energy components through other nations with “absolutely no consequences.”

    “Let me be clear: America will never be energy secure or independent if we can’t provide the resources we need, and it would be foolish of us in Congress to allow these waivers to continue any longer,” Manchin said in a statement.

    On the other hand, eight House Republicans voted against the resolution last week, with some arguing it would cost solar jobs in their districts.

    George Hershman, CEO of utility solar company SOLV Energy, recently called Republican support for the resolution “disappointing,” given how many solar projects are cropping up in red congressional districts.

    “The largest solar districts in the country are Republican. That’s where the job impacts are going to be,” he told POLITICO last month. “I mean, I’m as disappointed with Democrats that might sign on to [the resolution] as House Republicans that understand the job creation of solar in their districts.”

    Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, called on Biden to “quickly and decisively” veto the resolution.

    “Energy workers across the country are looking to President Biden to protect their livelihoods,” she said in a statement.

    The vote Wednesday is part of a wider trend of resolutions brought under the Congressional Review Act, which requires only a simple majority to pass the Senate, to undo parts of the Biden administration’s regulatory agenda.

    The Senate also voted 50-48 on Wednesday to pass a resolution that would overturn the Biden administration’s protections under the Endangered Species Act for the lesser prairie-chicken, a wild bird found in five states. The White House said Wednesday that Biden will veto that resolution, as well.

    Alex Guillén contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Senate #sends #bipartisan #rebuke #solar #tariff #policy #Bidens #desk
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Florida Republicans pass bill targeting transgender bathroom use

    Florida Republicans pass bill targeting transgender bathroom use

    [ad_1]

    2023 0421 desantis 23 francis 2

    Despite Republicans curtailing its scope, Democrats still vehemently opposed the legislation, arguing that the policies are targeting transgender people. Republicans, however, argue the bill is are about protecting “public safety, decency and decorum.”

    “We’ve had a huge scientific study with billions of people for 136 years that separate facilities work,” state Rep. Rachel Plakon (R-Lake Mary), who carried the House bill, said on the floor Wednesday. “Vote ‘yes’ for common sense.”

    DeSantis is widely expected to sign the legislation.

    One of the more contentious bills lawmakers considered in Florida during the two-month annual session, the proposal comes as state Republicans push legislation focused on how gender identity and sexual identity intersect with parental rights and education in general.

    It joins other moves by Florida Republicans and Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration focused on the transgender community, including Republicans seeking to pass a bill banning gender-affirming care for transgender minors and a recently-enacted state prohibition on Medicaid paying for gender-affirming care such as puberty blockers and hormone treatments.

    Named the “Safety in Private Spaces Act,” the legislation approved Wednesday is similar to bills taken up in conservative-leaning states like Iowa, Arkansas, Alabama, Oklahoma and Tennessee. In 2016, North Carolina enacted one of the first “bathroom bills,” a move that sparked widespread blowback from businesses, the NBA and NCAA.

    The bill opens the door for any person 18 years or older to be charged with a second-degree trespassing misdemeanor if they enter a restroom or changing facility designated for a person that isn’t the sex they are assigned at birth — and refuse to leave when asked by someone else. The bill also requires local school districts to craft code of conduct rules to discipline students who do the same.

    Democrats argue that the legislation is “dehumanizing” and effectively “politicizing bathrooms” to benefit conservatives politically, namely DeSantis, who is widely expected to run for president. They took aim at how Republicans have discussed the issue, such as one conservative House member who called transgender people “demons” and “mutants” and questioned how it could be enforced.

    “You have no idea what you’re doing here because you can’t think past your hatred, and you can’t think past your discrimination,” state Rep. Kelly Skidmore (D-Boca Raton) said on the floor Wednesday

    Before approving the legislation, lawmakers changed the bill Wednesday to specify who can ask someone to leave a restroom. For schools, as an example, teachers, administrators or school safety officers would have that authority.

    It also requires places such as colleges and government offices to establish disciplinary procedures for employees who use restrooms that don’t align with their sex at birth.

    Florida Republicans defend the proposal by noting it includes no mention of transgender people or any particular group. They said the legislation will codify in law what are “universal common decency standards.”

    The legislation, however, allows someone to chaperone a child or accompany an elderly or disabled person into a restroom that doesn’t align with their sex at birth. Law enforcement officers and medical personnel are also exempt if they’re responding to an emergency.

    “There’s not anything in the language of this bill that is targeting any specific group,” state Sen. Erin Grall (R-Fort Pierce), who carried the Senate bill, said on the floor Wednesday. “Rather, it speaks to the differences that we have as different sexes, as male and female.”

    Democrats, though, contend that the policies will isolate members of the transgender community, and possibly lead to increased acts of violence against them.

    “Somebody out there is going to take that into his or her own hands into stopping somebody who’s transgender from using a bathroom,” said state Sen. Victor Torres (D-Kissimmee), who spoke Wednesday and in the past about his transgender granddaughter.

    Jon Harris Maurer, public policy director of the LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Florida, said the legislation criminalizes transgender people for using bathrooms that “aligns with how they live their lives every day.”

    “This bill opens the door to abuse, mistreatment, and dehumanization,” Maurer said in a statement. “Our state government should be focused on solving pressing issues, not terrorizing people who are simply trying to use the restroom and exist in public.”

    [ad_2]
    #Florida #Republicans #pass #bill #targeting #transgender #bathroom
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Biden judicial nominee helped free-market group that opposed administration on climate change

    Biden judicial nominee helped free-market group that opposed administration on climate change

    [ad_1]

    biden judge 70726

    Delaney’s relationship with the organization, which has not been reported in the media until now, is just one of several aspects of his resume that causes concern among some progressives. He has already faced questions about his work defending an elite boarding school that was sued over sexual assault, and for signing a brief defending a state abortion restriction.

    The White House continues to support Delaney, calling him “extraordinarily qualified” in a statement to POLITICO this week. The two senators from his home state of New Hampshire, both of whom are Democrats, are also standing behind him.

    Delaney did not respond to a request for comment on this reporting. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to review his nomination at a markup on Thursday.

    Delaney was New Hampshire’s attorney general from 2009 to 2013. He now heads the litigation department for McLane Middleton, a law firm with offices in New Hampshire and Massachusetts.

    In 2018, Delaney joined the board of the New England Legal Foundation, according to his Senate questionnaire. He is also on the foundation’s legal review committee. Daniel Winslow, the president of the foundation, told POLITICO that the committee members vet the foundation’s amicus briefs before they are filed.

    Winslow added that he was not aware of Delaney weighing in on briefs since Winslow became the group’s head in October 2021, likely because he expected to be nominated to the bench. Biden tapped Delaney in January of this year, and the Senate Judiciary Committee held his nomination hearing in February.

    The New England Legal Foundation’s website touts its “vigorous advocacy of free market principles” and describes its mission as championing “individual economic liberties, traditional property rights, properly limited government, and inclusive economic growth.” Its “About” page features a quote from John W. Davis, the U.S. solicitor general under former President Woodrow Wilson: “Property rights and civil rights are not essentially in conflict; they are two sides of the same coin.” Late in his career, Davis defended school segregation and the “separate but equal” doctrine before the Supreme Court in a companion case to Brown v. Board of Education, representing the state of South Carolina for free.

    NELF’s June 2021 amicus brief in the climate change case urged the Supreme Court to take up the case and overrule a lower court that had sided with the EPA. After the justices agreed to hear the case, NELF filed another amicus brief in December 2021 opposing the administration’s position. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled against the EPA in a June 2022 opinion that Biden called a “devastating decision that aims to take our country backwards.” In the coming weeks, the EPA is expected to release a new climate change rule.

    Winslow said the group’s work on the case was of a piece with its mission: Advocating for free enterprise, property rights, limited government and inclusive economic growth.

    “Consistent with the rule of law, if you’re an agency, the boundaries of your conduct are set by the elected, accountable branch, Congress,” he said. “And when the administrative state goes beyond that boundary to the point of being unaccountable to the people directly — which Congress is — that violates our principle of rule of law, and that’s why we were involved in that case.”

    Delaney graduated from Georgetown University Law Center in 1994, according to his law firm bio. Five years later, he was heading the homicide prosecution unit in the New Hampshire attorney general’s office. He later served as counsel to the governor and then as the state’s attorney general before moving into private practice.

    During Delaney’s time on NELF’s board, the group has filed amicus briefs siding with the Chamber of Commerce and a host of powerful companies, including Facebook, Uber and Deutsche Bank.

    In the Uber case, NELF supported the company in a lawsuit brought by a blind man who alleged the rideshare app illegally discriminated against him by refusing to let him bring his guide dog on rides. Uber moved to force the resolution of the matter in arbitration rather than in court, citing its terms of service. NELF backed Uber, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court sided with the plaintiff.

    That was just one of multiple cases where NELF worked to shore up companies’ rights to resolve disputes through mandatory arbitration. In its 2019/2020 report, the group detailed its work successfully defending arbitration before the Supreme Court in one case — known as Lamps Plus v. Varela — but noted that its efforts on another arbitration-related case — New Prime v. Oliveira — didn’t prevail.

    Mandatory arbitration clauses have long drawn condemnation from progressives, who argue they result in customers and employees unwittingly ceding their rights to go to court, as the liberal advocacy group Public Citizen has detailed.

    Biden himself has also criticized mandatory arbitration. Last year, he signed legislation banning the requirement in cases of sexual assault and sexual harassment. At the signing ceremony, he assailed the practice more broadly.

    “Sixty million Americans are bound by forced arbitration clauses that were included in the fine print of their contracts,” he said. “And many don’t even know they exist. You might have signed one without knowing it. I strongly believe no worker should have to make such a commitment.”

    NELF also filed a brief in an important 2021 Supreme Court case involving a clash between union organizers and private property rights. Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid involved a California regulation that gave labor organizers the right to enter the property of agricultural employers in order to speak with workers about joining a union. NELF sided with the companies challenging the regulation, and the high court ultimately found the regulation unconstitutional.

    The Biden administration defended the California regulation in the case. So did a group of Democratic lawmakers: Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)., Cory Booker (N.J.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.) and Alex Padilla (Calif.). In their brief, the senators listed NELF as one of several entities filing amicus briefs that are funded by “industry-tied foundations and anonymous money groups.”

    NELF’s most recent annual report listed dozens of corporations, law firms and individuals as contributors. The report said the group got 45 percent of its 2020 revenue from corporate sponsors.

    NELF also weighed in on a case related to a New Hampshire regulator’s effort to reduce dangerous PFAS contaminants — known as “forever chemicals” — in drinking water. NELF sided with 3M Company in its effort to block a rule reducing the presence of those contaminants. The group argued that New Hampshire’s Department of Environmental Services hadn’t done a proper cost-benefit analysis before tightening its regulations of the chemicals.

    “Our amicus brief said, ‘Hey judges, let the legislature have the first crack at this issue,’” Winslow, the group’s president, said. “No, we don’t favor PFAS.”

    PFAS contamination has been a major concern for the Biden administration, as the White House detailed in a fact sheet released this March.

    Some advocates for liberal causes voiced concerns about Delaney’s nomination after being informed by POLITICO of his connection to NELF.

    Jeff Hauser, the head of the progressive watchdog group Revolving Door Project, told POLITICO that he found Delaney’s nomination puzzling.

    “The Biden agenda on economic issues, such as protecting workers and the environment, faces a judicial headwind from the conservative legal movement of which NELF and Delaney is a part,” Hauser wrote in an email. “That tension between the Biden Administration’s legal interests and Delaney’s revealed preferences makes elevating Delaney to the bench a confoundingly counterproductive idea.”

    And Mike Kink, the head of the union-backed Strong Economy for All Coalition, said the Senate should seek more information about Delaney’s role at the group.

    “Anyone who’s concerned about economic justice should be concerned about this nominee’s connections” to the foundation, Kink said. “The group Delaney helped head has shielded corporate polluters and fraudsters while fighting eviction protections for tenants and fair taxes on the wealthiest individuals and corporations. The Senate must closely question this nominee and assure Americans he’ll work on the bench for regular people who need the law on their side, not just for the rich and powerful.”

    On the right, meanwhile, Delaney’s link to NELF is the opposite of a red flag.

    “If in fact he is conservative-leaning, then perhaps it was not the best move for Republicans to oppose his nomination,” said Josh Blackman, a conservative law professor at the South Texas College of Law Houston.

    Andrew Bates, a White House spokesperson, said the president’s support for Delaney is unchanged. “We are unmoved by an affiliation the President’s extraordinarily qualified nominee disclosed to the public and the Senate months ago, in the most thorough and transparent way available,” Bates said. “This is also the first we have heard any concerns about this expressed at all; and we are skeptical of complaints that surface in the press before we have heard them privately.”

    At the Senate Judiciary Committee’s February nomination hearing, members pressed Delaney on his work for a boarding school that was sued over its handling of a sexual assault, as POLITICO has detailed.

    Delaney has also taken some heat from the left for signing a brief defending a New Hampshire abortion restriction when he worked in the New Hampshire attorney general’s office. The brief backed a New Hampshire law requiring minors to notify their parents before receiving abortions. The law has since been repealed.

    But Delaney has received broad support from a host of other groups, including numerous former state attorneys general and the head of New Hampshire’s Court Appointed Special Advocates for Children.

    His home state senators, Democrats Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan, both strongly supported his nomination. Their spokespersons told POLITICO they still firmly back him.

    “Before considering Michael Delaney’s nomination, Senator Shaheen reviewed his full record, which includes his fierce defense of LGBTQ rights, bringing criminals to justice and leading one of the most significant legal battles against a massive oil company in New Hampshire state history,” said Sarah Weinstein, a spokesperson for Shaheen. “Michael Delaney’s wide scope of supporters includes individuals in the advocacy and legal sectors, as well as judges on the New Hampshire Supreme Court, which reaffirm his respected reputation as a public servant committed to seeking justice.”

    Laura Epstein, a spokesperson for Hassan, sent a similar statement. “His background has been thoroughly vetted, and throughout his career, he has shown a strong commitment to justice, including supporting civil rights and the environment,” Epstein said. “His strong, bipartisan support from a wide cross-section of leaders — from public defenders to Attorneys General from 20 states across the country to the CEO of New Hampshire’s Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) — underscores why he will make for an excellent First Circuit Judge.”

    [ad_2]
    #Biden #judicial #nominee #helped #freemarket #group #opposed #administration #climate #change
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Auto union withholds support for Biden, citing electric vehicles

    Auto union withholds support for Biden, citing electric vehicles

    [ad_1]

    biden electric vehicles 19160

    He said he and other leaders recently met with Biden administration officials to push their case.

    “We were very adamant that if the government is going to funnel billions in taxpayer money to these companies, the workers must be compensated with top wages and benefits,” he said. “A ‘just transition’ has to include standards for our members and future workers.”

    The Biden campaign did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

    UAW endorsed Biden in the 2020 race, citing his historic support for labor. The union has more than 400,000 active members in the U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico, according to its website.

    The union’s threat exposes a rift between two key Democratic constituencies.

    Biden, who considers himself a “car guy,” has made electrifying cars a major piece of his climate change agenda. He’s set a goal of 50 percent of new car sales being electric by 2030, and EPA proposed a regulation last month that could even exceed that goal.

    But while organized labor has generally endorsed electrification, unions have been uneasy about what the transition could mean for workers. With simpler drivetrains and the need for plants to retool, the EV push has already led to big job changes.

    “Right now, we’re focused on making sure the EV transition does right by our members, our families and our communities,” Fain wrote. “We’ll be ready to talk politics once we secure a future for this industry and the workers who make it run.”

    But Fain ruled out backing former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president, saying another Trump term “would be a disaster.”

    “We need to get our members organized behind a pro-worker, pro-climate, and pro-democracy political program that can deliver for the working class.”

    A version of this report first ran in E&E News PM. Get access to more comprehensive and in-depth reporting on the energy transition, natural resources, climate change and more in E&E News.

    [ad_2]
    #Auto #union #withholds #support #Biden #citing #electric #vehicles
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Trump will not present defense case in Carroll trial

    Trump will not present defense case in Carroll trial

    [ad_1]

    election 2024 trump desantis 15358

    Tacopina said earlier this week that Trump himself also won’t take the witness stand.

    The former president hasn’t attended the trial, which began last week, but on Wednesday jurors did see a 20-minute portion of his videotaped deposition, recorded in October 2022.

    On screen, Trump appeared somewhat sullen, answering questions with his arms folded on a table in front of him and his shoulders hunched. He called Carroll’s allegation “the most ridiculous, disgusting story.”

    “It’s just made up,” he said.

    On Wednesday, the jury also heard testimony from a clinical psychologist, Leslie Lebowitz; Carroll’s sister, Cande Carroll; and Natasha Stoynoff, a writer who has alleged Trump sexually assaulted her in 2005.

    During Stoynoff’s testimony, jurors were shown a clip of the “Access Hollywood” tape, a recording from 2005 in which Trump boasts, “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” adding: “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”

    Carroll’s lawyers are expected to show another portion of the deposition to jurors Thursday.

    [ad_2]
    #Trump #present #defense #case #Carroll #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • What’s Really Behind the Release of Tucker Carlson’s Texts

    What’s Really Behind the Release of Tucker Carlson’s Texts

    [ad_1]

    The point of this inquiry isn’t to provide Carlson any relief — he deserves all the scrutiny his firing has brought him — but to examine the motives of the unnamed sources who have risen against him in recent days. Why have so many powerful actors chosen this moment to slag Carlson, when none of the behaviors described clash with the way he’s carried on for years? One possibility is that people who are working for Fox have assembled a PR campaign to discredit the network’s former star that will throw the press pack off doing additional coverage on the Dominion case. It’s like a fighter jet releasing a flare to fool an enemy’s heat-seeking missile. Why theorize in this direction? Because the story that’s currently being put out there just doesn’t add up.

    According to the Times and the Post, the Fox board got spooked when it saw the unredacted message (Exhibit 276 from the case) in which Carlson texted about his reaction to the beating of a purported Antifa member. Writes the Times, “The text alarmed the Fox board, which saw the message a day before Fox was set to defend itself against Dominion Voting Systems before a jury. The board grew concerned that the message could become public at trial when Mr. Carlson was on the stand, creating a sensational and damaging moment that would raise broader questions about the company.”

    Why should this text message “alarm” the Fox board, which includes Rupert Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch, William A. Burck, Chase Carey, Anne Dias, Roland A. Hernandez, Jacques Nasser and Paul Ryan, when Carlson routinely said much more inflammatory things on his program? Perhaps the board has never tuned in to hear Carlson’s gems about the “great replacement theory” or about immigrants making the country “poorer, and dirtier and more divided” or know about his blatant white nationalist sentiments or viewed the episode in which he argued the January 6 Capitol riot was a largely peaceful demonstration. Perhaps board members missed these salient facts about Carlson because they don’t even own televisions. This might explain why their hair turned white when they read what was, by Carlson standards, a fairly anodyne text. But who wants to give the board this sort of slack?

    You can believe the board was troubled by the Carlson text, and you can believe that Fox might have fretted about the board-ordered investigation of Carlson that the Times reports, without taking the leap that the board was intervening at this late date to limit Fox’s exposure in the Dominion case. As the Times piece itself reported, “It was not guaranteed that the text would have been revealed in open court.” That sounds right. As juicy as Exhibit 276 might be, it doesn’t have any immediate relevance to the Dominion case, so why would Dominion lawyers, who assembled a wealth of damning stuff pertinent to their case, wander off the fairway into the rough with the Carlson comment?

    Additionally, even though Carlson permitted stolen-election claims to be aired on his show, he was not the worst offender at Fox. Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro broadcast more of the claims, something Fox mogul Rupert Murdoch admitted. It’s not apparent at all that Carlson was the prime focus of Fox’s legal worries in the Dominion case. (Though he faced specific exposure in a separate workplace harassment case filed by a woman who had formerly worked on his show.) So can we really believe that his firing was connected to the Dominion case when Fox hosts like Pirro and Bartiromo still work for the network?

    No evidence exists that proves the extended coverage of Carlson is designed to move the discussion off of Fox and onto its erstwhile anchor. But the steady flow of leaked material — including the Times and Post stories as well as a series of embarrassing off-air recordings uncovered by the activist site Media Matters for America — point to the possibility of an after-the-firing campaign to make Carlson the personification of the network’s rot when the infection goes much deeper.

    People connected to the Fox case might be leaking information on Carlson to burn him before he burns them. If that’s true, they should beware. As Ben Smith wrote in his Times column in June 2021, Carlson has been a good source for political reporters in the past. “It’s so unknown in the general public how much he plays both sides,” one unnamed reporter for a prominent publication told Smith.

    Dominion vs. Fox may have been settled, but Fox vs. Carlson will rage on.

    ******

    Name your anonymous sources in an email to [email protected]. No new email alert subscriptions are being honored at this time. My Twitter feed wants to leak. I haven’t visited my Mastodon and Post accounts in weeks. My Substack Notes account is not worth following. My RSS feed wants to be sued.



    [ad_2]
    #Whats #Release #Tucker #Carlsons #Texts
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Black Caucus presses Senate Dems to blow up tradition on judges

    Black Caucus presses Senate Dems to blow up tradition on judges

    [ad_1]

    So the Black Caucus, joined by a coalition of progressive groups, is turning up the heat on Senate Democrats in what’s becoming the most consequential battle over chamber rules since Democrats tried last year to weaken the filibuster.

    “I don’t know why anyone, let alone Senate Democrats, would hold up a Jim Crow practice,” Black Caucus Chair Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) said in an interview on Wednesday, describing the GOP’s use of blue slips against judicial nominees as a civil rights issue.

    “It is literally about the fundamental survival of the people we represent,” Horsford added. “And we expressed that history, that context and that necessity to Chairman Durbin. I respect the chairman. He understands the dilemma.”

    The dispute has huge implications for the future of the federal judiciary, the Senate and the White House. With the House run by Republicans until 2024 at least, Senate Democrats still can confirm judges for lifetime appointments without a single GOP vote — but Republicans can block some of those nominees from ever getting to the chamber floor by denying blue slips.

    The acrimony is particularly acute among House members from blue districts in red states. They’re chafing at their Republican senators’ unwillingness to let nominees through and looking to Senate Democrats to help — even though during the Trump era the CBC urged the GOP to keep the blue slip to give Democrats some say in lifetime nominees.

    So Durbin isn’t ready to get rid of the tradition for federal district court nominees. And both Black Caucus members from the Senate, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Raphael Warnock, share his reluctance to change the practice.

    In an interview, Durbin said he and GOP senators are negotiating over new Biden nominees that will become public soon. And several GOP senators said in interviews that they are working closely with the White House to address nominees for district court judgeships, U.S. attorney posts and U.S. marshals posts, all of which are subject to the blue slip.

    The Senate Judiciary Committee previously abandoned the blue slip for appellate court nominees who cover multiple states. If Durbin wanted to nix the practice for district courts, it would not require a Senate rules change.

    Durbin is still receptive to the Black Caucus’ entreaties, saying that he needs a “higher level of cooperation” from the GOP. He estimated that fewer than 20 of Biden’s nominees have received green lights from the GOP, while Democrats provided more than 110 for former President Donald Trump’s judicial picks during his time in office.

    “I tried to explain to them the arcane Senate rules. And how difficult it would be to do business. So I don’t know if I convinced them, because a lot of them are frustrated with the lack of cooperation,” Durbin said of his meeting with the Black Caucus.

    Republicans have used their blue-slip power recently against two Biden nominees, in addition to last year’s rejection by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) of William Pocan — the brother of Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) — as a district judge. Democrats’ big fear, however, is that Republicans will start using the practice more.

    In a letter to Durbin this week, a coalition of progressive groups warned that “39 of the 43 district court vacancies subject to Republican blue slips — 91% — still do not have nominees.” The letter’s signatories ranged from Demand Justice to the League of Conservation Voters to End Citizens United.

    “The blue slip policy should be reformed or discontinued to ensure a fair process and stop Republicans from blocking highly-qualified Biden judicial nominees,” the progressive groups wrote. Their ideas: ignore blue slip blockades, force a firm timeline for senators to register their objections and require public explanations for blue slip denials.

    Republicans are holding their ground. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the party’s top member on the Judiciary Committee, said that scrapping the blue slip makes the Senate “irrelevant” and criticized the White House for not conducting sufficient outreach to the GOP.

    The White House is “turning to the red states because they’ve filled all the blue states, and it takes consulting. They didn’t even talk to people in Florida for six months. I made them talk to them. So this is a manufactured issue,” Graham said.

    White House spokesperson Andrew Bates responded that “the White House has done outreach to every single Republican Senate office that represents a state with a judicial vacancy. In many instances, that outreach dates back to the previous Congress.”

    Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) accelerated the blue slip clash after she announced she would stop Scott Colom from taking a Mississippi judgeship. It’s likely that Biden may need to find a new nominee; “Sen. Hyde Smith will not budge,” said one person with direct knowledge of the negotiations who spoke on condition of anonymity.

    There are currently more than 65 federal district court vacancies, and 38 of those do not have nominees — many of them in states where Republican senators have veto power. The lower-level courts are the Democrats’ primary focus after prioritizing appellate courts over the last two years.

    In addition, Kansas GOP Sens. Roger Marshall and Jerry Moran are slowing the nomination of Jabari Wamble to fill a district court seat while they await Biden’s choice to fill an appellate court vacancy covering their states. In an interview, Marshall said he’s simply being “cautious” and didn’t indicate where they would fall on a blue slip for Wamble.

    Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a Judiciary Committee member, said he is having “a lot of good conversations” with the White House; as many as three Missouri seats could be open by the fall.

    Horsford said Black Caucus members want every Republican withholding a blue slip to disclose their reasoning. He was joined in the Durbin meeting by Black Caucus members Reps. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), Terri Sewell (D-Ala.), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Troy Carter (D-La.), Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), Al Green (D-Texas), and Booker.

    Horsford said the lawmakers emphasized to Durbin that blue slips are not a Senate rule but a custom. For many of his members, Horsford added, “it’s hard for them as the sole Democrat in some of their southern states to defend a policy where one or two Senate Republicans can hold up those nominees.”

    Notably, the practice has yielded some success stories. The all-GOP Senate delegations in Idaho and Louisiana worked with the White House to hatch bipartisan agreements, and Indiana’s two Republican senators worked to confirm a home-state judge by a rare voice vote this year.

    And Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) said she’s willing to give it another go with Johnson, even after he stopped William Pocan.

    As Booker recalled in an interview, he used blue slips to stifle Trump’s judicial picks — underscoring that the power to stop judicial nominees can also help Democrats during GOP presidencies.

    Still, Booker is clearly torn: “Anytime you tear up a Senate tradition, you should be really thoughtful about it.”

    [ad_2]
    #Black #Caucus #presses #Senate #Dems #blow #tradition #judges
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Lawmakers dismiss possibility of debt limit off-ramp

    Lawmakers dismiss possibility of debt limit off-ramp

    [ad_1]

    john thune 44975

    Some Republicans — particularly House conservatives — see that as a win for Democrats and Biden, who have been pushing to lift to the debt ceiling with no strings attached as the GOP calls for significant cuts to federal spending in exchange. So they’re not looking to open that particular escape hatch, at least not yet.

    “No,” said Senate GOP Whip John Thune (R-S.D.). “I just think that this needs to get done and delay, delay, delay doesn’t solve anything.”

    “I can tell you a short-term extension and clean debt ceiling is not going to pass Congress,” echoed Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). “That is a solution that the White House has fever dreams of, but it’s not going to pass Congress. Nor should it.”

    Plus, Republicans feel they have the upper hand in negotiations with the White House after Speaker Kevin McCarthy successfully passed his debt ceiling package last week, which would lift the nation’s borrowing cap by $1.5 trillion or through March 2024, whichever comes first, while slashing $130 billion in government funding.

    A short-term extension is a “bad idea in part because House Republicans have already passed a debt ceiling deal,” said Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio). “I think if there was no deal out there and we had no real solution on the table, it would be a different story. But we do have an offer on the table.”

    Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), a member of the House Freedom Caucus, said a clean debt ceiling increase of “any duration” is a “no-go,” even if it means negotiating with the White House on spending.

    “Republicans have to break a long-standing habit of thinking that giving in to reckless Democrats gradually constitutes victory,” he said.

    Democrats, meanwhile, aren’t willing to negotiate on the debt — and several more months bought by a temporary extension could mean they’re conceding to do just that. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer roundly rejected the idea of a temporary debt hike this week, saying Congress should pursue a two-year extension through the 2024 election.

    Many lawmakers are waiting to see what happens when congressional leaders meet with Biden on Tuesday, hoping for some signs of movement in a debt stalemate that has dragged on for months.

    Not everyone is opposed to the idea of a stopgap bill, admitting it might ultimately become the only path to avoid default. While lawmakers technically have just under a month to negotiate, the reality of the congressional calendar means lawmakers will have even less time to strike a deal. There are only about eight legislative days left in May that the House and Senate are simultaneously in session, and both chambers will need time to pass the legislation.

    “I could be supportive of that, but the question is, whether House Republicans would be supportive of that,” said Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), when asked whether he would back a short-term lift of the debt ceiling if it meant serious negotiations with Democrats on government funding in the coming months.

    If Republicans and the White House can’t work it out in the next couple weeks, “then the idea of giving us the time is a good idea,” Crapo said.

    When asked whether there’s a chance the debt stalemate ends with a temporary extension in the coming weeks, Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) said, “for sure,” though he stressed that’s not his preferred outcome. Both sides should be able to reach a deal, he said.

    Adding to the complications of a temporary hike: it would likely coincide with government funding talks slated to happen over the summer, with a shutdown deadline on Sept. 30.

    There’s plenty of precedent that suggests Congress and the White House could successfully hammer out a debt ceiling deal alongside government funding. In 2019, then-President Donald Trump deployed Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to negotiate with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, resulting in a two-year budget deal that also waived the debt ceiling through July 2021.

    And some Republicans aren’t feeling particularly urgent, doubting that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s early June deadline is anything more than a political ploy. Some GOP members think the real deadline would hit sometime over the summer.

    “Nobody believes her. I don’t believe her,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “I’m not saying she’s a liar. I’m just saying that Janet Yellen is no longer an economist and a professor, she’s a politician. And I don’t believe June 1 is anything other than a date that she either set or was told to set through a political lens.”

    Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a top appropriator who’s a member of Senate Republican leadership, said she expects more clarity on how the standoff might pan out after the White House meeting on Tuesday.

    “We’ll have to see,” she said. “I think that the president has finally come to the table and is going to be talking with the four leaders.”

    Capito said she would prefer that the impasse is resolved in the coming weeks, “but I don’t want to default, nobody else wants to either.”

    Olivia Beavers, Jordain Carney, Daniella Diaz and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Lawmakers #dismiss #possibility #debt #limit #offramp
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )