March 14, 2019

Beto O'Rourke frequently voted for Republican legislation, analysis reveals

This won't be popular and it's from December. The more we know.

Beto O’Rourke frequently voted for Republican legislation, analysis reveals
Review of his six-year record in Congress shows Democrat frequently opposed own party, and supported bills that boosted the fossil fuel industry and Trump’s immigration policy
David Sirota@davidsirota
Thu 20 Dec 2018 06.00 EST
Last modified on Thu 20 Dec 2018 10.55 EST



Beto O’Rourke’s spirited run for the US Senate in Texas last month has prompted powerful voices in the Democratic party establishment to tout the outgoing Texas congressman as a 2020 presidential candidate who, as the party’s standard-bearer, would offer a vision of America contrasting against that of Republicans.
Beto O'Rourke poses growing threat to fellow Democrats with 2020 hopes

However, a new analysis of congressional votes from the non-profit news organisation Capital & Main shows that even as O’Rourke represented one of the most solidly Democratic congressional districts in the United States, he has frequently voted against the majority of House Democrats in support of Republican bills and Trump administration priorities.

Capital & Main reviewed the 167 votes O’Rourke has cast in the House in opposition to the majority of his own party during his six-year tenure in Congress. Many of those votes were not progressive dissents alongside other left-leaning lawmakers, but instead votes to help pass Republican-sponsored legislation.
Sign up for the new US morning briefing

O’Rourke has voted for GOP bills that his fellow Democratic lawmakers said reinforced Republicans’ anti-tax ideology, chipped away at the Affordable Care Act (ACA), weakened Wall Street regulations, boosted the fossil fuel industry and bolstered Donald Trump’s immigration policy.

Consumer, environmental, public health and civil rights organizations have cast legislation backed by O’Rourke as aiding big banks, undermining the fight against climate change and supporting Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda. During the previous administration, Barack Obama’s White House issued statements slamming two GOP bills backed by the 46-year-old Democratic legislator.

more...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR2vMOvHyswbTRmQMiDxKvpsguzgYbhW_RCrQ4KhR7mnyKrVFSdbhMF8Pn8

March 14, 2019

Graham blocks resolution calling for Mueller report to be made public

Graham blocks resolution calling for Mueller report to be made public
By Jordain Carney - 03/14/19 03:55 PM EDT


Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Thursday blocked a resolution calling for special counsel Robert Mueller's report to be made public after it passed the House unanimously.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) asked for unanimous consent for the nonbinding resolution, which cleared the House 420-0, to be passed by the Senate before they leave town for a weeklong recess.



But Graham, a close ally of Trump's who chairs the Judiciary Committee, objected after Schumer refused to amend the House-passed resolution to include a provision calling on the Justice Department (DOJ) to appoint a special counsel to investigate DOJ misconduct in the handling of the investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's email use and the Carter Page Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act applications.




more...

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/434124-graham-blocks-resolution-calling-for-mueller-report-to-be-made-public

March 14, 2019

Richie Neal and Trump's Taxes

Richie Neal and Trump’s Taxes
Jeff Hauser & Eleanor Eagan
March 13, 2019
The costs of having a corporate Democrat chair the House Ways and Means Committee


As most House Democrats enthusiastically jump on the long-dormant congressional oversight train, one senior lawmaker has conspicuously chosen to stay on the platform. Under the leadership of Representative Richard Neal, the House Committee on Ways and Means has shown none of the zeal for oversight exhibited by its counterparts.

The announcement two weeks ago that Neal would finally request Trump’s tax returns, after a good deal of pressure from the Democratic Caucus, might have appeared to be a welcome reversal. But look at the fine print and you’ll see that the committee’s strategy is basically a continuation of Neal’s obstinate refusal to deliver on Democrats’ 2018 campaign promises.

Not only is Neal’s request still set for some uncertain time in the nearish future (approximately two and a half or more months too late), the request he is contemplating is wildly inadequate.

That is because Neal plans to disregard tax law experts and request only the president’s personal returns.

Neal’s lame excuse is that business returns for Trump’s over 500 Limited Liability Corporations (LLCs) are too complex. Neal is right that understanding Trump’s finances will be unjustifiably arduous, but as one of the few people in the country with the power to gather the resources and expertise to conquer this task, surrender in the face of this complexity is a cowardly dereliction of duty.

more...

https://prospect.org/article/richie-neal-and-trumps-taxes

March 14, 2019

Barbara McQuade: Can Manhattan D.A. Cy Vance Flip Manafort After Mueller Failed?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/new-york-charges-against-paul-manafort-provide-intrigue-on-sentencing-day?ref=home

Can Manhattan D.A. Cy Vance Flip Manafort After Mueller Failed?
If Trump’s former campaign chairman was counting on a pardon from the man who lauded his refusal to ‘break,’ the NYC prosecutor may have just thrown a wrench into the plan.
Barbara McQuade
03.14.19 12:57 AM ET

snip//

But just when Manafort’s cases were over, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance charged Manafort in state court in New York. The timing could not have been a coincidence. What to make of these new charges against Manafort?

One obvious point of speculation is that these new charges were filed to prevent Manafort from escaping accountability for his crimes through a pardon. Other former Trump associates, such as former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, former deputy campaign chair Rick Gates and former attorney Michael Cohen, have pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with the special counsel. Manafort, in contrast, has not. Manafort’s plea agreement in the District of Columbia included a cooperation provision that gave him an opportunity to earn a reduction in his sentence by providing substantial assistance in the investigation of others, but prosecutors discovered that while feigning cooperation, Manafort lied to investigators, and his deal was rescinded, causing some to speculate that Manafort is angling for a pardon from President Trump.

President Trump has remained supportive of Manafort throughout his prosecution, tweeting about his respect for such a “brave man,” who refused to “break.” Trump has used his pardon power in the past to absolve Sheriff Joe Arpaio of contempt of court and political commentator Dinesh D’Souza for campaign finance crimes, among others, showing that he is not afraid to use the power for what some may see as political causes. The president has a virtually unfettered power to pardon individuals who are convicted of crimes as a show of mercy. The one limitation on his pardon power is that while he may use it for people who have been convicted of federal crimes, he has no such power over state crimes.

That’s where state charges against Manafort can work as a backstop. The Manhattan DA’s indictment charges 16 counts, alleging mortgage fraud, falsifying business records and a scheme to defraud. While New York’s protective double jeopardy rules may create some litigation risk for the fraud charges, the counts for falsifying business records are unique to state law and seem unlikely to pose the same challenge.

Is Vance’s goal simply to ensure that Manafort is held accountable by facing prison time for his crimes? That alone would be a worthy goal for a defendant whose crimes were as pervasive and sophisticated as Manafort’s. Or is Vance instead thinking that by applying more pressure on Manafort, he can do what Mueller could not—convince him to cooperate by neutralizing President Trump’s pardon power.

Checkmate?

March 13, 2019

Trump wants to close international immigration offices. The ramifications are huge.

https://thinkprogress.org/uscsis-closures-impact-adoptions-family-reunification-4e4d2fe73754/


Trump wants to close international immigration offices. The ramifications are huge.
Sacrificing human rights for the sake of "efficiency."
Rebekah Entralgo
Mar 13, 2019, 1:46 pm


U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced Tuesday that it plans to shutter all of its 23 field offices across 20 countries in an effort to save money and resources. The administration’s goal of cost-cutting, however, could have real life ramifications for refugee processing and foreign nationals in urgent need of humanitarian parole.

Overseas USCIS field offices play a crucial role in refugee applications, family reunification visas and foreign adoptions, in addition to other responsibilities like processing naturalization documents for military members who marry foreign nationals. Under this potential change, the work of international USCIS field offices would be divvied up among the State Department, embassies and consulates, and the agency’s domestic offices.

snip//

Until the shift in responsibilities is formally implemented, families and individuals who rely on the international offices will likely face significant delays in requests. Families adopting from overseas may have to wait longer to bring their child home, as would someone who needs to urgently enter the United States on the basis of a humanitarian crisis. According to a 2008 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, humanitarian parole cases are used when a foreign national is unable to obtain a visa for whatever reason, and are rarely granted except in the case of an absolute emergency or urgent family reunification. One example of humanitarian parole that is granted is for foreign nationals who could serve as the donor of a family member dying in the United States.

Currently, there is no detailed plan on how this policy change would be implemented. It isn’t known, for example, if it is even legal for the State Department to assume some of the responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees USCIS. It also isn’t known how much this move would cost.



News of the impending USCIS closures comes the same week as the 2020 budget proposal, which included an “immigration services surcharge.” The fee increase would add an estimated 10 percent to immigration form filing fees. According to the budget, these fees are necessary to go towards “deficit reduction,” despite the fact that the fees would be just a drop in the bucket compared to the $31 trillion the budget estimates the deficit will reach within the next decade.

March 13, 2019

WATCH: Ocasio-Cortez Grills Wells Fargo CEO Over Profiting From 'Caging of Children' and Pipeline Di

Published on Tuesday, March 12, 2019
by Common Dreams
WATCH: Ocasio-Cortez Grills Wells Fargo CEO Over Profiting From 'Caging of Children' and Pipeline Disasters

"Want to know why Ocasio-Cortez's popularity keeps climbing? Because she amplifies questions that movements of people, like the #NoDAPL movement, have been shouting to the powers that be for ages."
by
Julia Conley, staff writer


Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Ocasio (D-NY) proved once again her verbal interrogation skills on Tuesday as she grilled Wells Fargo CEO Timothy Sloan over the financial giant's dubious investments and won applause for holding his feet to the fire.

The freshman congresswoman questioned bank CEO Timothy Sloan about two issues for which corporations are rarely directly held accountable—the bank's financing of human rights abuses as well as environmental disasters.

On the issue of Wells Fargo's relationship with the private prison industry and the Trump administration's child detention policy, Ocasio-Cortez asked sharply: "Mr. Sloan, why was the bank involved in the caging of children?"
https://twitter.com/alexisgoldstein/status/1105522290270392320
In his response, Sloan announced that the bank is in the process of cutting ties with one group and has already stopped financing another—information that wasn't publicly known before the hearing.

more...

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/03/12/watch-ocasio-cortez-grills-wells-fargo-ceo-over-profiting-caging-children-and?fbclid=IwAR1qg1ZDwJ2oMInncBk5nFNqq9ORGbVZxWKiM4Uc0lo9LH9AAKnLhZ3M8Jw

March 13, 2019

Coast Guard officer described by prosecutors as 'domestic terrorist' not facing terrorism charges

Coast Guard officer described by prosecutors as ‘domestic terrorist’ not facing terrorism charges
Chris Hasson's case demonstrates the pitfalls prosecutors face when dealing with far-right extremists.
Luke Barnes
Mar 12, 2019, 4:26 pm


The Coast Guard lieutenant who allegedly plotted the murder of prominent Democrats and journalists is facing up to 31 years behind bars — but has not been charged with terrorism.

Christopher Hasson, 49, was arrested last month by federal agents on drugs and weapons charges. In the initial federal detention motion, prosecutors said the charges were the “proverbial tip of the iceberg” and described Hasson as a “domestic terrorist, bent on committing acts dangerous to human life that are intended to affect governmental conduct.”

The motion went on to describe the hallmarks of far-right extremism which Hasson had allegedly displayed. He was obsessed with Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian far-right terrorist who killed 77 people — mostly teenagers — during an attack in Norway in 2011. Hasson also allegedly made thousands of online searches for neo-fascist and neo-Nazi literature, compiled a hit list of prominent Democrats and journalists, and researched their locations and security arrangements.

Hasson also allegedly amassed an arsenal of rifles, handguns, bulletproof vests and over a thousand rounds of ammunition. He also allegedly acquired the opioid Tramadol and more than 30 bottles of Human Growth Hormone.

more...

https://thinkprogress.org/chris-hasson-coast-guard-officer-domestic-terrorist-terrorism-charges-fa8901063f72/

March 12, 2019

Trump budget chief: Cutting veterans pay isn't a big deal

https://shareblue.com/trump-budget-chief-budget-veterans-benefits/?fbclid=IwAR2M845QnlIMgSwCPToDQIU-w8Sl_Gzg1kol68dF1VnvdzT4cQSM6zv95U8

Trump budget chief: Cutting veterans pay isn't a big deal
By Oliver Willis -
March 12, 2019


Trump's budget director said it's fine to take from veterans benefits to balance the budget.

Trump's acting budget director said there's no downside to the administration's proposal to take money from veterans benefits.

Acting Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought testified before the House Budget Committee on Tuesday.

In his 2019 budget, Trump has proposed rounding down the cost-of-living adjustments given to veterans. Military Times notes that the idea "has been decried by veterans groups in the past as unfairly using their earned benefits to balance the budget."



The cold dismissal of veterans' concerns is the latest in a long line of slights and attacks on the military from Trump. He largely views the armed services as a useful backdrop for his presidency, via venues like parades, rather than as an institution to be supported and respected.

Trump also loves to hide behind the military's large public support to prop up his unpopular presidency.

In the same budget document, Trump fraudulently takes credit for the "largest" increase in military pay in a decade, but the military received larger increases twice under Obama.

Trump is again planning to hurt veterans, but instead of expressing some shame or regret for him doing so, his budget director is attempting to say hurting them is in their best interests.

Published with permission of The American Independent.

March 12, 2019

Report: Jared And Ivanka Think of Air Force One As Their Own Private Ride

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/03/jared-and-ivanka-think-of-air-force-one-as-their-own-private-ride?fbclid=IwAR0rdhOcfGxoOXPYxZGlSlUJ008j1ZGp0odwPwh7gUtBynfP74tT-FnQDps


Report: Jared And Ivanka Think of Air Force One As Their Own Private Ride
The First Daughter and Son-in-Law are even more power-hungry than previously thought.
by Bess Levin
March 12, 2019 4:33 pm


When Donald Trump named his daughter and son-in-law senior advisers to the president, the term “moderating influence” was frequently tossed around, as in, “Even though Real Estate Barbie and Bizarro Ken have no business whatsoever working in the White House, perhaps they’ll serve as a moderating influence that will save us from their father‘s worst impulses.” Obviously, that never happened because 1) Trump answers to no one except foreign dictators, and 2) Ivanka and Jared are power-hungry opportunists whose only priorities involve enriching themselves. We already knew that the pair flouted rules they didn’t think applied to them, maintained business ties that may have put national security at risk, and only received top-secret clearance by whining and stomping their feet until President Daddy gave it to them. And now, thanks to a new report, we’ve learned that Javanka reportedly believe all the powers of the presidency apply to them.

Kushner, Inc., out next week from journalist Vicky Ward, tells the story of “two children . . . who have climbed to positions of power by disregarding protocol and skirting the rules when they can.” Among the anecdotes Ward gleaned from interviewing 220 people are that “Ms. Trump and Mr. Kushner wanted to control who could travel on trips funded by the State Department,” and that the couple, who apparently view Air Force One as their own personal plane, had a handy work-around in place for when they didn’t get their way:



Hey, it’s not like Mnuchin had anything better to do! Elsewhere in Kushner, Inc., Ward reports that Ivanka suffers from the same condition as her father wherein they both believe they can convince people a thing that was said on tape and captured by numerous news outlets never actually happened:



The book does attempt to explain that the only reason Ivanka and Jared are like this is because they had super-tough childhoods, though, somehow, we’re not sure the anecdotes about Ivanka having to tour an elite boarding school on her own (after arriving in a stretch limo) and Jared’s parents asking a business associate to occasionally take him out to dinner while he was at Harvard “to make sure he was not dating non-Jews or doing drugs” will elicit much sympathy.

Unsurprisingly, the White House and the Kushner/Trump camp have tried to discredit Kushner, Inc., insisting, through a spokesman, that “Every point that Ms. Ward mentioned in what she called her ‘fact-checking’ stage was entirely false,” and that “It seems she has written a book of fiction rather than any serious attempt to get the facts. Correcting everything wrong would take too long and be pointless.”

March 12, 2019

Trump's budget request slashes retirement benefits for 2 million federal workers

Trump’s budget request slashes retirement benefits for 2 million federal workers
Each federal worker would lose about $75,000 in retirement savings.
By Alexia Fernández Campbell@AlexiaCampbellalexia@vox.com Mar 12, 2019, 4:40pm EDT


President Donald Trump’s grand vision for America in 2020 can be summarized this way: spend billions more dollars on the US military and immigration enforcement; cut billions of dollars from the social safety net. And do nothing to close the $1 trillion deficit Republicans created with their 2017 corporate tax cuts.

The president’s 2020 budget proposal, which he released Monday, managed to anger everyone from retirees to childhood cancer researchers. It also angered millions of federal employees and retired government workers, who would see their pensions cut under the president’s budget request.

Randy Erwin, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees labor union (NFFE), blamed Trump for trying to make federal workers pay for the 2017 tax cuts, which disproportionately benefited the wealthiest Americans.



The proposal would cancel cost-of-living increases to pension income for retirees in one program, and would lower the annual adjustment to another pension program by 0.5 percent. The budget also scraps certain retirement benefits for employees who stop working before they are eligible for Social Security.

Current federal employees would also end up paying more for their retirement benefits, without getting anything in return.

All in all, the president wants to cut $148.9 billion from employee pensions in the next decade — roughly $75,000 per federal worker, according to NFFE. And it’s not a small workforce, either: The US government is the largest employer in the country, with 2.1 million civilian employees. The vast majority of them live outside the Washington, DC, area.

more...

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/12/18261739/trump-budget-2019-federal-workers