Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
KelleyKramer
KelleyKramer's Journal
KelleyKramer's Journal
December 17, 2018
The EPA Is Planning to Jeopardize the Water Quality for 117 Million Americans
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/12/the-epa-is-planning-to-jeopardize-the-water-quality-for-117-million-americans/
?w=990
The Cuyahoga River fire in 1952, near downtown Cleveland sparked national alarm about water quality.
The Trump administration unveiled a proposal on Tuesday weakening federal water protections for millions of acres of streams, wetlands, and waterways that will likely affect the drinking water for more than one-third of Americans. While the Trump administration specifically targeted the 2015 Obama-era rule known as the Clean Water Rule, or Waters of the United States, the proposal goes further in rolling back environmental oversight than has occurred with any president since Ronald Reagan.
Inside the Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday, the focus of a celebratory 90-minute event was not on water quality. Some two-dozen speakers from the Trump administration, including Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler, were joined by some members of Congress, to criticize the Obama-era rule as federal overreach. Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) declared he was “nervous” when he finally entered the EPA for the first time in his four decades in Congress, claiming the EPA is usually a “four-letter word,” but now the agency can be renamed, the “Environmental Farm Protection Agency,” because of the new rule’s deference to agricultural interests. He was only one of the agency’s fiercest critics who spoke to the audience, many of whom were members of the American Farm Bureau Federation, a powerful agricultural lobbying arm.
The EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers proposal, now open to 60 days of public comment, dramatically restricts which bodies of water fall under the 1972 Clean Water Act regulations. The 2015 Obama rule expanded the definition to include 2 million more acres of streams and 20 million more acres of wetlands, triggering years of backlash and lawsuits led by agriculture, real estate developers, and other industries. The proposal announced today will limit Clean Water Act regulations to major waterways, their tributaries, and adjacent wetland, but will exempt other wetlands and streams that flow seasonally during heavy rainfall. These would be subject to wide-ranging state and local oversight, if any. Today’s proposal also replaces a Bush-era rule that subjected some of these streams to regulations if they are significantly connected to navigable waters—a rule that has been in place for half the country.
Conservative critics have waged a proxy fight against the Clean Water Rule by framing it as government overreach undermining the rights of farmers and local government. A common talking point was to claim the EPA wanted to regulate “puddles” after it rained on farmland. But in some areas, the so-called puddles—now exempt from the Clean Water Act—involved over half the water flowing into major rivers, explains Blan Holman, managing attorney in Southern Environmental Law Center. “When you shrink that definition, you’ve now reduced the universe of waters that are protected,” Holman tells Mother Jones. “If you’re concerned about drinking water sources, you need to be concerned about what’s flowing into those reservoirs and those rivers.”
More on the link-
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/12/the-epa-is-planning-to-jeopardize-the-water-quality-for-117-million-americans/
.
The EPA Is Planning to Jeopardize the Water Quality for 117 Million Americans
The EPA Is Planning to Jeopardize the Water Quality for 117 Million Americans
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/12/the-epa-is-planning-to-jeopardize-the-water-quality-for-117-million-americans/
?w=990
The Cuyahoga River fire in 1952, near downtown Cleveland sparked national alarm about water quality.
The Trump administration unveiled a proposal on Tuesday weakening federal water protections for millions of acres of streams, wetlands, and waterways that will likely affect the drinking water for more than one-third of Americans. While the Trump administration specifically targeted the 2015 Obama-era rule known as the Clean Water Rule, or Waters of the United States, the proposal goes further in rolling back environmental oversight than has occurred with any president since Ronald Reagan.
Inside the Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday, the focus of a celebratory 90-minute event was not on water quality. Some two-dozen speakers from the Trump administration, including Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler, were joined by some members of Congress, to criticize the Obama-era rule as federal overreach. Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) declared he was “nervous” when he finally entered the EPA for the first time in his four decades in Congress, claiming the EPA is usually a “four-letter word,” but now the agency can be renamed, the “Environmental Farm Protection Agency,” because of the new rule’s deference to agricultural interests. He was only one of the agency’s fiercest critics who spoke to the audience, many of whom were members of the American Farm Bureau Federation, a powerful agricultural lobbying arm.
The EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers proposal, now open to 60 days of public comment, dramatically restricts which bodies of water fall under the 1972 Clean Water Act regulations. The 2015 Obama rule expanded the definition to include 2 million more acres of streams and 20 million more acres of wetlands, triggering years of backlash and lawsuits led by agriculture, real estate developers, and other industries. The proposal announced today will limit Clean Water Act regulations to major waterways, their tributaries, and adjacent wetland, but will exempt other wetlands and streams that flow seasonally during heavy rainfall. These would be subject to wide-ranging state and local oversight, if any. Today’s proposal also replaces a Bush-era rule that subjected some of these streams to regulations if they are significantly connected to navigable waters—a rule that has been in place for half the country.
Conservative critics have waged a proxy fight against the Clean Water Rule by framing it as government overreach undermining the rights of farmers and local government. A common talking point was to claim the EPA wanted to regulate “puddles” after it rained on farmland. But in some areas, the so-called puddles—now exempt from the Clean Water Act—involved over half the water flowing into major rivers, explains Blan Holman, managing attorney in Southern Environmental Law Center. “When you shrink that definition, you’ve now reduced the universe of waters that are protected,” Holman tells Mother Jones. “If you’re concerned about drinking water sources, you need to be concerned about what’s flowing into those reservoirs and those rivers.”
More on the link-
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/12/the-epa-is-planning-to-jeopardize-the-water-quality-for-117-million-americans/
.
December 16, 2018
As Trump argues for a wall, a border security measure gets pulled back
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-argues-wall-border-security-measure-pulled-back/story?id=59830679
U.S. Army soldiers have removed barbed wire along the US-Mexico border in areas where the Trump administration has said more border security measures are needed after local community leaders raised concerns.
About 2 miles of military-grade wire was removed from city land in Laredo, Texas, according to Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officials. The agency ordered the removals after hearing from local elected officials who raised environmental and public safety concerns with the wire running near community parks.
Laredo Mayor Pete Saenz, who leads the Texas Border Commission, said the Trump administration has, in part, used his community to fabricate the threat of migrants traveling north. “They want to be overly protective,” Saenz told ABC News. “But at what cost? The cost to the local economy. The cost to our livelihoods here at the border area.” “By all means we want security, but it’s got to be done properly and weighed carefully,” the mayor said.
Razor wire has also been removed in Hidalgo, Texas, where the Rio Grande River valley acts as a natural impediment to crossing as it does throughout much of south Texas. Even though some border communities like Hidalgo haven’t seen the direct impact from the military fortifications, City Councilman Rudy Franz says the extra measures are excessive. “This is blown out of proportion,” Franz told ABC News. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I think it puts fear in people.”
.
US-Mex border areas Trump admin said need more security, troops remove barbed wire at locals request
As Trump argues for a wall, a border security measure gets pulled back
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-argues-wall-border-security-measure-pulled-back/story?id=59830679
U.S. Army soldiers have removed barbed wire along the US-Mexico border in areas where the Trump administration has said more border security measures are needed after local community leaders raised concerns.
About 2 miles of military-grade wire was removed from city land in Laredo, Texas, according to Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officials. The agency ordered the removals after hearing from local elected officials who raised environmental and public safety concerns with the wire running near community parks.
Laredo Mayor Pete Saenz, who leads the Texas Border Commission, said the Trump administration has, in part, used his community to fabricate the threat of migrants traveling north. “They want to be overly protective,” Saenz told ABC News. “But at what cost? The cost to the local economy. The cost to our livelihoods here at the border area.” “By all means we want security, but it’s got to be done properly and weighed carefully,” the mayor said.
Razor wire has also been removed in Hidalgo, Texas, where the Rio Grande River valley acts as a natural impediment to crossing as it does throughout much of south Texas. Even though some border communities like Hidalgo haven’t seen the direct impact from the military fortifications, City Councilman Rudy Franz says the extra measures are excessive. “This is blown out of proportion,” Franz told ABC News. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I think it puts fear in people.”
.
December 16, 2018
Did Michael Flynn Try to Strike a Grand Bargain With Moscow as It Attacked the 2016 Election?
His associates say he claimed he was in contact with the Russian ambassador during the campaign.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/michael-flynn-contacts-russia-campaign-robert-mueller/
?w=990
In early December, special counsel Robert Mueller, in preparation for the upcoming sentencing of Michael Flynn, submitted two memos outlining his recommended punishment for President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser. The documents noted that Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, deserved no prison time for his felony because he had provided “substantial assistance” to Mueller’s investigation and several other ongoing criminal probes. And one of the memos tantalizingly noted that Flynn had aided Mueller’s “investigation concerning any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald J Trump.” The memo does not specify what information Flynn provided on this topic, but perhaps he told Mueller about the Russian contacts of a key Trump campaign official: himself.
In February 2017, the Washington Post reported that Flynn had “a series of contacts” with Russia’s then-ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, in 2016 that “began before the Nov. 8 election and continued during the transition.” Kislyak confirmed to the Post that he had communicated with Flynn by text, phone, and in person. But that article—and much of the Flynn coverage—focused on Flynn’s post-election contacts with Kislyak, conversations that he lied about to the FBI and that led to his indictment. There has been no public information, via the Mueller investigation or other sources, regarding Flynn’s interactions with Kislyak during the 2016 campaign when he was Trump’s top adviser on national security matters.
Yet two Flynn associates tell Mother Jones that Flynn has informed friends and colleagues that prior to Election Day he spoke with Kislyak about how Trump could work productively with Russia if he won the presidency. One of these Flynn associates, who each asked not to be identified, notes that Flynn said he discussed with Kislyak a grand bargain in which Moscow would cooperate with the Trump administration to resolve the Syrian conflict and Washington would end or ease up on the sanctions imposed on Russia for its annexation of Crimea and military intervention in Ukraine. The other Flynn associate says Flynn said he had been talking to Kislyak about Syria, Iran, and other foreign policy matters that Russia and the United States could tackle together were Trump to be elected. A third Flynn associate recalls that shortly after the election, Flynn told him he had been in contact with Kislyak about Syria—but without stating whether that was before or after Election Day.
-snip-
Had Flynn privately met or communicated with Kislyak during the summer or fall, it would mean Trump’s chief national security aide was secretly interacting with the representative of a foreign power as that government was mounting information and cyber warfare against the United States. Such an interaction could signal to the Vladimir Putin regime that Trump didn’t mind the Kremlin’s interference in the election and would be willing to work with Moscow despite its efforts to subvert the US election. And if Flynn held such conversations with the Russian ambassador, this could have bolstered the Kremlin’s preference for Trump over Hillary Clinton and provided Moscow with further incentive for intervening in the 2016 campaign to assist Trump—especially if there was any talk of a sanctions-for-Syria deal or other policy aims desired by Putin. (Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, a top Republican supporting Trump, met with Kislyak at least twice in 2016, including in September in his Senate office.)
Much more on the link-
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/michael-flynn-contacts-russia-campaign-robert-mueller/
.
Bombshell- Michael Flynn proposed a sanctions relief deal to Russians BEFORE the 2016 election
Did Michael Flynn Try to Strike a Grand Bargain With Moscow as It Attacked the 2016 Election?
His associates say he claimed he was in contact with the Russian ambassador during the campaign.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/michael-flynn-contacts-russia-campaign-robert-mueller/
?w=990
In early December, special counsel Robert Mueller, in preparation for the upcoming sentencing of Michael Flynn, submitted two memos outlining his recommended punishment for President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser. The documents noted that Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, deserved no prison time for his felony because he had provided “substantial assistance” to Mueller’s investigation and several other ongoing criminal probes. And one of the memos tantalizingly noted that Flynn had aided Mueller’s “investigation concerning any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald J Trump.” The memo does not specify what information Flynn provided on this topic, but perhaps he told Mueller about the Russian contacts of a key Trump campaign official: himself.
In February 2017, the Washington Post reported that Flynn had “a series of contacts” with Russia’s then-ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, in 2016 that “began before the Nov. 8 election and continued during the transition.” Kislyak confirmed to the Post that he had communicated with Flynn by text, phone, and in person. But that article—and much of the Flynn coverage—focused on Flynn’s post-election contacts with Kislyak, conversations that he lied about to the FBI and that led to his indictment. There has been no public information, via the Mueller investigation or other sources, regarding Flynn’s interactions with Kislyak during the 2016 campaign when he was Trump’s top adviser on national security matters.
Yet two Flynn associates tell Mother Jones that Flynn has informed friends and colleagues that prior to Election Day he spoke with Kislyak about how Trump could work productively with Russia if he won the presidency. One of these Flynn associates, who each asked not to be identified, notes that Flynn said he discussed with Kislyak a grand bargain in which Moscow would cooperate with the Trump administration to resolve the Syrian conflict and Washington would end or ease up on the sanctions imposed on Russia for its annexation of Crimea and military intervention in Ukraine. The other Flynn associate says Flynn said he had been talking to Kislyak about Syria, Iran, and other foreign policy matters that Russia and the United States could tackle together were Trump to be elected. A third Flynn associate recalls that shortly after the election, Flynn told him he had been in contact with Kislyak about Syria—but without stating whether that was before or after Election Day.
-snip-
Had Flynn privately met or communicated with Kislyak during the summer or fall, it would mean Trump’s chief national security aide was secretly interacting with the representative of a foreign power as that government was mounting information and cyber warfare against the United States. Such an interaction could signal to the Vladimir Putin regime that Trump didn’t mind the Kremlin’s interference in the election and would be willing to work with Moscow despite its efforts to subvert the US election. And if Flynn held such conversations with the Russian ambassador, this could have bolstered the Kremlin’s preference for Trump over Hillary Clinton and provided Moscow with further incentive for intervening in the 2016 campaign to assist Trump—especially if there was any talk of a sanctions-for-Syria deal or other policy aims desired by Putin. (Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, a top Republican supporting Trump, met with Kislyak at least twice in 2016, including in September in his Senate office.)
Much more on the link-
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/michael-flynn-contacts-russia-campaign-robert-mueller/
.
December 16, 2018
AJC INVESTIGATION: How Brian Kemp turned warning of election system vulnerability against Democrats
In a dead heat with Stacey Abrams, Brian Kemp created a diversion from computer security breakdown
https://www.myajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/ajc-investigation-how-brian-kemp-turned-warning-election-system-vulnerability-against-democrats/iLOkpHK3ea39t8Eh4PCGxM/
Brian Kemp, the Republican candidate for governor, had a problem. As did Brian Kemp, Georgia’s secretary of state. It was Nov. 3, a Saturday, 72 hours to Election Day. Virtually tied in the polls with Democrat Stacey Abrams, Kemp was in danger of becoming the first Georgia Republican to lose a statewide election since 2006. And, now, a new threat. The secretary of state’s office had left its voter-registration system exposed online, opening Kemp to criticism that he couldn’t secure an election that featured him in the dual roles of candidate and overseer.But by the next day, Kemp and his aides had devised one solution for both problems, an investigation by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution shows.
They publicly accused the Democratic Party of Georgia of trying to hack into the voter database in a failed attempt to steal the election. The announcement added last-minute drama to an already contentious campaign. More important, it also pre-empted scrutiny of the secretary of state’s own missteps while initiating a highly unusual criminal investigation into his political rivals.
But no evidence supported the allegations against the Democrats at the time, and none has emerged in the six weeks since, the Journal-Constitution found. It appears unlikely that any crime occurred. “There was no way a reasonable person would conclude this was an attempted attack,” said Matthew Bernhard, a computer scientist at the University of Michigan who has consulted with plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s use of outdated touch-screen voting machines.
To reconstruct the campaign’s final weekend, the Journal-Constitution interviewed more than 15 people — computer security experts, political operatives, lawyers and others — and reviewed court filings and other public records. That examination suggests Kemp and his aides used his elected office to protect his political campaign from a potentially devastating embarrassment. Their unsubstantiated claims came at a pivotal moment, as voters were making their final decisions in an election that had attracted intense national attention.
There is MUCH more on the link, the whole disgustingly corrupt and criminal story...
https://www.myajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/ajc-investigation-how-brian-kemp-turned-warning-election-system-vulnerability-against-democrats/iLOkpHK3ea39t8Eh4PCGxM/
.
GA Gov- Days before election SoS Brian Kemp said Dems hacked voter rolls, we now know that was a LIE
AJC INVESTIGATION: How Brian Kemp turned warning of election system vulnerability against Democrats
In a dead heat with Stacey Abrams, Brian Kemp created a diversion from computer security breakdown
https://www.myajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/ajc-investigation-how-brian-kemp-turned-warning-election-system-vulnerability-against-democrats/iLOkpHK3ea39t8Eh4PCGxM/
Brian Kemp, the Republican candidate for governor, had a problem. As did Brian Kemp, Georgia’s secretary of state. It was Nov. 3, a Saturday, 72 hours to Election Day. Virtually tied in the polls with Democrat Stacey Abrams, Kemp was in danger of becoming the first Georgia Republican to lose a statewide election since 2006. And, now, a new threat. The secretary of state’s office had left its voter-registration system exposed online, opening Kemp to criticism that he couldn’t secure an election that featured him in the dual roles of candidate and overseer.But by the next day, Kemp and his aides had devised one solution for both problems, an investigation by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution shows.
They publicly accused the Democratic Party of Georgia of trying to hack into the voter database in a failed attempt to steal the election. The announcement added last-minute drama to an already contentious campaign. More important, it also pre-empted scrutiny of the secretary of state’s own missteps while initiating a highly unusual criminal investigation into his political rivals.
But no evidence supported the allegations against the Democrats at the time, and none has emerged in the six weeks since, the Journal-Constitution found. It appears unlikely that any crime occurred. “There was no way a reasonable person would conclude this was an attempted attack,” said Matthew Bernhard, a computer scientist at the University of Michigan who has consulted with plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s use of outdated touch-screen voting machines.
To reconstruct the campaign’s final weekend, the Journal-Constitution interviewed more than 15 people — computer security experts, political operatives, lawyers and others — and reviewed court filings and other public records. That examination suggests Kemp and his aides used his elected office to protect his political campaign from a potentially devastating embarrassment. Their unsubstantiated claims came at a pivotal moment, as voters were making their final decisions in an election that had attracted intense national attention.
There is MUCH more on the link, the whole disgustingly corrupt and criminal story...
https://www.myajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/ajc-investigation-how-brian-kemp-turned-warning-election-system-vulnerability-against-democrats/iLOkpHK3ea39t8Eh4PCGxM/
.
December 10, 2018
EPA to roll back protections in rewrite of Obama-era water rule
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/420380-epa-to-roll-back-protections-in-rewrite-of-obama-era-water-rule
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to unveil a new proposal that would roll back major federal protections for thousands of U.S. waterways and wetlands. The Trump administration is expected to rewrite a major national water rule imposed by former President Obama in 2015, The Associated Press reported Saturday.
The outlet obtained a set of White House talking points for the proposed new water rule, which indicate that the Trump administration is stripping federal protections for waterways. The White House talking points reportedly argue that the "previous administration’s 2015 rule wasn’t about water quality," according to the AP. “It was about power - power in the hands of the federal government over farmers, developers, and landowners,” the statement indicates.
-snip-
Jan Goldman-Carter, senior director of wetlands and water resources at the National Wildlife Federation, told the AP that about 60 percent of the stream miles in the continental U.S. would no longer be protected. The proposed rollback would also strip protection for half of the U.S. wetlands, Goldman-Carter said. She called it an “an unprecedented rollback of Clean Water Act protections.”
Environmental groups say the Obama-era rule helps protect remote and sometimes dry creek and wetlands, which help protect major downstream lakes and rivers from pollutants, runoffs of fertilizer and oil spills, the AP noted. The protections helped shield humans from droughts, floods and hurricanes, according to the outlet. The 2015 measure also worked toward cleaning up larger bodies of water, like the Chesapeake Bay.
.
Trump EPA to rollback Obama-era protections for thousands of waterways and wetlands
EPA to roll back protections in rewrite of Obama-era water rule
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/420380-epa-to-roll-back-protections-in-rewrite-of-obama-era-water-rule
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to unveil a new proposal that would roll back major federal protections for thousands of U.S. waterways and wetlands. The Trump administration is expected to rewrite a major national water rule imposed by former President Obama in 2015, The Associated Press reported Saturday.
The outlet obtained a set of White House talking points for the proposed new water rule, which indicate that the Trump administration is stripping federal protections for waterways. The White House talking points reportedly argue that the "previous administration’s 2015 rule wasn’t about water quality," according to the AP. “It was about power - power in the hands of the federal government over farmers, developers, and landowners,” the statement indicates.
-snip-
Jan Goldman-Carter, senior director of wetlands and water resources at the National Wildlife Federation, told the AP that about 60 percent of the stream miles in the continental U.S. would no longer be protected. The proposed rollback would also strip protection for half of the U.S. wetlands, Goldman-Carter said. She called it an “an unprecedented rollback of Clean Water Act protections.”
Environmental groups say the Obama-era rule helps protect remote and sometimes dry creek and wetlands, which help protect major downstream lakes and rivers from pollutants, runoffs of fertilizer and oil spills, the AP noted. The protections helped shield humans from droughts, floods and hurricanes, according to the outlet. The 2015 measure also worked toward cleaning up larger bodies of water, like the Chesapeake Bay.
.
December 10, 2018
Rep. Raúl Grijalva Is Going to Make Ryan Zinke’s Life Hell in the Next Congress
A Democratic spitfire takes the helm of the House Committee on Natural Resources
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/rep-raul-grijalva-is-going-to-make-ryan-zinkes-life-hell-in-the-next-congress/
?w=990
Less than a week before the midterm elections, US House Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) released a report detailing how the US House Committee on Natural Resources, on which he has served for 14 years, stacked its hearings with industry interests. “Under Republican leadership,” he wrote, “hearings have disproportionally included witnesses who pad their profits by degrading public lands.”
Now that Democrats have won a majority in the House, Grijalva will have his chance, as the committee’s new chairman, to change the direction of the governing body that oversees federal lands and energy and water resources. Grijalva’s committee will also oversee and investigate the Interior Department, employing the system of checks and balances that Grijalva thinks his predecessors neglected.
Last week, High Country News spoke with Grijalva about his priorities and what his leadership could mean for climate change policies and resource management in the West. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Interview is on the link--
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/rep-raul-grijalva-is-going-to-make-ryan-zinkes-life-hell-in-the-next-congress/
.
Dem Rep. Ral Grijalva Is Going to Make Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke's Life Hell in the Next Congress
Rep. Raúl Grijalva Is Going to Make Ryan Zinke’s Life Hell in the Next Congress
A Democratic spitfire takes the helm of the House Committee on Natural Resources
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/rep-raul-grijalva-is-going-to-make-ryan-zinkes-life-hell-in-the-next-congress/
?w=990
Less than a week before the midterm elections, US House Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) released a report detailing how the US House Committee on Natural Resources, on which he has served for 14 years, stacked its hearings with industry interests. “Under Republican leadership,” he wrote, “hearings have disproportionally included witnesses who pad their profits by degrading public lands.”
Now that Democrats have won a majority in the House, Grijalva will have his chance, as the committee’s new chairman, to change the direction of the governing body that oversees federal lands and energy and water resources. Grijalva’s committee will also oversee and investigate the Interior Department, employing the system of checks and balances that Grijalva thinks his predecessors neglected.
Last week, High Country News spoke with Grijalva about his priorities and what his leadership could mean for climate change policies and resource management in the West. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Interview is on the link--
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/rep-raul-grijalva-is-going-to-make-ryan-zinkes-life-hell-in-the-next-congress/
.
December 9, 2018
Gotta hand it to Trump, he only hires the best.
And he spent a lot of time yelling and screaming about how he would make the world respect the United States again
Well here it is ladies and gentlemen, Donald Trumps pick to be the US ambassador to the United Nations ....
Heather Nauert cited D-Day as the height of U.S.-German relations. Now she’s headed to the U.N.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/12/07/heather-nauert-cited-d-day-height-us-german-relations-now-shes-headed-un/?fbclid=IwAR3WjPFS-JoS6FbrZ79F1ehmJYg7XBMuIlsmN2x_kw0rQFKXhksp0e_45bA&utm_term=.fddc99d8f612
The United Nations came into existence to vanquish Germany, as 26 nations jointly pledged in 1942 not to surrender to “savage and brutal forces seeking to subjugate the world.”
Three-quarters of a century later, the woman who would soon become President Trump’s pick to represent the United States at the United Nations cited the D-Day landings — a cornerstone of this unwavering Allied pledge and the basis of the Nazi defeat on the Western Front — to showcase the strength of German-American relations.
“When you talk about Germany, we have a very strong relationship with the government of Germany,” Heather Nauert, the State Department’s spokeswoman, said in June. She added: “Looking back in the history books, today is the 71st anniversary of the speech that announced the Marshall Plan. Tomorrow is the anniversary of the D-Day invasion. We obviously have a very long history with the government of Germany, and we have a strong relationship with the government.”
While the Marshall Plan rebuilt Western Europe, including West Germany, in the ashes of Adolf Hitler’s quest for global domination, the D-Day comment raised eyebrows, with some suggesting it demonstrated a lack of historical understanding from the former “Fox & Friends” presenter who gained prominence on television during the Monica Lewinsky scandal but has no diplomatic experience. This critique is emerging again as she prepares to move to New York as the American ambassador to the United Nations, a role to which President Trump plans to nominate her.
.
Heather Nauert cited D-Day as the height of U.S.-German relations. Now she's headed to the U.N.
Gotta hand it to Trump, he only hires the best.
And he spent a lot of time yelling and screaming about how he would make the world respect the United States again
Well here it is ladies and gentlemen, Donald Trumps pick to be the US ambassador to the United Nations ....
Heather Nauert cited D-Day as the height of U.S.-German relations. Now she’s headed to the U.N.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/12/07/heather-nauert-cited-d-day-height-us-german-relations-now-shes-headed-un/?fbclid=IwAR3WjPFS-JoS6FbrZ79F1ehmJYg7XBMuIlsmN2x_kw0rQFKXhksp0e_45bA&utm_term=.fddc99d8f612
The United Nations came into existence to vanquish Germany, as 26 nations jointly pledged in 1942 not to surrender to “savage and brutal forces seeking to subjugate the world.”
Three-quarters of a century later, the woman who would soon become President Trump’s pick to represent the United States at the United Nations cited the D-Day landings — a cornerstone of this unwavering Allied pledge and the basis of the Nazi defeat on the Western Front — to showcase the strength of German-American relations.
“When you talk about Germany, we have a very strong relationship with the government of Germany,” Heather Nauert, the State Department’s spokeswoman, said in June. She added: “Looking back in the history books, today is the 71st anniversary of the speech that announced the Marshall Plan. Tomorrow is the anniversary of the D-Day invasion. We obviously have a very long history with the government of Germany, and we have a strong relationship with the government.”
While the Marshall Plan rebuilt Western Europe, including West Germany, in the ashes of Adolf Hitler’s quest for global domination, the D-Day comment raised eyebrows, with some suggesting it demonstrated a lack of historical understanding from the former “Fox & Friends” presenter who gained prominence on television during the Monica Lewinsky scandal but has no diplomatic experience. This critique is emerging again as she prepares to move to New York as the American ambassador to the United Nations, a role to which President Trump plans to nominate her.
.
December 9, 2018
Documents Point to Illegal Campaign Coordination Between Trump and the NRA
Trump and the gun group used the same consultants to spearhead TV ad blitzes at the height of the 2016 election, likely in violation of federal law.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/nra-trump-2016-campaign-coordination-political-advertising/
?w=990
The National Rifle Association spent $30 million to help elect Donald Trump—more than any other independent conservative group. Most of that sum went toward television advertising, but a political message loses its power if it fails to reach the right audience at the right time. For the complex and consequential task of placing ads in key markets across the nation in 2016, the NRA turned to a media strategy firm called Red Eagle Media.
-snip-
The two purchases may have looked coincidental; Red Eagle and AMAG appear at first glance to be separate firms. But each is closely connected to a major conservative media-consulting firm called National Media Research, Planning and Placement. In fact, the three outfits are so intertwined that both the NRA’s and the Trump campaign’s ad buys were authorized by the same person: National Media’s chief financial officer, Jon Ferrell. “This is very strong evidence, if not proof, of illegal coordination,” said Larry Noble, a former general counsel for the Federal Election Commission. “This is the heat of the general election, and the same person is acting as an agent for the NRA and the Trump campaign.”
Reporting by The Trace, which has teamed up with Mother Jones to investigate the NRA’s political activity, shows that the NRA and the Trump campaign employed the same operation—at times, the exact same people—to craft and execute their advertising strategies for the 2016 presidential election. The investigation, which involved a review of more than 1,000 pages of Federal Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission documents, found multiple instances in which National Media, through its affiliates Red Eagle and AMAG, executed ad buys for Trump and the NRA that seemed coordinated to enhance each other.
-snip-
Individuals working for National Media or its affiliated companies either signed or were named in FCC documents, demonstrating that they had knowledge of both the NRA and the Trump campaign’s advertising plans. Experts say the arrangement appears to violate campaign finance laws. “I don’t think I’ve ever seen a situation where illegal coordination seems more obvious,” said Ann Ravel, a former chair of the Federal Election Commission, who reviewed the records. “It is so blatant that it doesn’t even seem sloppy. Everyone involved probably just thinks there aren’t going to be any consequences.”
They did their homework, there is MUCH more on the link including graphs, charts the whole works ...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/nra-trump-2016-campaign-coordination-political-advertising/
.
EXCLUSIVE: Documents point to illegal campaign coordination between Donald Trump and the NRA
Documents Point to Illegal Campaign Coordination Between Trump and the NRA
Trump and the gun group used the same consultants to spearhead TV ad blitzes at the height of the 2016 election, likely in violation of federal law.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/nra-trump-2016-campaign-coordination-political-advertising/
?w=990
The National Rifle Association spent $30 million to help elect Donald Trump—more than any other independent conservative group. Most of that sum went toward television advertising, but a political message loses its power if it fails to reach the right audience at the right time. For the complex and consequential task of placing ads in key markets across the nation in 2016, the NRA turned to a media strategy firm called Red Eagle Media.
-snip-
The two purchases may have looked coincidental; Red Eagle and AMAG appear at first glance to be separate firms. But each is closely connected to a major conservative media-consulting firm called National Media Research, Planning and Placement. In fact, the three outfits are so intertwined that both the NRA’s and the Trump campaign’s ad buys were authorized by the same person: National Media’s chief financial officer, Jon Ferrell. “This is very strong evidence, if not proof, of illegal coordination,” said Larry Noble, a former general counsel for the Federal Election Commission. “This is the heat of the general election, and the same person is acting as an agent for the NRA and the Trump campaign.”
Reporting by The Trace, which has teamed up with Mother Jones to investigate the NRA’s political activity, shows that the NRA and the Trump campaign employed the same operation—at times, the exact same people—to craft and execute their advertising strategies for the 2016 presidential election. The investigation, which involved a review of more than 1,000 pages of Federal Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission documents, found multiple instances in which National Media, through its affiliates Red Eagle and AMAG, executed ad buys for Trump and the NRA that seemed coordinated to enhance each other.
-snip-
Individuals working for National Media or its affiliated companies either signed or were named in FCC documents, demonstrating that they had knowledge of both the NRA and the Trump campaign’s advertising plans. Experts say the arrangement appears to violate campaign finance laws. “I don’t think I’ve ever seen a situation where illegal coordination seems more obvious,” said Ann Ravel, a former chair of the Federal Election Commission, who reviewed the records. “It is so blatant that it doesn’t even seem sloppy. Everyone involved probably just thinks there aren’t going to be any consequences.”
They did their homework, there is MUCH more on the link including graphs, charts the whole works ...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/nra-trump-2016-campaign-coordination-political-advertising/
.
December 9, 2018
Republicans Are Using Potential GOP Election Crimes in North Carolina to Push for More Voter Suppression Measures
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/north-carolina-election-fraud-voter-id-laws.html
?width=780&height=520&rect=1560x1040&offset=0x0
It is easy for Democrats to feel some glee about revelations that a Republican operative may have committed absentee ballot fraud in connection with last month’s election for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District. Not only does this mean that Democrat Dan McCready may have a chance to beat Republican Mark Harris in a new election that the state election board or the U.S. House of Representatives may order, giving Democrats a chance to pick up a 41st Republican seat this election cycle. The idea of a Republican operative being caught up in election shenanigans after North Carolina Republicans and others have been yelling so loudly in the past decade about the false specter of Democratic “voter fraud” deliciously demonstrates the hypocrisy and disingenuousness of Republican rhetoric about election integrity.
But to me, the circumstances surrounding the North Carolina election controversy are profoundly depressing, because they reveal that even incontrovertible facts are not going to get in the way of a narrative used to justify a host of suppressive laws aimed at making it harder for those likely to vote for Democrats to register and to vote, not only in North Carolina, but in Florida, Georgia, Wisconsin, and elsewhere.
The efforts are likely going to continue to accelerate despite what we can learn about election integrity from the North Carolina ballot shenanigans, and it is unclear at best whether courts will continue to step up to block efforts aimed at assuring that Republicans can hold on to as much power as possible even when they lack the support of a majority of voters.
Let’s begin with what happened in the recent North Carolina 9th District congressional race. The state board of elections has refused to certify the results, and there is an ongoing investigation over the fate of absentee ballots, which might have swung the result in an election decided by 905 votes. Harris, the Republican candidate, signed a contract with a consulting firm that used Leslie McCrae Dowless Jr., a Republican political operative, for absentee ballot operations in Bladen County. Evidence so far suggests that Dowless used operatives to collect absentee ballots, sometimes filling in blank ballots and sometimes destroying ballots cast for Harris’ opponent, McCready. BuzzFeed reports that it was an all-cash operation where workers turned ballots over to Dowless rather than returning them to election officials as required by state law.
MUCH more on the link, including a run-down of several states where Republicans are currently going full throttle to try to subvert democracy --
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/north-carolina-election-fraud-voter-id-laws.html
.
Republicans Are Using GOP Election Crimes in North Carolina to Push for More Voter Suppression Measu
Republicans Are Using Potential GOP Election Crimes in North Carolina to Push for More Voter Suppression Measures
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/north-carolina-election-fraud-voter-id-laws.html
?width=780&height=520&rect=1560x1040&offset=0x0
It is easy for Democrats to feel some glee about revelations that a Republican operative may have committed absentee ballot fraud in connection with last month’s election for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District. Not only does this mean that Democrat Dan McCready may have a chance to beat Republican Mark Harris in a new election that the state election board or the U.S. House of Representatives may order, giving Democrats a chance to pick up a 41st Republican seat this election cycle. The idea of a Republican operative being caught up in election shenanigans after North Carolina Republicans and others have been yelling so loudly in the past decade about the false specter of Democratic “voter fraud” deliciously demonstrates the hypocrisy and disingenuousness of Republican rhetoric about election integrity.
But to me, the circumstances surrounding the North Carolina election controversy are profoundly depressing, because they reveal that even incontrovertible facts are not going to get in the way of a narrative used to justify a host of suppressive laws aimed at making it harder for those likely to vote for Democrats to register and to vote, not only in North Carolina, but in Florida, Georgia, Wisconsin, and elsewhere.
The efforts are likely going to continue to accelerate despite what we can learn about election integrity from the North Carolina ballot shenanigans, and it is unclear at best whether courts will continue to step up to block efforts aimed at assuring that Republicans can hold on to as much power as possible even when they lack the support of a majority of voters.
Let’s begin with what happened in the recent North Carolina 9th District congressional race. The state board of elections has refused to certify the results, and there is an ongoing investigation over the fate of absentee ballots, which might have swung the result in an election decided by 905 votes. Harris, the Republican candidate, signed a contract with a consulting firm that used Leslie McCrae Dowless Jr., a Republican political operative, for absentee ballot operations in Bladen County. Evidence so far suggests that Dowless used operatives to collect absentee ballots, sometimes filling in blank ballots and sometimes destroying ballots cast for Harris’ opponent, McCready. BuzzFeed reports that it was an all-cash operation where workers turned ballots over to Dowless rather than returning them to election officials as required by state law.
MUCH more on the link, including a run-down of several states where Republicans are currently going full throttle to try to subvert democracy --
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/north-carolina-election-fraud-voter-id-laws.html
.
December 9, 2018
Florida Voted to Give Ex-Felons the Franchise. Now Republicans Are Throwing a Wrench in That Process
Republicans absolutely HATE a voting democracy. Just look at what they are doing right now in NC, Wis, Mich, Ga, Fla and other parts of the country. Republicans will do anything, both legal and illegal, to stop Americans from voting.
Republicans hate Americans voting more than anything else, they hate it more than they hate billionaires having to pay taxes, they hate it more than they hate Americans being able to go to the doctor when sick
And I will NEVER again allow a Republican say they support our troops. Our troops put their life on the line and fight for what Republicans hate the most.. freedom and democracy
This is just disgusting....
Florida Voted to Give Ex-Felons the Franchise. Now Republicans Are Throwing a Wrench in That Process.
Florida’s GOP elections chief is resisting implementation of the ballot initiative to expand voting rights.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/12/florida-voted-to-give-ex-felons-the-franchise-now-republicans-are-throwing-a-wrench-in-that-process/
?w=990
A month after Florida voters approved a measure to restore the franchise to about 1.4 million former felons—the largest expansion of voting rights in decades—a battle over implementing that change is already beginning. The state’s Republican elections chief is resisting swift implementation of the measure, which was approved by nearly 65 percent of Florida voters on November 6 and is scheduled to take effect on January 8. He’s asking the state Legislature, dominated by Republicans, to interpret the ballot initiative. As a result, the dismantling of one of the harshest disenfranchisement schemes in the country could be subject to delays, confusion, and lawsuits.
To those who crafted Amendment 4, the ballot language was straightforward. It read, “This amendment restores the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation.” It stipulated an exception for people convicted of murder or a sexual offense.
“On January 8, anybody who has completed the terms of their sentence for an offense other than murder or felony sexual assault had their rights restored by the voters on Election Day,” said Howard Simon, who as director of the Florida ACLU helped craft and shepherd Amendment 4 to passage. But Simon, who retired last week after 21 years leading the Florida ACLU, predicted that there might be trouble ahead. “I’m not naive,” he said in an interview with Mother Jones on the day he stepped down. He predicted that the state Legislature, which does not convene until March 5, might try to muddy the waters. Legislation could bog down rights restoration or sow enough confusion that some ex-felons are deterred from registering.
This week, the first signs of obstruction arose. The secretary of state, Republican Ken Detzner, told the media on Tuesday that he believes the ballot language is unclear and, rather than give guidance to the elections supervisors, he wants the state Legislature to weigh in. “We need to get some direction from them as far as implementation and definitions—all the kind of things that the supervisors were asking,” he said. “It would be inappropriate for us to charge off without direction from them.”
.
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 8,958
