Pentagon official starts impeachment testimony after GOP protest causes 5-hour delay

October 24, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Five hours after it was scheduled to begin, a top Pentagon official provided testimony in the Capitol, where dozens of House Republicans had blocked her Wednesday morning deposition to protest the procedures underlying the Democrats’ impeachment probe.

Laura Cooper, the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, had arrived in the Capitol well before the 10 a.m. closed-door hearing was slated to start. A short while later, dozens of Republicans — none of whom were members of the three committees of jurisdiction — stormed into the secure meeting room to protest what they argued was a lack of transparency governing the impeachment process.

Click Here: cheap true religion jeans
“This should have happened in the light of day, and every member should be able to have input,” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthyThe Memo: Trump ‘lynching’ firestorm is sign of things to come McConnell: Trump lynching comment ‘an unfortunate choice of words’ White House spokesman: Trump didn’t mean to compare his experience with ‘darkest moments’ in US history MORE (R-Calif.), who endorsed — but did not participate directly — in the sit-in.

“When you’re talking impeachment, you’re taking about removing a duly elected person from office. You should have due process,” he added.

The list of protesting Republicans included a number of House Freedom Caucus members, such as Reps. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) and Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzLawmakers from both sides of the aisle mourn Cummings The Hill’s Morning Report – Tempers boil over at the White House Schiff says committees will eventually make impeachment inquiry transcripts public MORE (R-Fla.), and at least one member of GOP leadership, Minority Whip Steve ScaliseStephen (Steve) Joseph ScaliseMcCarthy on Trump’s ‘lynching’ comparison: ‘That’s not the language I would use’ House rejects GOP measure censuring Schiff This week: Tensions flare over Schiff, impeachment inquiry MORE (R-La.).

Cooper was not in the deposition room when the wave of protesting Republicans arrived, according to lawmakers in the room at the time.

It’s unclear how the hours-long standoff was resolved.

House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving was seen going into the secure room around 2:30 p.m. But Democrats had rejected the idea that they would demand the physical removal of protesting Republicans, even as House rules stipulate that such depositions are limited to members of the relevant committees.

Cooper was summoned to testify because she would have had a hand in overseeing the military aid to Ukraine that President TrumpDonald John TrumpGraham to introduce resolution condemning House impeachment inquiry Support for impeachment inches up in poll Fox News’s Bret Baier calls Trump’s attacks on media ‘a problem’ MORE had withheld over the summer. That decision is a key component of the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, particularly after a whistleblower’s allegations that Trump had dangled the funds to pressure Ukrainian leaders for political favors.

Cooper did not deliver opening remarks when her testimony finally began Wednesday afternoon, according to lawmakers in the room.

Behind Rep. Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffThe strange case of ‘Dr. Trump’ and ‘Mr. Tweet’ The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump faces backlash for comparing impeachment to ‘lynching’ House Republican: Schiff ‘should not be leading this whole inquiry’ MORE (D-Calif.), the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Democrats have been charging ahead with their impeachment investigation. While they haven’t put a timeline on the process, Democrats have said they would like to move “expediently” toward a yet unknown conclusion.

Lawmakers hammer Zuckerberg over Facebook controversies

October 24, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Facebook CEO Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergZuckerberg set for grilling over Facebook cryptocurrency On The Money: Waters clashes with Trump officials over ‘disastrous’ housing finance plan | Dems jump into Trump turf war over student loans | House passes bill targeting anonymous shell companies Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg would support delaying Libra | More attorneys general join Facebook probe | Defense chief recuses from ‘war cloud’ contract | Senate GOP blocks two election security bills | FTC brings case against ‘stalking’ app developer MORE on Wednesday fielded sharp criticism and tough questions about nearly all aspects of his company’s business practices at a hearing about Facebook’s new cryptocurrency project Libra.

The aggressive questioning underlined how difficult it will be for the Libra project to move past the baggage of Facebook’s various controversies, which have angered lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

During the House Financial Services Committee hearing, Zuckerberg found some allies in Republican lawmakers who praised the tech executive’s “entrepreneurial spirit” and the “innovation” of the Libra coin.

But over the course of the day, Republicans and Democrats alike pummeled Zuckerberg over Facebook-related issues, including the continued presence of hate groups on the platform, the company’s struggles to stave off foreign election interference, its policies on disinformation, how the company treats its content moderators and why it hopes to move into the financial services space when it is already facing intensifying scrutiny of its market dominance.

“As I have examined Facebook’s various problems, I have come to the conclusion that it would be beneficial for all if Facebook concentrates on addressing its many existing deficiencies and failures before proceeding any further on the Libra project,” House Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine WatersMaxine Moore WatersOn The Money: Waters clashes with Trump officials over ‘disastrous’ housing finance plan | Dems jump into Trump turf war over student loans | House passes bill targeting anonymous shell companies House passes bill taking aim at anonymous shell companies Avoiding the snake in the grass: Let’s not allow impeachment to divide us MORE (D-Calif.) said during her opening remarks.

“You have opened up a serious discussion about whether Facebook should be broken up,” Waters said, adding her voice to the chorus of policymakers around the world who have questioned whether Facebook is too big and powerful.

Zuckerberg remained serious and reserved throughout the six-hour hearing and even seemed aggravated during particularly rough lines of questioning as the day wore on. Lawmakers on the committee, led by Waters, have called for Zuckerberg to pause the Libra project until the companies involved can address the outstanding regulatory concerns around the coin.

“We’ve faced a lot of issues over the past few years,” Zuckerberg conceded. “I’m sure there are a lot of people who wish it was anyone but Facebook who is helping to put this forward.”

“But there’s a reason we care about this,” he continued. “Facebook is about putting power in peoples’ hands.”

Zuckerberg offered a staunch defense of the controversial cryptocurrency project, which has faced skepticism and pushback from regulators around the world since Facebook announced its plans over the summer. He said the cryptocurrency project could help bring financial services into the hands of billions of people worldwide.

While he reminded lawmakers that he cannot speak for the broader Libra Association, the 21-member entity tasked with overseeing the cryptocurrency’s launch, lawmakers insisted the cryptocurrency is inextricably tied to Zuckerberg and Facebook.

“Libra is Facebook, and Facebook is you,” said Rep. Ayanna PressleyAyanna PressleyAOC: Trump comparing impeachment inquiry to a lynching is ‘atrocious’ These 3 women are defining the race to unseat Trump Ocasio-Cortez mourns Cummings: ‘A devastating loss for our country’ MORE (D-Mass.). “You’ve proven we cannot trust you with our emails, with our phone numbers, so why should we trust you with our hard-earned money?”

Libra’s complex structure and massive scale will likely be subject to a vast array of banking, securities, money laundering and illicit finance laws enforced by close to a dozen agencies and departments.

Even the most industry-friendly lawmakers and regulators have expressed alarm about the potential financial impact of a project already primed with 2 billion potential customers.

“I think we should advance. I think we should seek innovation. I’m not opposed to some of the things that you’re trying to do,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.).

“I’m gravely, gravely concerned about the implications they may have, the operation of it, but I think we need to give it due consideration,” Loudermilk continued, adding Libra doesn’t “fit in a box.”

As a payments system, Libra would be forced to monitor transactions to make sure they don’t run afoul of illicit finance laws enforced by the Treasury Department.

While Libra does not intend to be a bank, it could still draw scrutiny from several federal bank watchdogs. Because Libra uses a cryptocurrency, that also brings the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission into the fold.

And Libra’s broader impact on the global financial system will involve the Federal Reserve, whose chairman, Jerome Powell, urged Libra to hit the breaks or risk serious regulatory backlash.

“You’re creating a whole new currency that could potentially be anonymous and could hide all types of criminal activity,” said Rep. Carolyn MaloneyCarolyn Bosher MaloneyHouse passes bill taking aim at anonymous shell companies An unintended burden on small businesses House Republicans ‘demand the release of the rules’ on impeachment MORE (D-N.Y.), who called Libra “a huge concern to all Americans and national security.”

The Libra project is still in its very early stages. Facebook released a white paper laying out its vision over the summer, and the 21 initial members of the Libra Association signed on to its charter just last week. Throughout the day, Zuckerberg emphasized there are still many unresolved questions around what the coin could look like by the time it is launched.

“I actually don’t know if Libra is going to work,” Zuckerberg said.

Right now, the executive said, the founding companies behind the coin are “making sure we can architect a system that works and gets the appropriate regulatory approvals.”

Click Here: cheap true religion jeans

He repeatedly committed that Facebook, currently the Libra coin’s only financial backer, would not support launching the project until U.S. regulators have gotten behind it. He added that Facebook would leave the project entirely if the association tries to launch the cryptocurrency without the go-ahead from concerned regulators.

Zuckerberg’s appearance before the House panel came more than a year since he testified about the Cambridge Analytica scandal in a series of widely publicized congressional hearings. His return before Congress comes amid a broader Washington backlash as lawmakers and 2020 Democrats have ratcheted up scrutiny of Big Tech over issues including user privacy, market dominance and election interference.

The past year has seen a swirl of new controversies, scandals and investigations erupt around Facebook. Just after the company settled for a record-shattering $5 billion fine with the Federal Trade Commission over charges of privacy violations, the company revealed it is facing a separate antitrust investigation from that agency. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice and a team of bipartisan House lawmakers are also probing whether Facebook uses its market dominance in digital advertising and social media to quash competitors and take advantage of users.

“I don’t think we can trust you,” said Rep. Jesús García (D-Ill.), who has introduced a bill that would quash the Libra project. “Facebook has acquired too much power, it has become too big, and we should seriously consider breaking it up.”

At the end of the hearing, Waters and the top Republican on the committee said there are still a litany of outstanding concerns around the cryptocurrency effort.

“We still don’t have a deeper understanding of how Libra will work, how it will further financial inclusion … or how it may expand access to financial services for Americans that need it most,” ranking member Patrick McHenryPatrick Timothy McHenryHouse passes bill taking aim at anonymous shell companies Waters clashes with Trump officials over ‘disastrous’ housing plans House committee pressing Zuckerberg to testify on digital currency Libra MORE (R-N.C.) said.

After the hearing, Waters told reporters that she was not satisfied yet, though she was pleased that Zuckerberg came to testify.

Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg would support delaying Libra | More attorneys general join Facebook probe | Defense chief recuses from 'war cloud' contract | Senate GOP blocks two election security bills | FTC brings case against 'stalking' app developer

October 24, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Welcome to Hillicon Valley, The Hill’s newsletter detailing all you need to know about the tech and cyber news from Capitol Hill to Silicon Valley. If you don’t already, be sure to sign up for our newsletter with this LINK.

Welcome! Follow the cyber team, Maggie Miller (@magmill95), and the tech team, Emily Birnbaum (@birnbaum_e) and Chris Mills Rodrigo (@chrisismills)

ZUCKERBERG TEES UP DEFENSE: Facebook CEO Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergZuckerberg set for grilling over Facebook cryptocurrency On The Money: Waters clashes with Trump officials over ‘disastrous’ housing finance plan | Dems jump into Trump turf war over student loans | House passes bill targeting anonymous shell companies Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg would support delaying Libra | More attorneys general join Facebook probe | Defense chief recuses from ‘war cloud’ contract | Senate GOP blocks two election security bills | FTC brings case against ‘stalking’ app developer MORE is set to tell House lawmakers that he would support a delay of the company’s Libra cryptocurrency project until regulators are satisfied.

Zuckerberg will make the remarks as part of his testimony before the House Financial Services Committee, which is set to hold a hearing on the digital currency on Wednesday.

Members of the committee from both parties have raised sharp concerns over Facebook’s proposed 2020 launch date for the Libra, which is facing intensive financial regulatory scrutiny around the world.

What he’ll say: “Some have suggested that we intend to circumvent regulators and regulations,” Zuckerberg will say, according to his prepared testimony. “We want to be clear: Facebook will not be a part of launching the Libra payments system anywhere in the world unless all U.S. regulators approve it.”

“And we support Libra delaying its launch until it has fully addressed US regulatory concerns,” he said.

Pushing the 2020 date: When Facebook first announced the Libra project, it said it was planning to launch the coin by next year. But executives have recently been tempering that date, and David Marcus — the head of Calibra, the Facebook subsidiary helping to launch the cryptocurrency — told reporters last week to think of 2020 as an ambitious goal.

“We co-wrote a white paper to begin a dialogue with experts and the regulators and policymakers who oversee the stability and security of our financial systems,” Zuckerberg will say. “It was never intended to be the final word on the project. The goal was to signal the direction we want to go and to start a conversation about how to get there. That conversation is ongoing.”

Zuckerberg is certain to face a grilling from lawmakers at the hearing, who peppered Marcus with questions and criticisms for hours at a hearing over the summer.

Read more on Zuckerberg’s prepared testimony here.

GET ON BOARD: Forty-seven attorneys general have joined onto the recently announced antitrust investigation into Facebook, the New York attorney general’s office announced Tuesday, super-charging a probe that comes amid broader scrutiny of Big Tech by the U.S. government.

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced that a broad range of states, represented by both Democratic and Republican attorneys general, will participate in probing Facebook’s market dominance and business practices over the next several months.

The investigation has grown significantly since James launched the probe in June with then just seven other attorneys general.

“After continued bipartisan conversations with attorneys general from around the country, today I am announcing that we have vastly expanded the list of states, districts, and territories investigating Facebook for potential antitrust violations,” James said in a statement on Tuesday.

“Our investigation now has the support of 47 attorneys general from around the nation, who are all concerned that Facebook may have put consumer data at risk, reduced the quality of consumers’ choices, and increased the price of advertising,” she said. “As we continue our investigation, we will use every investigative tool at our disposal to determine whether Facebook’s actions stifled competition and put users at risk.”

House committee advances measure taxing nicotine in vaping products

October 24, 2019 KANKENNEWS

The House Ways and Means Committee approved legislation Wednesday that would impose a federal tax on the nicotine used in liquid vaping products.

The move comes amid growing concerns over the health effects of vaping, as a respiratory illness linked to vaping products spreads across the country.

The panel approved the measure in a mostly party-line vote of 24 to 15, with Rep. Lloyd DoggettLloyd Alton DoggettHouse progressives to push for floor amendments on Pelosi drug price bill Overnight Health Care — Presented by Partnership for America’s Health Care Future — Four companies reach 0M settlement in opioid lawsuit | Deal opens door to larger settlements | House panel to consider vaping tax | Drug pricing markup tomorrow Overnight Health Care — Presented by National Taxpayers Union —Dem wants more changes to Pelosi drug pricing bill | Ebola outbreak wanes, but funding lags | Johnson & Johnson recalls batch of baby powder after asbestos traces found MORE (D-Texas) voting present. Two Republicans, Reps. Tom RiceHugh (Tom) Thompson RiceHouse committee advances measure taxing nicotine in vaping products Democrats struggle with repeal of key Trump tax provision The Hill’s Morning Report – Trump struggles to replicate 2016 coalition MORE (S.C.) and Vern BuchananVernon Gale BuchananMORE (Fla.), voted with Democrats, while Rep. Stephanie MurphyStephanie MurphyLawmakers set to host fundraisers focused on Nats’ World Series trip House Democrats change drug pricing bill in bid to address progressive concerns Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg to testify on Libra | Extremists find home on Telegram app | Warren blasts Facebook for not removing anti-Biden ad | California outlaws facial recognition in police body cameras | China rips US tech sanctions MORE (D-Fla.) joined Republicans in opposing the measure.

Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), the bill’s sponsor, said the new tax would help decrease use of vaping products, particularly among teens and young adults.

Click Here: cheap INTERNATIONAL jersey

“A whole generation of our children are getting addicted to nicotine” through the use of vaping products, Suozzi said at Wednesday’s markup. “For young people especially, who have less money and therefore higher price elasticity, taxes on vaping products are an effective way to decrease usage.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention this month said the median age of patients affected by the vaping illness is 23, and 79 percent of the patients are under the age of 35.

Tom Barthold, chief of staff for the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), told lawmakers that the proposed tax would lead to a projected 22 percent annual reduction in use of the affected vaping products.

The bill would extend the federal tax on nicotine in cigarettes to nicotine in vaping products, raising about $10 billion over a decade, according to the JCT.

Several GOP members voiced concerns that the bill would not impose a tax on vaping products with THC, the main psychoactive compound in marijuana, despite the CDC’s findings of a greater correlation between THC vaping products and the illnesses than with nicotine vaping products.

Rep. George HoldingGeorge Edward Bell HoldingBetsy DeVos’s playbook of political correctness Education Dept. cites disproportionate focus on ‘positive aspects of Islam’ in reviewing UNC-Duke grant funding Delay of new trade deal harms America’s digital advantage MORE (R), whose North Carolina district includes tobacco businesses, argued that a tax on nicotine products alone would be ineffective.

He said the bill would make CBD and THC products relatively more affordable compared to nicotine vapor products subject to the proposed tax.

“If we actually want to address the recent rise in vaping-related lung illnesses, it’s intuitively obvious that these THC products are actually what we should be looking at,” Holding added.

The committee also approved by voice vote three bipartisan bills that would require certain high-deductible health plans to cover the cost of inhalers, allow the use of tax-advantaged accounts to purchase over-the-counter medications and menstrual-care products and expand accessibility to health savings accounts.

“This is a good package of bills, and I support each one individually,” Murphy said at the markup. “But the revenue generated from the vaping bill is not enough to pay for the new spending in the three other measures.”

Suozzi’s office has argued that the revenue from the vaping bill would cover the costs of the other three measures.

Updated at 7:13 p.m.

Former Pete Sessions staffer to comply with subpoena in federal probe investigating Giuliani, associates

October 24, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Federal prosecutors have subpoenaed a longtime aide to former Rep. Pete SessionsPeter Anderson SessionsFourth defendant in Giuliani associate case taken into custody at New York airport The Hill’s Morning Report – Dem debate contenders take aim at Warren Former GOP lawmaker Pete Sessions subpoenaed over dealings with Giuliani associates MORE (R-Texas) as they seek to examine Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiOvernight Defense: Trump’s Syria envoy wasn’t consulted on withdrawal | McConnell offers resolution urging Trump to rethink Syria | Diplomat says Ukraine aid was tied to political investigations Democrats say they have game changer on impeachment READ: Diplomat describes pressure put on Ukraine to open ‘investigations’ MORE’s business dealings with Ukraine, including his involvement in efforts to oust the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

Caroline Boothe, who served as the chief of staff to Sessions, the former House Rules Committee chairman, notified House Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiGraham to introduce resolution condemning House impeachment inquiry Democrats say they have game changer on impeachment Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg would support delaying Libra | More attorneys general join Facebook probe | Defense chief recuses from ‘war cloud’ contract | Senate GOP blocks two election security bills | FTC brings case against ‘stalking’ app developer MORE (D-Calif.) that she intends to comply with the subpoena, according to her lawyer.

“Ms. Boothe notified the Speaker about the subpoena as she was required to do under House Rules. She fully intends to cooperate with the investigation,” Elliot Berke, a lawyer at Berke Farah LLP, said in a statement.

A spokesman for Sessions said his client is cooperating with federal investigators.

“Mr. Sessions is cooperating with the US Attorney from the Southern District of New York and will be providing documents to their office related to this matter over the next couple of weeks as requested,” Sessions spokesman Matt Mackowiak said in a statement to The Hill.

Prosecutors with the Southern District of New York (SDNY) are seeking Boothe’s testimony after Sessions was referred to as “Congressman-1” in an indictment that alleged that two Giuliani associates, who were recently charged with campaign finance violations, lobbied the GOP lawmaker to help them oust then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch from her post.

Sessions has not confirmed whether he is Congressman-1, but he says he has met multiple times with the two Giuliani associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman. The two allegedly donated to Sessions amid efforts to remove Yovanovitch, but Sessions has denied that he took any official action as a result of meetings that he had with the two Florida businessmen.

Sessions in a statement this month said it was only after “several congressional colleagues reported to me that the current U.S. ambassador to Ukraine was disparaging President TrumpDonald John TrumpGraham to introduce resolution condemning House impeachment inquiry Support for impeachment inches up in poll Fox News’s Bret Baier calls Trump’s attacks on media ‘a problem’ MORE to others” that he wrote a letter to Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoTrump hotel cancels Christian aid group’s event to support the Kurds: report Pence on Syria: ‘Our troops are coming home’ House calls on Russia to release Paul Whelan or else provide evidence of wrongdoing MORE raising concerns about the diplomat.

“My entire motivation for sending the letter was that I believe that political appointees should not be disparaging the President, especially while serving overseas,” he said at the time.

“I have been friends with Rudy Giuliani for more than 30 years,” he said, adding that he does not “know what his business or legal activities in Ukraine have been.”

A spokesman for SDNY did not return a request for comment.

Sessions is said to also be under subpoena to provide documents and other information to federal investigators, according to reports, as they seek to examine whether there was a scheme to funnel foreign money to U.S. politicians.

The subpoena also reportedly is seeking information about Giuliani and his two business associates, who had been helping Giuliani investigate Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenSupport for impeachment inches up in poll Overnight Defense: Trump’s Syria envoy wasn’t consulted on withdrawal | McConnell offers resolution urging Trump to rethink Syria | Diplomat says Ukraine aid was tied to political investigations Democrats say they have game changer on impeachment MORE before their arrest.

House Democrats are also examining the circumstances surrounding the Trump administration’s contacts with Ukraine, particularly whether Trump and Giuliani withheld nearly $400 million in financial aid to Ukraine as leverage to get a commitment from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Biden, one of his top 2020 political rivals, as well as interference in the 2016 election.

Multiple witnesses have testified behind closed doors in recent weeks, voicing disappointment and frustration about Yovanovitch’s sudden removal.

Yovanovitch earlier this month also delivered damning testimony in a nearly 10-hour closed-door meeting before House investigators, accusing top Trump officials of staging “a concerted campaign” against her based on “unfounded and false claims by people with clearly questionable motives.”

“I do not know Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me,” she said, according to her prepared remarks. “But individuals who have been named in the press as contacts of Mr. Giuliani may well have believed that their personal financial ambitions were stymied by our anti-corruption policy in Ukraine.”

Click Here: cheap INTERNATIONAL jersey

Rep. Kennedy presses Trump health official on Medicaid work requirements

October 24, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Rep. Joe KennedyJoseph (Joe) Patrick KennedyFlight attendant union endorses Markey in Senate primary battle Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle mourn Cummings Ocasio-Cortez taps supporters for donations as former primary opponent pitches for Kennedy MORE III (D-Mass.) in a tense exchange Wednesday pressed the head of the Medicare and Medicaid programs to explain why she has allowed states to impose work requirements on Medicaid beneficiaries.

Kennedy asked Seema Verma, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to point to any study that backs up the administration’s argument that work requirements make people healthier.

“Healthier people might work, work doesn’t necessarily make people healthier,” Kennedy, who is running a primary campaign to unseat Sen. Ed MarkeyEdward (Ed) John MarkeyDemocrats offer cybersecurity bill for ‘internet of things’ Democrats introduce SWAMP Act to ban meetings with foreign leaders at Trump properties Flight attendant union endorses Markey in Senate primary battle MORE (D-Mass.), said. “You are imposing policies on millions of people across this country. Can you show me one study that says that is a good policy?”

Work requirements are a central feature of the Trump administration’s vision to transform the Medicaid program. Officials argue that work requirements are a pathway out of poverty, and provide an incentive for people to work.

Under ObamaCare, states were given the option to expand Medicaid to childless low-income adults who didn’t previously qualify for the program.

The Trump administration says that “able-bodied” adults should work instead and that Medicaid should be reserved for children, people who are pregnant, adults who are disabled and very-low-income residents.

The Trump administration has approved work requirements in 10 states to date, and seven more are awaiting approval.

In Arkansas, 18,000 people lost Medicaid coverage as a result of the state’s work requirements before they were struck down by a federal judge.

Kennedy asked Verma if she considers it a “success” that so many people have lost their health care.

“I think it’s premature to draw conclusions about Arkansas’s program. The program was in effect for 10 months,” Verma said.

“18,000 people lost their health care. How many more people have to lose their health care before you can make a determination?” Kennedy responded incredulously.

Click Here: Italy Football Shop

Beto O’Rourke’s campaign-in-waiting awaits his signal

October 22, 2019 KANKENNEWS

First came the fundraising solicitations. Then the social media-ready videos, the house parties and a string of Democratic strategists signing on in early primary states.

Beto O’Rourke might not have a campaign yet, but he has a campaign-in-waiting. And if he decides to run for president, he’ll be handed an existing infrastructure that could help mitigate the effects of a late entry into the 2020 race.

Two separate ‘Draft Beto’ efforts have become a significant force to keep public attention focused on him as a potential presidential candidate. And their groundwork in early primary states could prove critical if O’Rourke enters the race, delivering a roster of consultants and supporters for him to tap into if he runs. Unlike many of his Democratic rivals — several of whom are already far along in building their staffs — O’Rourke has done little on his own to assemble a campaign infrastructure in those states.

In Nevada last week, a message introducing the Draft Beto effort was forwarded to Democrats via the secretary of the state Democratic Party, and when Democrats in New Hampshire received invitations to a Draughts with Draft Beto event in Concord next week, nine state representatives were listed among the co-hosts.

The campaign now has a presence not only in those critical early states, but also in delegate-rich California, which will hold an early March primary in 2020 and where a small platoon of Democratic consultants — including former Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama operatives — have signed on. In South Carolina, Tyler Jones, a chief strategist for Joe Cunningham’s upset victory in a congressional race last year, and Boyd Brown, a former state lawmaker and former Democratic National Committee member, are working on Draft Beto campaigns.

O’Rourke has not yet said whether he will run for president, and the effort to draft him remains much smaller than the unsuccessful campaign to draw Elizabeth Warren into the presidential race in 2016. Before that presidential election, the influential progressive groups Democracy for America and MoveOn organized opened offices in the early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire and collected 365,000 signatures before abandoning the effort.

Still, the list-building and organizing work O’Rourke’s supporters are doing on O’Rourke’s behalf could give him a “leg up,” said Charles Chamberlain, chairman of DFA.

After the nearly $1.5 million effort to draw Warren into the 2016 contest disbanded, Chamberlain said, DFA’s next choice, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, “basically took the infrastructure that we built for Run Warren Run,” including staffers in Iowa and New Hampshire.

For O’Rourke, Chamberlain said, “It does give a chance to do some pre-organizing before an announcement.”

There is abundant historical precedent for draft campaigns and their political cousins — the write-ins. In addition O’Rourke, lower-profile draft efforts have sprung up this year around Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Sherrod Brown and Howard Schultz.

But such efforts nearly always fail — or they attach themselves to candidates who would have run regardless. Two rare exceptions occasionally mentioned by O’Rourke supporters came in the 1950s, when Dwight D. Eisenhower and a reluctant Adlai Stevenson were both the subject of vigorous draft campaigns.

This year, one of the campaigns to draft O’Rourke has amassed an email list of close to 7,500 people already, said Nate Lerner, one of the co-founders. It’s set a goal of raising $1 million, though so far it’s raised only about $30,000 since forming in December, organizers told POLITICO.

A promotional video that the group cut for O’Rourke reached more than 600,000 views on Twitter, and the group has expanded its fundraising not only to pour money into an account that it would transfer to O’Rourke if he runs, but also to promote the draft campaign on social media.

“It’s smaller [than Run Warren Run] in that we’re not MoveOn,” Lerner said. “But that also, I think, speaks to the power behind this, that we’re able to accomplish what we have. … We’ve spent very little, and yet we’ve built up something that’s pretty massive.”

Earlier this month, organizers of a separate Draft Beto campaign held gatherings for supporters in Iowa, the first-in-the-nation caucus state, and invitations in New Hampshire have gone out for events next week at a brewery in Manchester and at the home of Democratic activist Jay Surdukowski, who co-chaired Martin O’Malley’s 2016 presidential campaign in the state.

“A red state Democrat from a border-state could be an important voice in the Primary debates,” the invitation for the Manchester event read.

Will Herberich, a New England-based strategist co-chairing Draft Beto 2020, the group behind the New Hampshire and Iowa events, said about 35 people attended a gathering in Iowa City and about 45 people in Des Moines. He and organizers of the better-funded Draft Beto campaign told POLITICO they have held preliminary discussions about working together in an effort to avoid duplicating efforts.

Both groups are operating without O’Rourke’s input, though Lerner said, “We’ve had some loose conversations with some of his team members just to make sure that they don’t hate us.”

Lerner said, “They definitely like that we’re keeping him relevant in the news.”

Still, without a candidate, draft campaigns can quickly sour. Last week, organizers of a campaign to draft Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti into the presidential race, told POLITICO that after launching on Twitter in July 2017, most of the roughly 100 people who were actively involved in the campaign but not living in Los Angeles had moved on.

“Neither Mayor Garcetti nor anyone on his team ever reached out to any of our leadership by phone, and refused to meet with one of our key leaders during his three visits to L.A.,” Mike Weber, an Albuquerque-based organizer of the group, said in an email. “They dissed us more than a dozen times, including leaders on our team who each put in hundreds of hours of work in the Draft Garcetti effort. In 27 years in politics, I’ve never seen anything like it. Not even a simple 2-minute thank you call to the two young leaders I asked them to. Nothing but exclusion and ice-cold rudeness.”

Weber said he will now support Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), while others are throwing their support to Julián Castro or waiting for O’Rourke.

O’Rourke himself has avoided discussing 2020, instead focusing on immigration and taking a solo road trip through the Southwest last week, posting brooding dispatches on social media from the road. O’Rourke, who became a top-tier presidential contender after raising more than $80 million in his closer-than-expected Senate run against Republican Ted Cruz, is scheduled to be interviewed by Oprah Winfrey in New York at a live event on Feb. 5.

If he decides to run, in addition to any lift he might get from the draft campaigns, O’Rourke would also have the benefit of one of the most valuable email lists in Democratic Party politics.

But the clock is ticking on his decision and, to some Democrats, the mere existence of Draft Beto campaigns is nonsensical.

“If Beto O’Rourke wants to be president and he wants to run for president, great,” said James Carville, the former Bill Clinton strategist. “If he wants people to beg him to run for president, then you should not do it. … I desperately want [former New Orleans Mayor] Mitch Landrieu to run for president. I’m not going to beg him.”

He added, “If you want to run, go for it. If you don’t, don’t try to be convinced.”
Click Here: kenzo online españa

'Unless you support impeachment, we’re not supporting you'

October 22, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Tom Steyer has built a formidable political organization that could give serious help to a presidential candidate in 2020, but the billionaire activist is on his own as the contest begins to take shape.

“In Washington, D.C., talking to pundits and congresspeople — it’s super lonely,” Steyer told POLITICO on Sunday during a visit to the District for a summit of his Need to Impeach organization. “Oh, God, inside the Beltway everybody thinks I’m a low-double-digit IQ.”

That’s because Steyer is continuing to focus his energy on one of the hardest-to-sell issues in Democratic politics today: calling for lawmakers to begin impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump, an effort that he says should start immediately despite most party leaders’ repeated calls to wait until after special counsel Robert Mueller finishes his investigation.

Steyer, a hedge fund manager and environmentalist who recently chose not to pursue his own presidential bid, plans to spend $40 million in 2019 on the impeachment effort, working to galvanize the email list of 7 million supporters he’s gathered into an active grassroots army capable of pushing politicians up and down the ballot on the issue. But candidates currently exploring bids for president haven’t indicated they’re open to calling for Trump’s impeachment — a fact that doesn’t seem to daunt Steyer, who only grows more animated the more he rails about impropriety in Washington.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) have all stopped short of calling for impeachment when asked about it in recent months, instead focusing their comments on how Congress should protect Mueller’s Russia investigation.

“What I wish to be the highest priority, at least for the United States Congress, is that Bob Mueller be able to finish his investigation,” Harris said when asked about impeachment, shortly after announcing her presidential bid last week.

That kind of answer is maddening to Steyer, who likens it to Democrats trying to ignore “a fire in the kitchen” at a time when he’s seemingly one of the only people on the national stage willing to stand up and try to put the fire out.

“Trump said during the campaign, ‘I can murder someone on Fifth Avenue and it doesn’t matter,’” Steyer said. “It’s true — he can murder someone on 5th Avenue, and unless Robert Mueller says its murder, it doesn’t matter. People are not willing to step up and say, ‘This is absolutely unacceptable and un-American.’ And if you’re not willing to do that, then the president really is above the law.”

Critics say Steyer’s focus on impeachment is damaging Democrats’ reputation with their rank and file.

“I don’t know how many millions Tom Steyer has spent on television at this point on the subject of impeachment, but it’s a lot of millions, right? And I don’t sense any moving of the needle because of it,” said Jerry Crawford, an Iowa lawyer and party operative. “It just sounds like more partisan bickering to the public, which essentially has zero tolerance level for that.”

Warren, who has known Steyer for a long time and appeared with him last summer in a series of videos for his climate group, NextGen, has also explicitly mounted a campaign against money in politics, saying Democrats should say “no to the billionaires whether they are self-funding or whether they’re funding PACs” — an implicit dig at Steyer when he was one of the few considering funding their own campaigns. Her comments reflected a rising debate among Democrats about whether presidential candidates should eschew super PACs and other sources of unlimited money.

Steyer says he’ll see how his political organizing evolves in 2019 before deciding what his process may be for supporting a 2020 candidate, but he is increasingly using impeachment as a litmus test in looking at politicians.

“Unless you support impeachment, we’re not supporting you,” Steyer said on Sunday.

Though Steyer is often at odds with Democrats in Washington, he said everyone from TSA agents to the concession-stand operator at a movie theater have recognized him from his pro-impeachment television ads and voiced their support.

Click Here: mochila fjallraven

“Human beings who are registered as Democrats are on my side,” Steyer said. “Overwhelmingly.”

A December POLITICO and Morning Consult poll found that 69 percent of Democrats felt Congress should begin impeachment proceedings to remove the president from office, while 38 percent of voters overall agreed.

Need to Impeach is gathering 300 supporters for a training and strategy session in Washington on Monday, aimed at helping activists learn how to put pressure on their representatives and 2020 candidates around impeachment.

Steyer spent $120 million between his political organizations during the 2018 midterms, and had close to 1,000 staff members during the peak of the election cycle. During the government shutdown, the group was adding 25,000 new names a day to its pro-impeachment email list.

During the 2016 elections, Steyer held off on endorsing Hillary Clinton and tried to nudge the candidates to adopt aggressive clean-energy plans, frustrating the Clinton campaign. In building the impeachment organization, Steyer said, he drew lessons from his multi-year push on climate change, when he says he focused too much on waging information battles and not enough on grassroots organizing and correctly framing his message.

“With climate, I thought we had to win the argument,” he said. “I didn’t realize we had to win the fight.”

Steyer has focused intensely on impeachment since Trump’s election. But climate change has only ripened as an increasingly pressing political issue, said Mark Longabaugh, a Democratic strategist. Record heat and natural disasters, along with ongoing warnings from scientists about the potentially disastrous impact of global warming, have helped raise public consciousness.

“If I were him, I think we’re at a critical inflection point on climate and he ought to re-engage that important issue,” Longabaugh said in a recent interview. “And if he were to do that he would have more relevance on the political debate today, rather than being an outlier on impeachment.”

‘Her ambition got it wrong about Joe’: Harris faces debate backlash

October 22, 2019 KANKENNEWS

SAN FRANCISCO — Kamala Harris might be reveling in her sudden burst of attention after roasting Joe Biden over racial issues on the debate stage last week, but a backlash is already brewing.

Biden supporters and Democrats who have attended the former vice president’s events in the days after the first nationally televised debate, are describing Harris’ assault on Biden as an all-too-calculated overreach after she knocked him on his heels in a grilling over busing and his remarks on segregationist senators.

“She played low ball, which was out of character. And he didn’t expect it, nor did I,” said Lee White, a Biden supporter who attended his remarks at the Jesse Jackson Rainbow PUSH Coalition. “She should not have gone that route. She’s much too intelligent, she’s been able to be successful thus far, why do you have to do that.”

One major Biden supporter from California who declined to be named for publication said Harris’ direct attack on Biden was a mistake that would haunt her.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

“It’s going to bite her in the ass,” the supporter noted. “Very early on there was buzz … Biden-Kamala is the dream ticket, the best of both worlds.’’

After this week, “That shit ain’t happening.”

The criticism of Harris over her rough treatment of Biden is among the first signs of backlash — including in her home state — against the California Democrat who had a breakout moment in the first presidential debate. It’s also a sign of the goodwill and loyalty that many still feel toward that the vice president, who has managed to keep many of his backers in his camp, even amid criticism of what was roundly viewed as a subpar debate performance. Indeed, sources say Biden walked away with a $1 million haul after two fundraisers in San Francisco alone this weekend.

“We can be proud of her nonetheless, but her ambition got it wrong about Joe,” said former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, the first African American woman to serve in the Senate who has endorsed Biden in the 2020 primary. “He is about the best there is; for her to take that tack is sad.”

Harris stunned Biden in the debate, knocking him back on his heels by noting his past “hurtful” efforts to work with segregationists and what she defined as his opposition to school busing. Harris’ emotional recounting of her own experience in the Berkeley school district as a child who was bused to more segregated schools — “that girl was me,’’ she said — became a defining debate moment, and bruised Biden’s status as the Democratic front-runner.

But one of Biden’s supporters called the attack by Harris “too cute by half” after her campaign tweeted out — and quickly began merchandising — a photo of Harris as a young girl. “Couldn’t they at least pretend that it was semi-organic?” the Biden supporter asked, referring to the planned nature of Harris’ debate night ambush.

Some Biden loyalists said they thought it was misleading of Harris to attack Biden on civil rights, given what they said was his lifelong advocacy on that front.

White, who is African American, said of the underlying segregationist issues Harris attacked: “I thought it was old news.”

Sam Johnson, a Columbia, S.C.-based public affairs consultant who represents many minority clients, accused Harris of “desperately overreaching.”

“I don’t think a lot of folks are saying, ‘well, there’s a lot of credibility of her going after Biden,’” said Johnson, who has not backed a 2020 candidate. “I don’t think it was received by the majority of folks as an attack that is going to move the needle. Most folks aren’t looking at that as something where, hey, ‘Biden was against civil rights carte blanche.’”

“It was planned, and it was staged and it was rehearsed — and they were ready to raise money on it,’’ another Bay Area Biden supporter said of Harris’ roundhouse punch.

But former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown — whose patronage of Harris helped put the then-Alameda County assistant district attorney on the political map in her early years — bridled at the suggestion that Harris may have muddled her political future with her attack on Biden. He told POLITICO that the vice president has no one to blame but himself for a lackluster and unprepared performance.

“They better hope she would accept [a VP nomination],’’ he said. “Otherwise, he’s a guaranteed loser.”

But Brown, who also served as speaker of the California Assembly, said Biden’s stunned reaction only underscored that — on the issue of civil rights — he has so far failed to be completely honest with voters and should simply admit his past unpopular actions and positions.

“At this point, she may be the only life raft he has,’’ he added, “because, as of this moment, he’s on the Titanic.”

Biden, in comments to supporters this weekend, appeared to acknowledge the possibility that his quest may not end in success — an unusual departure from the script of most presidential candidates who confidently toss off phrases like “as your next president.”

Speaking to about 150 backers in the bay-side Marin County community of Belvedere, Biden dismissed the idea that he was making a sacrifice to run for president, but said that he felt an obligation at a time when the country is at a crisis point with the Trump presidency.

“My family and I believe very strongly that you kind of have certain things fall in your wheelhouse,” he said. “It doesn’t mean I’m going to win, doesn’t mean I’m the only person who can be a good president, I’m not saying that.”

He told two different audiences that civil rights is a lifelong “passion’’ and also made reference to his Democratic competitors. While never mentioning Harris by name, he appeared to address her sharp criticism about working with segregationists, pushing back at the notion that reaching across the aisle is an outdated notion.

“I know I’m criticized heavily by my qualified contenders who are running,” he said, “when I say, ‘folks, we’ve got to bring the country together.’”

“Some will say, ‘well, that’s old Joe, they’re the old days,’’ he said. “[But] if that’s the old days,’’ he told supporters, “we’re dead … that’s not hyperbole.”

Former San Francisco Supervisor Leslie Katz, who has known the former San Francisco district attorney for years and is a member of Harris’ finance committee, defended the senator’s approach.

“She was giving him a chance to address the issues that would plague him. … She was gracious, and she personalized it: She said she didn’t think he was a racist,’’ Katz said. “What stunned me was that he wasn’t prepared for that topic, and he needs to figure that out, sooner rather than later.”

Debbie Mesloh, a longtime Harris adviser, also defended Harris’ question to Biden as on the mark — and entirely fair. “She was ready, and she was bold, and she delivered,’’ she said. “She really showed what she can do.”

Harris, meanwhile, was met in her hometown of San Francisco like a conquering hero post-debate, facing a sea of ebullient supporters at a packed #LGBTQ fundraiser during San Francisco’s PRIDE weekend.

But after reveling in the moment, Harris also delivered a reality check about the long campaign still ahead.

“It will be tough. It will be excruciating. It’s going to be a long haul,’’ she told them.

“We’re going to have good weeks. We’re going to have bad weeks. It’s not going to be given to us … but we are going to be joyful about this,’’ she said. “As much success as we’ve had — there’s still much to do.”

Gov. Bullock demands entry into first DNC debate

October 22, 2019 KANKENNEWS

Montana Gov. Steve Bullock submitted paperwork to the Democratic National Committee asserting that he has qualified for the first primary debate at the end of June, setting up a showdown between the party committee and red-state governor.

“Governor Bullock has met the threshold for qualification for the first debate,” Bullock campaign manager Jenn Ridder wrote in a letter to DNC Chairman Tom Perez, obtained first by POLITICO.

But that’s an assessment the DNC likely disputes.

At issue is whether Bullock has crossed the polling threshold to qualify for the first debate. Candidates needed to earn at least 1 percent in three polls conducted by qualifying organizations and released by the end of Wednesday. But Bullock’s case hinges on the rules surrounding a single poll released in January by ABC News and The Washington Post.

The ABC/Post poll showed Bullock receiving 1 percent support — but the question was open-ended, meaning respondents had to volunteer a name instead of being read a list of candidates.

The DNC told POLITICO last week that it would not count those open-ended polls for qualification — which left Bullock one poll short of qualifying.

Bullock’s camp was sharply critical of the move. The DNC countered that Bullock’s camp was well aware that the ABC/Post poll would not count and that that information had been relayed to the campaign as early as March — but the DNC did not publicly announce this decision until last week. Previously, many poll trackers — including POLITICO and MSNBC, one of the media sponsors for the first debate — believed Bullock had crossed the polling threshold.

“While there has been discussion in the press regarding the status of the Washington Post/ABC poll [from January], the poll plainly meets the standards published by the DNC,” Ridder wrote in the letter. “Since there is no sufficient warrant to exclude such a poll in either of the original rules or in the Polling Method Certification form promulgated by the DNC this week, the poll meets the DNC requirements and is valid. As such, Governor Bullock has met the threshold to qualify for the first debates and he looks forward to joining his colleagues on the stage for this important occasion.”

The initial set of rules laid out by the DNC listed both ABC News and The Washington Post as qualified poll sponsors and did not explicitly rule out open-ended polling.

On Wednesday, Bullock’s team seemed resigned to his fate that he wouldn’t make the first debate.

“You won’t see Gov. Steve Bullock at the first debate, and I’m the reason why,” Montanan Madison Johnson said in a video released by the campaign, referring to Medicaid expansion in his state. “Before he could run for president, Steve had to convince a Republican Legislature to save my health care — and he did. … That might not mean much at the DNC in Washington, but it means everything to me.”

Even if the DNC relents and rules that Bullock has qualified for the debate stage, there is a second conundrum.

A POLITICO analysis found that 20 candidates have already qualified for the debate, and the DNC has said it would allow no more than 20 candidates onstage at the end of the month.

If the DNC determines Bullock qualified, 21 total candidates will have done so, triggering a set of tiebreaker rules if the committee insists on its 20-candidate limit. Candidates who “double qualified,” meeting both polling and donation criteria, would take priority.

After that, candidates will be ranked based off their polling averages, and if candidates have identical polling averages, the next step is to compare the number of polls that have shown each candidate with at least 1 percent support.

In POLITICO’s analysis, several candidates other than Bullock have a polling average of 1 percent — including Rep. Eric Swalwell, Sen. Michael Bennet, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and former Rep. John Delaney. If Bullock qualifies, he would be tied with Swalwell — with both having 1 percent in three polls, the minimum needed to qualify.

The DNC did not return a request for comment early Thursday morning. The DNC has previously declined to answer questions on what would happen, should there be an exact tie between the 20th and 21st candidate.

The committee has little time to deliberate, however. The drawing dividing candidates between the two nights of debate is slated for Friday.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

dovdiv

Monthly Archives: October 2019

Pentagon official starts impeachment testimony after GOP protest causes 5-hour delay

Lawmakers hammer Zuckerberg over Facebook controversies

Hillicon Valley: Zuckerberg would support delaying Libra | More attorneys general join Facebook probe | Defense chief recuses from 'war cloud' contract | Senate GOP blocks two election security bills | FTC brings case against 'stalking' app developer

House committee advances measure taxing nicotine in vaping products

Former Pete Sessions staffer to comply with subpoena in federal probe investigating Giuliani, associates

Rep. Kennedy presses Trump health official on Medicaid work requirements

Beto O’Rourke’s campaign-in-waiting awaits his signal

'Unless you support impeachment, we’re not supporting you'

‘Her ambition got it wrong about Joe’: Harris faces debate backlash

Gov. Bullock demands entry into first DNC debate