July 25, 2015

Lee Hopes to Use Nuclear Option to Repeal Obamacare

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) announced that “he plans to use a complicated procedural maneuver known as the nuclear option to repeal the Affordable Care Act with just 51 votes,” the Washington Post reports.

“Democrats famously used the strategy in 2013 to break a Republican blockade of President Obama’s nominees to fill judicial openings. Now Lee wants to use the partisan procedure get rid of Obamacare.”

“It’s unclear whether Lee’s gambit will work — but if it does, there are likely 51 senators who would vote to repeal Obama’s signature domestic achievement. The issue is whether such language can get a vote on the Senate floor to begin with.”

###

http://politicalwire.com/2015/07/25/lee-hopes-to-use-nuclear-option-to-repeal-obamacare/

July 25, 2015

Here’s how the New York Times bungled the Hillary Clinton emails story

NEWSWEEK
25 JUL 2015 AT 08:52 ET

What the hell is happening at The New York Times?

In March, the newspaper published a highly touted article about Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email account that, as I wrote in an earlier column, was wrong in its major points. The Times’s public editor defended that piece, linking to a lengthy series of regulations that, in fact, proved the allegations contained in the article were false. While there has since been a lot of partisan hullaballoo about “email-bogus-gate”—something to be expected when the story involves a political party’s presidential front-runner—the reality remained that, when it came to this story, there was no there there.

Then, on Thursday night, the Times dropped a bombshell: Two government inspectors general had made a criminal referral to the Justice Department about Clinton and her handling of the emails. The story was largely impenetrable, because at no point did it offer even a suggestion of what might constitute a crime. By Friday morning, the Times did what is known in the media trade as a “skin back”—the article now said the criminal referral wasn’t about Clinton but about the department’s handling of emails. Still, it conveyed no indication of what possible crime might be involved.

The story seemed to further fall apart on Friday morning when Representative Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) issued a statement saying that he had spoken to the inspector general of the State Department and that there had been no criminal referral regarding Clinton’s email usage. Rather, Cummings said, the inspectors general for State and the intelligence community had simply notified the Justice Department—which issues the regulations on Freedom of Information Act requests—that some emails subject to FOIA review had been identified as classified when they had not previously been designated that way.

So had the Times mixed up a criminal referral—a major news event—with a notification to the department responsible for overseeing FOIA errors that might affect some documents’ release? It’s impossible to tell, because the Times story—complete with its lack of identification of any possible criminal activity—continues to mention a criminal referral.

But based on a review of documents from the inspectors general, the problems with the story may be worse than that—much, much worse. The reason my last sentence says may is this: There is a possibility—however unlikely—that the Times cited documents in its article that have the same dates and the same quotes but are different from the records I have reviewed. I emailed Dean Baquet, the Times’s executive editor, to ask if there are some other records the paper has and a series of other questions, but received no response. (Full disclosure: I’m a former senior writer for the Times and have worked with Baquet in the past.)

more
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/heres-how-the-new-york-times-bungled-the-hillary-clinton-emails-story/

July 25, 2015

MSNBC host ridicules Republican campaign ad using fake photo of Obama with Iranian leader

MSNBC host Chris Hayes mocked a Republican political action committee on Friday for airing a commercial backing Sen. Russ Johnson (R-WI) in party by using a photo of President Barack Obama purportedly shaking hands with his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rouhani.

“This is really amazing — can you believe that President Obama actually shaking hands with the president of Iran?” Hayes asked sarcastically. “Of course, he never did that.” In reality, Hayes explained, the two leaders have never met in person.

“It would be monumental news if they had,” he said, adding that the picture appeared to have been photoshopped from an image of Obama meeting then-Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in 2011.

The All In host also pointed out that Restoration PAC, the Illinois-based group behind the commercial, reacted somewhat defensively when asked about the discrepancy by Buzzfeed.

“I don’t know what you’re talking about,” Restoration spokesperson Dan Curry said on Thursday. “You’re saying that’s a photoshop — can you explain what you’re talking about?”

more
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/msnbc-host-ridicules-republican-campaign-ad-using-fake-photo-of-obama-with-iranian-leader/

July 25, 2015

Donald Trump is an actual fascist: What his surging popularity says about the GOP base

The word "fascist" has been abused by the left over the years. But a look at Trump's rhetoric shows scary parallels

CONOR LYNCH

In the political discussion of today, there always comes a risk of being discounted as a crackpot when using a word like “fascist” to describe a political opponent. The word, much like “socialist,” has been so abused since the fall of fascism that it lost its meaning quite some time ago. Comparisons of modern leaders to Hitler tend to be completely void of any substance, and there is even an Internet adage, “Godwin’s law,” that says, “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.”

In a recent article by Jeffrey Tucker, however, it is argued, quite justly in my opinion, that Donald Trump, whether he knows it or not, is a fascist (or is at least acting like one). Much like Mussolini and Hitler, Trump is a demagogue dedicated to riling up the people (particularly conservatives) with race baiting, traditionalism and strongman tough talk — and, according to polls, it’s working — for now. Tucker writes:

“Trump has tapped into it, absorbing unto his own political ambitions every conceivable resentment (race, class, sex, religion, economic) and promising a new order of things under his mighty hand.”

No doubt about it, Donald Trump has decided to stir the pot, and, as Tucker says, he seems to be running for a CEO position, rather than president of a nation. Trump discusses Iran and Mexico as if they were competing corporations, and says that, as president, or CEO, he will drive them into the ground, make them file for bankruptcy — something Trump legitimately knows a thing or two about. Trump, of course, is largely taken as a joke, and most rational commentators assume he is doing this for publicity — which he is certainly getting.

more
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/25/donald_trump_is_an_actual_fascist_what_his_surging_popularity_says_about_the_gop_base/

July 25, 2015

How Did This Happen Exactly? - By Josh Marshall

I've watching this New York Times blockbuster about the now non-existent criminal referral about Hillary Clinton's emails. And it is one of these stories that didn't just come apart in one big way. It fell apart in several different big ways over the course of the day. Former Times reporter Kurt Eichenwald has a good dissection of how it all unfolded that makes a pretty good case that even now - post corrections and sorta retractions - the piece still contains major omissions and distortions.

One thing worth noting is that if you're going to publish a piece that really lands a big blow on the Clintons, you really need to be a totally certain it's not entirely wrong. Because, man, they will never let you hear the end of it!

But as I said in the title, how did this happen exactly?

Journalists get things wrong. You can do everything right and still get it wrong. That's in the nature of writing the first draft of history. And that's why a journalist's greatest ally is fear and a bit of obsessive anxiety.

What I frequently tell reporters who I work with is to run this little thought experiment when you're about to publish a big piece or something a lot rides on. Pretend that the story blows up in your face. And you have to explain to me or your editor what went wrong. If you're the reporter in that case, you take your lumps but when you have that conversation you really want to be able to say and explain how you covered every base, checked every box on the list and it still went wrong. When you go through that exercise it often makes you think of some box that hasn't been checked that you really want to have checked if you find yourself in a real version of that hypothetical conversation.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/how-did-this-happen-exactly

July 25, 2015

California AG To Review Planned Parenthood 'Sting' Videos

Source: ASSOCIATED PRESS

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Attorney General Kamala Harris said Friday that she plans to review two undercover videos released by anti-abortion activists aimed at discrediting Planned Parenthood's procedures for providing fetal tissue to researchers, to see if any laws were broken.

Harris announced the move in a letter to four Democratic members of Congress who had requested an investigation, saying she'll use her office's authority to regulate charity organizations to see if the organization that made the videos violated registration or reporting requirements, or broke any other rules. Harris, a Democrat, plans to run for the U.S. Senate in 2016.

"We will carefully review the allegations raised in your letter to determine whether there were any violations of California law," Harris said in the letter to four members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

She said her office will look into "allegations that individuals impersonated corporate officials from a fake biologics company, resulting in the release of secretly filmed videos of Planned Parenthood physicians without their consent."

-snip-


Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/california-review-planned-parenthood-videos

July 25, 2015

Another shoddy Clinton smear: Anatomy of the New York Times’ epic email screw-up

NYT initially reports Hillary may become target of criminal probe -- and then watches its story fall apart

SOPHIA TESFAYE

Late last night, The New York Times published an anonymously sourced reported, titled ”Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email,” that claimed two inspectors general asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether the Democratic presidential frontrunner “mishandled” sensitive government information by using a personal email account and server while she was secretary of state. That story quickly fizzled by early Friday morning, with the Justice Department quashing talk of a criminal probe, although a new report claims Clinton sent at least four emails that contained classified intelligence community information from her private server while at the State Department.

A spokesperson for the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community confirmed to the Wall Street Journal that a review of 40 of the 30,000 emails Clinton has released from her time in office found that four “were classified when they were sent and are classified now.” Clinton had previously claimed she never sent classified emails using her personal server, although the State Department has later acknowledged that some information in the messages should be retroactively classified.

“I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material,” Clinton claimed during a press conference on her email use in March. “I’m certainly aware of the classified requirements and did not send classified material.”

But earlier this month, I. Charles McCullough III, the intelligence community’s inspector general, informed the FBI of a “potential compromise of classified information” regarding Clinton’s email. His spokesperson explained that it was a counterintelligence referral and that “office is statutorily required to refer compromises of national security information” because the inspector general’s office does not handle comprise cases.

more
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/24/another_shoddy_clinton_smear_anatomy_of_the_new_york_times_epic_email_screw_up/

July 25, 2015

Officials deny report that U.S. preparing to release Israeli spy

Source: Reuters

U.S. officials on Friday denied a Wall Street Journal report that the Obama administration was considering early release for Jonathan Pollard, a former U.S. Navy intelligence officer convicted of spying for Israel.

The Justice Department said Pollard must serve his full 30-year sentence. It stressed that he has long been eligible for consideration for parole in November but insisted that the administration has no say in how that process unfolds.

One U.S. official rejected the notion that Pollard's release would have anything to do with trying to smooth tense relations with Israel over President Barack Obama's nuclear deal with Iran, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fiercely opposes.

The Journal reported that some U.S. officials are pushing for Pollard's release in a matter of weeks, while others expect it could take months, possibly at his parole consideration date in November.

Read more: http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/07/24/usa-spy-pollard-idINKCN0PY2AT20150724

July 25, 2015

Chris Matthews calls out Ted Cruz for surge in right-wing “support” for Bernie Sanders...

Chris Matthews calls out Ted Cruz for surge in right-wing “support” for Bernie Sanders: “I know what you’re up to”

"It's called trouble-making," he said

SCOTT ERIC KAUFMAN

On “Hardball” Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz told host Chris Matthews that he is “in complete agreement” with fellow senator Bernie Sanders on a number of issues, including corporate welfare.

“Far too many Democrats — and I will readily admit far too many Republicans — are supporting hundreds of billions of dollars of loan guarantees to giant corporations at the expense of the taxpayers,” Cruz said. “I think people are fed up with that. They want someone who will stand with the working man and woman against the bipartisan corruption of Washington.”

Matthews sensed that Cruz’s support of Sanders originated from a place of deep dishonesty, and asked, “is that a strategy on the right, to build up Bernie Sanders?”

“I’ve said it for a long time,” Cruz replied, “I like and respect Bernie Sanders.”

“Yes,” Matthews said, “but you’re building him up. You just did it. You took an opportunity there to build him up. What is the strategy to build up Bernie Sanders from the right-wing perspective?”

Cruz replied that “Bernie admits he’s a socialist, we can at least have an honest debate” — suggesting that it’s impossible to have “an honest debate” with covert socialists like President Barack Obama or Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

more + video
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/24/chris_matthews_calls_out_ted_cruz_for_surge_in_right_wing_support_of_bernie_sanders_i_know_what_youre_up_to/

July 25, 2015

Take it from a guy who knows: Nader says Trump’s third party bid could be kryptonite for GOP

Take it from a guy who knows: Ralph Nader says Donald Trump’s third party bid could be kryptonite for GOP

The perennial third-party presidential candidate says Trump can cause the GOP big headaches

SOPHIA TESFAYE

Donald Trump has floated a potential third-party run should the GOP run him out of the Republican primary and Ralph Nader, who has his own extensive (and controversial) history with running as a third-party candidate, thinks the Republican Party should take his threats seriously.

“The Republican Party establishment is playing with nitroglycerine when it goes after Donald Trump and tries to minimize him and exclude him,” Nader told CNN this week. “Because a jilted Donald Trump as a third-party candidate can blow the presidential race wide open and turn it into a three way race.”

Nader, who’s been tagged with the title of “spoiler” over charges that his 2000 Green Party run allowed George W. Bush to prevail over Al Gore, is a four time third-party candidate who argues that Trump has nothing to lose with an independent run. Writing in a blog post last month, Nader argued that Trump’s candidacy alone is “a big nightmare for Republican contenders,” citing the media attention to sucks up and away from the other 15 contenders:

If he survives the first three months of mass media drubbing him and his notorious affliction of ‘leaving no impulsive opinion behind,’ he’s going to be trouble for the other fifteen or so Republican presidential candidates.

(...)

If he is still campaigning by Labor Day, watch out Republicans!

(...)

If the Republican bigwigs try to exclude or humiliate him, Trump has the means to run as an Independent candidate for president – as Mr. Perot essentially did under the banner of his Reform Party. Just the prospect of that added nightmare might induce caution at the top levels of the GOP.

more
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/24/take_it_from_a_guy_who_knows_ralph_nader_says_donald_trumps_third_party_bid_could_be_kryptonite_for_gop/