Trump administration buried reports warning climate change could hurt crops: report

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) has reportedly refused to publicize widespread research on climate change while President TrumpDonald John TrumpConway defends herself against Hatch Act allegations amid threat of subpoena How to defuse Gulf tensions and avoid war with Iran Trump says ‘stubborn child’ Fed ‘blew it’ by not cutting rates MORE has been in office.

The USDA declined to issue press releases or announcements on more than 45 peer-reviewed studies that were cleared through the nonpartisan Agricultural Research Service, Politico reported on Sunday. The studies all point to the potential effects of climate change, ranging from the discovery that rice loses vitamins in a carbon-rich environment to a warning that increased temperatures could boost pollen levels and intensify allergy season, according to the news outlet.

Politico found that the Agricultural Research Service has issued two releases directly related to climate change since the start of Trump’s term in 2017 — one finding that beef production only contributes minimally to greenhouse gas emissions and another that not eating animal products could cause nutritional problems.

Another press release on soy processing reportedly called reducing fossil fuel use or emissions “a personal consideration” for farmers.

“The intent is to try to suppress a message — in this case, the increasing danger of human-caused climate change,” Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University who is known for taking on climate skeptics, told Politico. “Who loses out? The people, who are already suffering the impacts of sea level rise and unprecedented super storms, droughts, wildfires and heat waves.”  

Politico also reported that researchers at the University of Washington who collaborated with the USDA to study how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could affect rice for more than two years were told there “was not enough data” to publicize the study, even after the department prepared its own announcement.

“It was so unusual to have an agency basically say: ‘Don’t do a press release,’ ” Jeff Hodson, a University of Washington spokesperson, told Politico. “We stand for spreading the word about the science we do, especially when it has a potential impact on millions and millions of people.”  

A USDA spokesperson said that there were no directives to limit the spread of climate-related research.

“Research continues on these subjects and we promote the research once researchers are ready to announce the findings, after going through the appropriate reviews and clearances,” the spokesperson said.

“USDA has several thousand scientists and over 100,000 employees who work on myriad topics and issues; not every single finding or piece of work solicits a government press release,” the spokesperson added.

–This report was updated at 3:20 p.m.

Click Here: Sports Water Bottles

Bipartisan senators to introduce bill forcing online platforms to disclose value of user data

A bipartisan pair of senators on Monday will introduce a bill that would force social media companies to disclose the value of the data they collect from users, an attempt to shed light on how much the companies gain from monetizing their customers. 

Sens. Mark WarnerMark Robert WarnerGOP senators divided over approach to election security Hillicon Valley: House lawmakers reach deal on robocall bill | Laid-off journalists launch ads targeting tech giants | Apple seeks tariff exemptions | Facebook’s Libra invites scrutiny Schiff introduces bill to strengthen law barring campaigns from accepting foreign dirt MORE (D-Va.) and Josh HawleyJoshua (Josh) David HawleyHillicon Valley: House panel advances election security bill | GOP senator targets YouTube with bill on child exploitation | Hicks told Congress Trump camp felt ‘relief’ after release of Clinton docs | Commerce blacklists five Chinese tech groups GOP senator introduces bill to combat child exploitation on YouTube Hillicon Valley: Senate sets hearing on Facebook’s cryptocurrency plans | FTC reportedly investigating YouTube over children’s privacy | GOP senator riles tech with bill targeting liability shield | FAA pushed to approve drone deliveries MORE (R-Mo.), two of the upper chamber’s most vocal tech critics, unveiled the Designing Accounting Safeguards to Help Broaden Oversight And Regulations on Data (DASHBOARD) Act on Sunday night. 

“For years, social media companies have told consumers that their products are free to the user,” Warner said in a statement. “But that’s not true – you are paying with your data instead of your wallet.”

“But the overall lack of transparency and disclosure in this market have made it impossible for users to know what they’re giving up, who else their data is being shared with, or what it’s worth to the platform,” he added. 

The bill, reported first by Axios, would force top companies like Facebook and Google to regularly tell their users how much their data is worth, compile annual reports on the “aggregate value” of user data they collect, and tell users what they’re doing with the data they collect. The bill would also require companies to offer users the option to delete all or some of their data.  

It would only apply to online services with 100 million monthly active users, targeting the top tech outlets rather than smaller services.  

It would also empower the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to figure out the best ways to calculate the value of data. 

Most top social media companies – such as Facebook – make the majority of their money through the collection of user data, which they use to target advertisements. The bill would force the companies to offer more transparency around how much that data is worth and what they gain from collecting it. 

“Tech companies can sell our information to the highest bidder and use it to target us with creepy ads,” Hawley said in a statement. “Even worse, tech companies do their best to hide how much consumer data is worth and to whom it is sold.”

The legislation comes as bipartisan groups in both chambers work to craft the nation’s first comprehensive data privacy legislation.

“We look forward to continuing our ongoing conversations with the bill’s sponsors,” a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement. 

Facebook CEO Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergUnderstanding what Facebook’s Libra is — and what it isn’t Buckyballs, Facebook and the dangers of virtue-signaling Facebook’s new cryptocurrency raises red flags for critics MORE and other company executives this year have called for more government regulation of the Internet, signaling that the company will seek a seat at the table as policymakers around the world work up legislation on issues like data privacy and content moderation.

Zuckerberg in a March op-ed called for a “globally harmonized” framework on data privacy and protection. 

Click Here: bape jacket cheap

Cotton: I hope Trump's statement 'got through' to Iran's leaders

Sen. Tom CottonThomas (Tom) Bryant CottonCotton: I hope Trump’s statement ‘got through’ to Iran’s leaders Overnight Defense: US to send 1K more troops to Mideast amid Iran tensions | Iran threatens to break limit on uranium production in 10 days | US accuses Iran of ‘nuclear blackmail’ | Details on key defense bill amendments Iran announces it will exceed uranium stockpile restraints of nuclear deal MORE (R-Ark.) said Sunday he hopes President TrumpDonald John TrumpFormer Joint Chiefs chairman: ‘The last thing in the world we need right now is a war with Iran’ Pence: ‘We’re not convinced’ downing of drone was ‘authorized at the highest levels’ Trump: Bolton would take on the whole world at one time MORE‘s statement that the U.S. will not tolerate any attacks on American personnel “gets through to the leaders in Tehran.”

He added, however, that he worries about Tehran’s “long history” of stepping up aggression.

 

“I fear if Iran doesn’t have firm set of boundaries drawn around its behavior, we’re going to see an attack on U.S. ship or a U.S. manned aircraft,” he said.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Speaking to Chris WallaceChristopher (Chris) WallaceCotton: I hope Trump’s statement ‘got through’ to Iran’s leaders Trump hits polling on Fox News: ‘Something weird going on at Fox’ Scarborough: ‘What a joke’ for Pompeo to say Fox’s Wallace asks ridiculous questions MORE on “Fox News Sunday,” Cotton reiterated his support for a retaliatory strike against Iran, this time following the downing of a U.S. drone. Cotton last Sunday called for strikes following an attack on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman that the U.S. blamed on Iran.

 

“I think retaliatory strikes were warranted when talking about foreign vessels on the high seas and they are warranted against an unmanned U.S. aircraft,” he said this week.

Cotton also said the U.S. could have “a different kind of relationship” with Iran if the nation turned away from its “campaign of terror throughout the region,” but U.S. officials should maintain a “healthy skepticism.”

 

“We should keep a maximum pressure campaign on them and give them the opportunity to act like a normal nation and seek relief in exchange for verifiable commitments,” he said.

 

President Trump on Friday said he ordered a retaliatory strike against Iran but called it off after he learned the number of expected casualties. While he called the shooting down of the unmanned U.S. Navy surveillance drone a “very big mistake,” he also indicated he was reluctant to escalate the situation because no Americans were killed.

 

The move came on the heels of increasing tensions between the U.S. and Iran that many have feared could lead to armed conflict. The president pulled out of the Obama-era nuclear deal that offered Tehran sanctions relief for limiting its nuclear program and the White has since imposed numerous sanctions.

 

Iran announced last week it would exceed the limit the deal placed on its stockpile of enriched uranium.

Click Here: Sports Water Bottles

2020 Democrats vow to expand abortion access at Planned Parenthood event

Democratic presidential candidates were pressed on their support for abortion Saturday at a first-of-its-kind forum exclusively focused on reproductive rights.

The forum, hosted by Planned Parenthood in South Carolina, presented candidates with an opportunity to stand out on an issue that’s driven the Democratic primary so far.

But the forum also highlighted differences between candidates, with some, like Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenPrivate prisons’ stocks drop on Warren pledge Overnight Health Care: Key Trump drug pricing proposal takes step forward | Missouri Planned Parenthood clinic loses bid for license | 2020 Democrats to take part in Saturday forum on abortion rights Viral photo shows Warren sitting behind Sanders on flight to Miami MORE (D-Mass.), Bernie SandersBernie SandersOvernight Health Care: Key Trump drug pricing proposal takes step forward | Missouri Planned Parenthood clinic loses bid for license | 2020 Democrats to take part in Saturday forum on abortion rights Will we ever have another veteran as president? Viral photo shows Warren sitting behind Sanders on flight to Miami MORE (I-Vt.) and Kirsten GillibrandKirsten Elizabeth GillibrandOvernight Health Care: Key Trump drug pricing proposal takes step forward | Missouri Planned Parenthood clinic loses bid for license | 2020 Democrats to take part in Saturday forum on abortion rights On The Money: S&P hits record as stocks rally on Fed cut hopes | Facebook’s new cryptocurrency raises red flags for critics | Internal IRS watchdog rips agency’s taxpayer service | Apple seeks tariff relief Gillibrand introduces bill blocking HUD rule on undocumented public housing residents MORE (N.Y.) vowing to go further than others to protect and expand abortion access.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I will guarantee that no matter where you live in this country, all 50 states, you will have access to legal safe abortion procedures,” Gillibrand, the first speaker, told a small audience of Planned Parenthood supporters.

Democrats and abortion rights activists want to make abortion access a key issue in the 2020 presidential election after several states this year passed bans and restrictions on the procedure.

The goal of anti-abortion groups and Republican legislators is to force the Supreme Court to overturn or weaken Roe v. Wade, the landmark ruling that established a woman’s right to an abortion.

Some candidates, including Gillibrand, Warren, Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharHillicon Valley: House panel advances election security bill | GOP senator targets YouTube with bill on child exploitation | Hicks told Congress Trump camp felt ‘relief’ after release of Clinton docs | Commerce blacklists five Chinese tech groups Overnight Health Care: Key Trump drug pricing proposal takes step forward | Missouri Planned Parenthood clinic loses bid for license | 2020 Democrats to take part in Saturday forum on abortion rights On The Money: House, Senate at odds over border bills | Senate Democrats want details on tech probes | Commerce blacklists five Chinese tech groups MORE (Minn.), New York Mayor Bill de BlasioBill de BlasioOvernight Health Care: Key Trump drug pricing proposal takes step forward | Missouri Planned Parenthood clinic loses bid for license | 2020 Democrats to take part in Saturday forum on abortion rights Candidate de Blasio the progressive, meet Mayor de Blasio the regressive Delaware Democrat criticizes Biden comments: ‘We can’t make excuses’ for not learning MORE vowed to codify that ruling into federal law to protect abortion access.

“I say it is time to go on offense with Roe vs. Wade,” Warren said.

“It’s not enough to say we’re going to rely on the court. We need to pass a federal law to make Roe vs. Wade the law.”

Candidates were given 15 minutes to answer questions from moderators and the audience, who were employees and supporters of Planned Parenthood.

The questions were easy, and the invite-only audience was friendly, giving Democrats a safe space to talk about a divisive issue.

But former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenOvernight Health Care: Key Trump drug pricing proposal takes step forward | Missouri Planned Parenthood clinic loses bid for license | 2020 Democrats to take part in Saturday forum on abortion rights Will we ever have another veteran as president? Washington braces for Trump’s next move on Iran MORE struggled and stumbled over his words and seemed to purposely avoid saying “abortion.”

Biden, a devout Catholic, personally opposes abortion and faced backlash this month saying he supported the Hyde amendment, a longstanding ban on federal funding of abortions. 

He reversed his position after facing blowback from groups such as Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Biden struggled to explain his change of heart Saturday, saying it did not fit in with his health care plan, which he has not released yet.

Asked by moderators about his “mixed record” on abortion, Biden disagreed.

“I’m not sure about the mixed record part. I’ve had 100 percent voting record” before his mic stopped working.

He and most of the other candidates explicitly promised to “eliminate” all changes President TrumpDonald John TrumpThe global economy is a soap opera, expect some plot twists Huawei sues US government over seized equipment Trump defends planned ICE deportations MORE made to the Title X Family Planning program, to make the program “rationale and reasonable.”

The changes, which a federal judge ruled Friday could go into effect, bans Title X providers from referring women from abortions and would cut funds to Planned Parenthood.

He said he would also roll back the Mexico City Policy, a ban signed by Trump on federal aid to organizations that promote or provide abortions.

Other Democrats on the stage made it clear there’s no room in the party for candidates who don’t support abortion rights.

“I think right now, given the attacks that we’re seeing in recent years, on Planned Parenthood in particular, and on abortion rights in general, I think what we can do and must do is find candidates in every state in this country and every congressional district in this country who do support absolutely a woman’s right to control her own body,” said Sanders, who said he would “substantially” increase funding for Planned Parenthood.

De Blasio, taking a veiled shot at Biden, said: Can we just be clear that if you’re a Democrat, you’re against the Hyde Amendment? Period. Period. No choice.”

Click Here: kanken mini cheap

Security boosted at Iraqi military base home to US contractors: reports

Security has been boosted at an Iraqi military base housing American contractors, the Associated Press reported Saturday.

An Iraqi military official told the outlet that security measures are being implemented at the Balad air base as tensions between the U.S. and Iran spike.

“All unnecessary movements have been reduced,” Gen. Falah Fares said, adding that the curfew now lasts from sunset until sunrise, according to the AP.

ADVERTISEMENT

He said the change was made after Balad Air Base, home to a squadron of Iraqi F-16 fighter jets, was hit with three mortar shells last week. The curfew had previously been from midnight to sunrise, he said.

Three Iraqi sources told Reuters that beyond new security measures, the U.S. was considering moving hundreds of staff working for Lockheed Martin Corp and Sallyport Global from Balad.

Col. Kevin Walker, U.S. Air Forces Central Command Director of Force Protection, denied that U.S. forces are evacuating contractors in a statement to both outlets Saturday.

“Operations at Balad Air Base are continuing as normal. Claims that personnel are being evacuated are categorically false,” Walker said. “There are no plans at this time to evacuate any personnel from Balad.”

Walker also said that the military is constantly evaluating security levels.

“The safety and security of all Air Force personnel and those that provide services to the U.S. Air Force are constantly evaluated, and should there be increased threats to our people, the U.S. Air Force will put measures in place to provide the protections required,” he said.

The Department of Defense did not immediately respond to a request about the situation at Balad Air Base from The Hill.

Tensions between the U.S. and Iran have skyrocketed following an American drone being shot down by Iran. The two countries differ on where the drone was.

President TrumpDonald John TrumpThe global economy is a soap opera, expect some plot twists Huawei sues US government over seized equipment Trump defends planned ICE deportations MORE on Friday confirmed that the U.S. military was “cocked and loaded” to retaliate against Iran after the drone incident, but backed off at the last minute.

The U.S. also accused Tehran of bombing two foreign oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. Iran denied any involvement.

Overnight Energy: Trump proposal would nix agency reviews of long-term climate impacts | Greens rip decision | House votes to block offshore drilling for one year

TRUMP REVERSES ANOTHER OBAMA CLIMATE POLICY: The White House on Friday proposed reversing an Obama-era policy that directs agencies to consider the climate impact from various projects.

The draft guidance would change the way agencies evaluate the environmental effect of things like pipelines and oil and gas drilling.

“Agencies should analyze reasonably foreseeable environmental consequences of major Federal actions, but should not consider those that are remote or speculative,” the guidance said in a section about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The document added that agencies “need not give greater consideration to potential effects from GHG emissions than to other potential effects on the human environment.”

Context: The guidance from the White House Council on Environmental Quality comes just days after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a rollback of Obama-era regulation on emissions from power plants.

The guidance directs agencies to consider greenhouse gas emissions when “substantial enough to warrant quantification.” Agencies do not have to consider how a project might impact greenhouse emissions if doing so would be “overly speculative.”

It reverses a 2016 rule from the same council that directed agencies to analyze how the projects they approve will contribute to climate change. Trump withdrew the Obama-era guidance in April 2017.

Greens react: Environmental groups called the proposal an attack on environmental protection.

“Once again, the Trump administration is more than willing to change the rules to benefit their corporate polluter friends. Today’s actions do nothing but turn a blind eye to the climate crisis while further stripping oversight and safeguards in an effort to aid the fossil fuel industry,” the Sierra Club said in a statement, vowing to fight the proposal.

Read more about the guidance here.

 

TGIF! And welcome to Overnight Energy, The Hill’s roundup of the latest energy and environment news.

Please send tips and comments to Miranda Green, mgreen@thehill.com and Rebecca Beitsch, rbeitsch@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @mirandacgreen, @rebeccabeitsch and @thehill.

CLICK HERE to subscribe to our newsletter.

 

DEMS HIT PAUSE ON OFFSHORE DRILLING: A spending bill passed by the House late Thursday would block offshore drilling along most U.S. shores, taking development of all of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts off the table.

Passed as part of a bill funding the Department of the Interior, the measure would bar new offshore development through fiscal 2020.

Members on both sides of the aisle have pushed for measures that would limit drilling along their state’s shorelines. The collection of amendments included in the bill limit new development in most coastal waters, including the Florida portion of the Gulf of Mexico.

“It’s pretty cut and dry where I come from. We don’t want it and we don’t need it,” Rep. Joe CunninghamJoseph CunninghamHouse committee forwards bills to bar offshore drilling across US Key endorsements: A who’s who in early states Ex-congressman launching PAC to defend Dem seats in 2020 MORE (D-S.C.) said at a meeting earlier this week to review offshore drilling bans.

Another portion of the bill would block the seismic testing used to find oil and gas reserves.

The Trump administration has pushed an energy dominance strategy that includes further offshore drilling, but Interior Secretary David Bernhardt has yet to unveil the department’s five-year offshore drilling plan, citing the uncertainty surrounding an Alaska case that blocks development there.

A number of environmental groups expressed support for the spending bill.

Read more about the ban here.

 

ICYMI: FORMER EPA STAFFER SAYS WHEELER LIED TO CONGRESS: A longtime former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) staffer is accusing Administrator Andrew WheelerAndrew WheelerOvernight Energy: Fight over fuel standards intensifies | Democrats grill Trump officials over rule rollback | California official blasts EPA chief over broken talks | Former EPA official says Wheeler lied to Congress Former EPA staffer says Wheeler lied to Congress California official blasts EPA head over car standard negotiations MORE of lying in a letter he wrote to Congress Thursday that denied agency staff were shut out as EPA developed a controversial rollback on Obama-era fuel standards.

Critics of the rollback have long contended that the EPA sidelined its Office of Transportation and Air Quality when developing the rule. The office is home to the agency’s in-house lab for testing vehicles emissions.

Wheeler denied that accusation this week, but Jeff Alson, a former senior policy advisor to that office, said Wheeler is not telling the truth.

“I know that is a lie because I was there. I was one of 20 people at EPA working on this for a decade,” Alson told The Hill. Alson retired in April of last year after working 40 years at the agency.

The issue of sidelined staffers came to a head as lawmakers probed the stalled negotiations between EPA and California, which has long had more stringent standards for vehicle fuel economy and is fighting the EPA rollback.

As lawmakers grilled EPA officials over the failed negotiation, the EPA delivered a letter from Wheeler that blamed California for the standstill.

It also accused the state’s negotiator, California Air Resources Board Chair Mary Nichols, of incorrectly saying the Office of Transportation and Air Quality were shut out of the rulemaking process.

“Her testimony that EPA professional staff were cut out of this proposal’s development is false,” Wheeler wrote.

Alson said the administration has denied pushing aside career staff before, but he found this instance particularly grievous.

“To see it in a formal letter that was given to Congress and to specifically accuse someone else of lying when in reality that person was being truthful and when Administrator Wheeler was the one doing the lying, it just put me beyond the point of no return,” he said.

Read more on the controvery here.

 

ON TAP THIS WEEK:

On Tuesday, the House will hold hearings on uranium mining and protecting American waterways.

The Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee will review implementation of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

On Wednesday, House Natural Resources Chairman Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) will host an environmental justice summit.

On Thursday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing on storing nuclear waste.

 

OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY:

Massive fire breaks out at Philadelphia oil refinery, The Washington Post reports.

New Jersey just gave the green light to build the nation’s largest offshore wind farm, NJ Advance Media reports.

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs bill pledging $18 million to fight red tide, WGFL reports.

Click Here: bape jacket cheap

Hillary Clinton slams Title X 'gag rule': 'It's up to all of us to fight back'

Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonThe Hill’s Morning Report — US strikes approved against Iran pulled back Darrell Issa eyes return to Congress Hope Hicks: Trump campaign felt ‘relief’ after WikiLeaks released damaging info about Hillary Clinton MORE told activists to “fight back” on Friday after a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration could bar Title X providers from offering abortion services.

Clinton tweeted Friday morning that the move was part of a widespread GOP effort to roll back abortion rights across the country and warned that it would extend to all reproductive health care, not just abortion.

“The attack on Title X is not isolated. It’s clear that politicians who oppose reproductive health care are coming not just for abortion access, but all reproductive health care. It’s up to all of us to fight back. #ProtectX,” she tweeted.

Clinton’s comments came a day after a federal court in California ruled that a so-called “gag rule” which bars health care providers that receive funds under certain Title X provisions from discussing abortion was constitutional.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Absent a stay, [the Department of Health and Human Services] HHS will be forced to allow taxpayer dollars to be spent in a manner that it has concluded violates the law,” stated the ruling.

Clinton’s post contained a retweet of a statement from Planned Parenthood, which called the ruling a “devastating blow to the 4 million patients who obtain birth control, cancer screenings, and other essential care through Title X.”

Abortion rights have reentered the forefront of Democratic politics in recent weeks due to new laws in Alabama, Georgia, and other states severely restricting abortion services for women.

Click Here: bape jacket cheap

Hope Hicks: Trump campaign felt 'relief' after WikiLeaks released damaging info about Hillary Clinton

Former White House communications director Hope HicksHope Charlotte HicksNadler apologized after repeatedly calling Hope Hicks ‘Ms. Lewandowski’ at hearing The Hill’s Morning Report — US strikes approved against Iran pulled back Hope Hicks: Trump campaign felt ‘relief’ after WikiLeaks released damaging info about Hillary Clinton MORE told the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday that she and members of the Trump campaign were relieved to see Wikileaks release damaging information stolen from Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonThe Hill’s Morning Report — US strikes approved against Iran pulled back Darrell Issa eyes return to Congress Hope Hicks: Trump campaign felt ‘relief’ after WikiLeaks released damaging info about Hillary Clinton MORE‘s campaign.

During her closed-door interview with the committee, Hicks was asked by Rep. David CicillineDavid Nicola CicillineHope Hicks: Trump campaign felt ‘relief’ after WikiLeaks released damaging info about Hillary Clinton Hicks tells lawmakers: ‘I lived the Mueller report’ Hicks repeatedly blocked by White House from answering Judiciary questions MORE (D-R.I.) whether the campaign “was happy” to “receive information that was damaging to Hillary Clinton.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“I think that ‘happy’ is not – I don’t think that’s a fair characterization. I think ‘relief that we weren’t the only campaign with issues’ is more accurate,” Hicks said, according to a 273-page transcript of her interview.

Hicks also referenced the unverified dossier of claims about President TrumpDonald John TrumpAOC is the Trump-era hero we need Nadler apologized after repeatedly calling Hope Hicks ‘Ms. Lewandowski’ at hearing Trump confirms US was ‘cocked and loaded’ for Iran strike MORE‘s ties to Russia authored by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele during her testimony when asked if she would accept compromising information on an opponent during an election from a foreign source.

“I’m asking you this based on your experience and the expertise you’ve developed, would you take foreign oppo information from a foreign government, if that were offered when working on a political campaign?” Norm Eisen, a committee lawyer, asked Hicks.

“You know, knowing how much chaos has been sowed as a result of something like the Steele dossier, no, I would not,” Hicks responded.

Hicks’ testimony was met with derision from Democrats on Thursday after the White House’s order for her to not answer questions related to the Trump presidency or White House transition team resulted in many questions going unanswered.

“As a matter of longstanding executive branch precedent in the Department of Justice practice and advice, as a former senior adviser to the President, Ms. Hicks may not be compelled to speak about events that occurred during her service as a senior adviser to the President. That question touched upon that area,” a White House deputy counsel informed lawmakers, an explanation which committee chairman Rep. Jerry NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerNadler apologized after repeatedly calling Hope Hicks ‘Ms. Lewandowski’ at hearing Hope Hicks: Trump campaign felt ‘relief’ after WikiLeaks released damaging info about Hillary Clinton House hearing marks historic moment for slavery reparations debate MORE (D-N.Y.) called “absolute nonsense.”

Key Trump proposal to lower drug prices takes step forward

One of President TrumpDonald John TrumpAOC is the Trump-era hero we need Nadler apologized after repeatedly calling Hope Hicks ‘Ms. Lewandowski’ at hearing Trump confirms US was ‘cocked and loaded’ for Iran strike MORE’s major proposals to lower drug prices took a step forward on Friday.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent to the White House for review a proposal to lower certain drug prices in Medicare by linking them to the lower prices paid in other countries, an idea called the international pricing index.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump unveiled the original proposal in October, but it was in the early stages then, with several more steps in the regulatory process.

There has been some speculation that the administration would never actually finalize the rule, and was simply using it as a bargaining chip to push for other drug pricing changes.

But the move to send the proposal to the White House for review, along with supportive comments from HHS Secretary Alex Azar on Friday, indicate the idea is at least moving forward.

Azar said on Fox Business on Friday that the proposal was sent to the White House that morning and said it would help close the gap between what the United States pays for drugs and what other countries do.

“We’re going to end that foreign free-riding, we’re going to stop having America’s seniors propping up the socialist systems abroad at their expense, and we’re continuing to act,” Azar said.

It is unclear how long the process of White House review will take, and whether the White House will seek to make significant changes to the proposal.

The idea, which is a sharp departure from traditional free-market GOP thinking on drug prices, has drawn opposition from some congressional Republicans.

In fact, HHS sent the proposal to the White House for review just days after Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyOvernight Health Care: Trump officials defend changes to family planning program | Senators unveil bipartisan package on health costs | Democrats pass T spending bill with HHS funds Grassley announces opposition to key Trump proposal to lower drug prices On The Money: Trade chief defends Trump tariffs before skeptical Congress | Kudlow denies plan to demote Fed chief | Waters asks Facebook to halt cryptocurrency project MORE (R-Iowa) this week announced that he opposed the idea.

“I don’t think that this administration’s approach on international pricing is going to be to the benefit of the adoption of and research for modern drugs,” Grassley, who is working on his own drug pricing proposal, told reporters.

The pharmaceutical industry, a powerful force in Washington, is also fiercely opposed to the idea.  

Trump shows off Air Force One model in Oval Office

President TrumpDonald John TrumpBooker hits Biden’s defense of remarks about segregationist senators: ‘He’s better than this’ Booker hits Biden’s defense of remarks about segregationist senators: ‘He’s better than this’ Trump says Democrats are handing out subpoenas ‘like they’re cookies’ MORE on Thursday displayed a model of a redesigned Air Force One during an Oval Office meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin TrudeauJustin Pierre James TrudeauTrudeau pledges to invest revenue from oil pipeline into clean energy Trudeau pledges to invest revenue from oil pipeline into clean energy AFL-CIO president laughs at Trump’s assertion that unions support new trade pact MORE.

The plane featured a red, white and blue paint design, which Trump has been pushing for as part of a contract for new Air Force One jets.

The model plane sat on a desk in front of the two leaders as they discussed Iran, China and other topics for roughly 10 minutes.

“It’s going to be terrific,” Trump said of the new plane, calling it an “upgrade” over the current model.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump last week shared renderings of the redesigned presidential plane during an interview with ABC’s George StephanopoulosGeorge Robert StephanopoulosMellman: Eroding the rule of law Mellman: Eroding the rule of law Webb: President Trump is right MORE. The red, white and blue design would replace the traditional white and baby blue that has been used on the presidential aircraft dating back to the Kennedy administration.

Some observers noted that the new pattern is similar to the former Trump Shuttle planes that the president managed decades ago as a private businessman.

The new Boeing planes are set to be delivered by the end of 2024, which would be the end of a possible second term for Trump.

Click Here: kanken mini cheap

The president’s desired redesign could face a roadblock, as a House panel voted last week to approve an amendment that would require the Trump administration to get congressional approval for any “work relating to aircraft paint scheme, interiors and livery” before it takes place.