President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE sent a letter to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan urging him to make a deal with the U.S. on Syria, according to a letter obtained by Fox Business. 

In the letter, sent ahead of the U.S. delegation meeting with Erdoğan on Thursday, Trump warned the Turkish president that “you don’t want to be responsible for slaughtering thousands of people, and I don’t want to be responsible for destroying the Turkish economy—and I will.” 

Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership

ADVERTISEMENT

Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoOvernight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Trump isolated amid Syria furor | Pompeo, Pence to visit Turkey in push for ceasefire | Turkish troops advance in Syria | Graham throws support behind Trump’s sanctions Graham: Erdoğan pledged to Trump to stay away from Kurdish territory in Syria Trump honors Stanley Cup champions, talks impeachment, Turkey MORE are on their way to Turkey to convince Erdoğan to call a cease-fire in his country’s offensive against the Kurds in Syria. Trump announced the removal of U.S. troops from Syria last week, prompting Turkey’s action.

“History will look upon you favorably if you get this done the right and humane way. It will look upon you forever as the devil if good things don’t happen. Don’t be a tough guy. Don’t be a fool!” Trump’s letter reads. 

Read the full text of the letter below.

Dear Mr. President,

Let’s work out a good deal! You don’t want to be responsible for slaughtering thousands of people, and I don’t want to be responsible for destroying the Turkish economy—and I will. I’ve already given you a little sample with respect to Pastor Brunson.

I have worked hard to solve some of your problems. Don’t let the world down. You can make a great deal. General Mazloum is willing to negotiate with you, and he is willing to make concessions that they would never have made in the past. I am confidentially enclosing a copy of his letter to me, just received.

History will look upon you favorably if you get this done the right and humane way. It will look upon you forever as the devil if good things don’t happen. Don’t be a tough guy. Don’t be a fool!

I will call you later.

Sincerely,

Donald Trump

Barcelona has faced days of unrest after the Spanish Supreme Court on Monday gave long prison sentences to nine Catalan separatist leaders for their roles in a 2017 independence effort. 

Nine activists were found guilty of sedition and given prison sentences of nine to 13 years, according to The Associated Press. Four were also convicted of misusing public funds. 

The AP reported Wednesday that more than 200 people, including police, have been injured in protests and that 29 people were arrested Tuesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Demonstrators in downtown Barcelona reportedly tossed up hundreds of toilet paper rolls because “there is a lot that needs cleaning up.”

According to the wire service, thousands participated in marches across the Catalonia region that came together Friday in Barcelona. 

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said Wednesday that the government would respond with “firmness, calmness and unity,” according to the AP. 

He blamed the riots on “organized groups of extremists” but said the government would not participate in an “ascending spiral of violence.”

Many people in Catalonia, where Barcelona is located, want the region to separate from Spain and become its own country. This is largely opposed by the Spanish government. 

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE (D) wrote in a tweet last year that he supported Medicare for All, a contrast to his attacks on the proposal at Tuesday night’s debate. 

“I, Pete Buttigieg, politician, do henceforth and forthwith declare, most affirmatively and indubitably, unto the ages, that I do favor Medicare for All, as I do favor any measure that would help get all Americans covered,” Buttigieg wrote in the 2018 tweet, which came in response to a question doubting whether he really supported the proposal for single-payer health insurance. 

In contrast, at Tuesday night’s debate, Buttigieg attacked his rival, Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE (D-Mass.), for supporting Medicare for all. 

Buttigieg said Tuesday that his plan to create an optional government-run insurance option is “just better than Medicare for all, whether you want it or not,” a proposal he said would “obliterate private plans.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Warren backers pointed to Buttigieg’s tweet on Wednesday to accuse him of attacking her for a position he previously held himself. 

Asked about the tweet, a Buttigieg aide on Wednesday argued he had not changed his position, saying that he supports Medicare for All as an end-goal, but that he wants to get there on a “glide path” by allowing people to have a choice and opt into the government plan. 

“If private insurers are not able to offer something dramatically better, this public plan will create a natural glide-path to Medicare for All,” Buttigieg’s website states.  

The tweet from 2018, however, does not say anything about a glide path, instead endorsing “Medicare for All.” While the tweet does not use the phrase “single-payer,” the question he was responding to did. 

Buttigieg also appeared to defend single-payer in a February 2019 interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

“What is Medicare for All? It’s a compromise,” Buttigieg said then. “In the UK, you’ve got national health care, that would be the true left wing position, the true right wing position is free for all, all corporate, and the compromise position is a single payer system where you have private doctors but a public payer.” 

“Buttigieg and Harris have both shifted their position on Medicare for All and proposed their own health care plans,” tweeted former aide to President Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaIraq is not yet lost, but if we continue to ignore it, it soon will be Obama praises marathon runners Eliud Kipchoge and Brigid Kosgei for ‘remarkable examples of humanity’s ability’ Each of us has a role in preventing veteran suicide MORE and “Pod Save America” host Jon Favreau on Wednesday in response to Buttigieg’s tweet. “And there can be perfectly legitimate reasons for that. The difference is, Harris hasn’t been openly attacking her old position. Trickier to pull off!”

Click Here: Fjallraven Kanken Art Spring Landscape Backpacks

The top Democratic presidential candidates on Tuesday night wrangled over their differing views on how to take on the unprecedented power of Big Tech, marking the first time the contenders have been asked to discuss the issue on the debate stage. 

Most of the candidates drew a contrast between their own views and those of Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE (D-Mass.), a top-tier hopeful who has called for breaking up top tech companies including Facebook, Google and Amazon. 

ADVERTISEMENT

While other candidates, including former Rep. Beto O’RourkeBeto O’RourkeWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats wrangle over whether to break up Big Tech in debate first MORE (D-Texas), Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Warren leads in speaking time during debate MORE (D-Minn.) and tech entrepreneur Andrew YangAndrew YangWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE, agreed the government should take on Big Tech, they said they don’t believe “breaking up” the companies will properly address issues including data privacy and market power.

“We will be unafraid to break up big businesses if we have to do that,” O’Rourke said, responding to Warren’s proposal, “but I don’t think it is the role of a president or a candidate for the presidency to specifically call out which companies will be broken up.” 

Warren defended her Big Tech plan, which was one of the first she offered after announcing her presidential candidacy and has quickly become one of her pet issues. She presented breaking up tech companies as one of the most powerful tools the government has for taking them on.

Click Here: NRL league Jerseys

“I’m not willing to give up and let a handful of monopolists dominate our economy and our democracy,” Warren said. “It’s time to fight back.” 

Few other candidates have officially gotten behind her efforts.

Even Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio New study: Full-scale ‘Medicare for All’ costs trillion over 10 years MORE (I-Vt.), a fellow progressive who has made opposition to concentrated corporate power a centerpiece of his campaign, did not explicitly say he is behind Warren’s plan. He called for appointing antitrust enforcers “who will take on these huge monopolies.” 

“We need a president who has the guts to appoint an attorney general who will take on these huge monopolies, protect small business and protect consumers by ending the price fixing,” Sanders said, noting that he also believes there is a monopoly issue in Wall Street and health care.

The argument comes as regulators and policymakers have significantly ratcheted up their investigations into the top tech companies, probing whether they use their dominant market positions to quash competitors and take advantage of consumers.

Yang, who has sought to present himself as the most tech-savvy candidate, has argued that he believes a legislative framework that treats “data as property” would protect users from being exploited by companies like Facebook and Twitter.

“Absolutely excesses in technology, and in some cases having them divest parts of their business is the right move, but we also have to be realistic that competition does not solve all of the problems,” Yang said. “It’s not like breaking up these big tech companies will revive Main Street businesses around the country.”

He said we “need new solutions and a new toolkit.”

O’Rourke, meanwhile, called for “very tough, very clear, very transparent rules of the road” around how companies can amass and treat user data.

And Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Warren leads in speaking time during debate MORE (D-Calif.) used the opportunity to promote her recent push to get Twitter to delete President Trump’s account, which she says the president regularly uses to promote dangerous misinformation, a violation of Twitter’s rules. Twitter says it treats speech from politicians differently, keeping it online under the assumption that it is “newsworthy” even when the posts violate Twitter’s policies.

It marked the first time the Democratic presidential candidates have criticized the companies at length on a national stage since the start of the campaign, exposing the enormous shift in public opinion since Democrats and Republicans alike sought to court companies like Facebook and Google during elections before 2016. 

Sen. Cory BookerCory Anthony BookerWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Warren leads in speaking time during debate Democrats wrangle over whether to break up Big Tech in debate first MORE (D-N.J.), formerly seen widely as an ally to Silicon Valley, said he believes there is “a massive crisis in our democracy with the way these tech companies are being used, not just in terms of anti-competitive practices, but also to undermine our democracy.”

“As president of the United States, I will put people in place who enforce anti-trust laws,” Booker said. 

President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE’s decision last week to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria, allowing Turkey to launch an offensive against Kurdish forces, has already had several unintended, albeit foreseeable, consequences.

Trump has defended his move as fulfilling a campaign promise to end so-called forever wars.

But from the day he announced the retreat from northern Syria, critics of the move have warned of wide-reaching repercussions, ranging from ceding U.S. influence in the Middle East to spurring a resurgence of ISIS.

ADVERTISEMENT

And as Turkey’s incursion enters its second week, reports out of Syria indicate some of those predictions are coming to fruition, from ISIS prisoners escaping to Russia taking over military patrols of a key Syrian city.

Here are five unintended consequences of Trump’s withdrawal from northern Syria.

Kurds align with Assad

The Kurdish forces that partnered with the United States to fight ISIS are now turning to Syrian President Bashar Assad for their protection.

The autonomous Kurdish administration in northeast Syria, which controls roughly a third of the country, announced over the weekend that Assad’s government had agreed to help “repel [Turkey’s] aggression and liberate the areas entered by the Turkish army and its hired mercenaries.”

The agreement represented a major shift in alliances in Syria’s 8-year civil war and effectively put an end to the Kurds’ autonomy, allowing Assad’s forces to move into the area for the first time in years.

Many had already considered Assad’s victory in the civil war inevitable at this point, but aligning with the Kurds further tightens his grip on power. It also raises the prospect of direct clashes between Turkish and Syrian forces, a potential bloody new phase in the war.

Russia’s influence grows

As Assad’s influence grows, so too does that of his main benefactor, Russia.

The Russian Defense Ministry announced Tuesday that its forces were now patrolling Manbij. The U.S.-led coalition subsequently confirmed it had fully withdrawn from the key Syrian city.

Video posted online Tuesday appeared to show the Russian forces taking over an abandoned U.S. base in Manbij.

Kurdish forces, backed by the U.S.-led coalition, retook Manbij from ISIS in 2016. In the years since, it became a key sticking point for Turkey as it demanded the Kurds’ withdrawal. Washington and Ankara previously agreed to a roadmap for the city that would have seen the Kurds withdraw followed by joint U.S.-Turkish patrols to keep the peace.

ADVERTISEMENT

Now Russia is tasked with preventing a military clash between Turkey and Syria in the city.

While Russia and Turkey officially back opposite sides in the Syrian civil war, Moscow and Ankara have grown closer in recent years. Turkey, a NATO ally, bought a Russian missile defense system in what has been seen as a bellwether for Ankara’s turn away from the West.

As if to cement Russia’s new position as arbiter in the Middle East, Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinDemocratic front-runners defend their age during debate Candidates unleash on Trump over Syria move, say he’s weakening US Erdoğan says he will never declare Syria ceasefire: Turkish media MORE visited Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates this week for the first time in more than a decade.

ISIS prisoners escape

There have been multiple reports of ISIS jailbreaks from Kurdish-guarded prisons amid the chaos of Turkey’s offensive.

In one of the biggest incidents, the Kurdish administration in northern Syria said 785 ISIS supporters had escaped a detention camp at Ein Eissa after a Turkish shelling, though the number has not been independently verified. The detainees got out after storming the gates and attacking the guards, the Kurds said.

Turkey has alleged that the Kurds emptied ISIS prisons themselves, an accusation Trump appeared to back Monday when he tweeted that “Kurds may be releasing some to get us involved.”

CNN and Foreign Policy, citing unnamed U.S. officials, reported that the United States believes a Turkish-backed Syrian militia released ISIS prisoners.

Either way, ISIS fighters and their supporters are getting out, stoking fears of a resurgence months after the United States declared the caliphate destroyed.

Trump has dismissed the jailbreaks, saying the prisoners can be “easily recaptured by Turkey or European nations from where many came.” 

NATO tensions spill over

Trump administration officials have defended the withdrawal by saying the United States could not engage in a military confrontation with a NATO ally.

But Ankara’s operation in Syria has led to an all-time low in relations between Turkey and the United States, with Congress looking to impose steep penalties on the Turkish government.

Several other NATO allies have also taken steps to punish Turkey. Italy, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Germany, the United Kingdom and the Czech Republic have all suspended arms sales to Turkey.

Defense Secretary Mark EsperMark EsperCastro: Trump ‘is caging kids on the border and effectively letting ISIS prisoners run free’ White House, Pentagon, Giuliani reject House subpoenas 281 lobbyists have worked in Trump administration: report MORE said this week that he will press NATO to take action against Turkey for its incursion.

“I will be visiting NATO next week in Brussels, where I plan to press our other NATO allies to take collective and individual diplomatic and economic measures in response to these egregious Turkish actions,” Esper said in a statement.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Tuesday he has “serious concerns” about the destabilizing effect of Turkey’s military operation, adding that it will be a topic of discussion at next week’s defense ministerial.

“NATO does not support this operation, of course. Many NATO allies have expressed strong criticism,” he told reporters in London. “What I can say is that I’m deeply concerned about the consequences, both when it comes to the fight against [ISIS], human suffering and stability in the wider region.”

Questions swirl about nukes in Turkey 

It’s been an open secret that the United States houses about 50 nuclear warheads at Turkey’s Incirlik air base, though U.S. officials have consistently declined to confirm that.

Arms control advocates for years have raised questions about the wisdom of the location, expressing concerns about the potential that the warheads could fall into the wrong hands.

Questions about the security of the nukes were raised after an unsuccessful coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in 2016.

With U.S.-Turkish relations plummeting over Syria, The New York Times cited two unnamed U.S. officials Monday saying State and Energy Department officials were quietly reviewing plans for evacuating the bombs.

Arms control advocates say removing the weapons from Turkey is long overdue.

“Seriously, it’s time to take our f—ing nuclear weapons out of Turkey,” Jeffrey Lewis, a director at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, tweeted after U.S. troops in Syria came under Turkish artillery fire Friday.

“The Obama and Trump Admins should have listened to those of us who could see the handwriting on the wall in 2016,” he added in another tweet Monday. “Pull the bombs now.”

Click Here: NRL league Jerseys

Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulRand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter Sunday Show Preview: Trump’s allies and administration defend decision on Syria Ana Navarro clashes with Rand Paul in fiery exchange: ‘Don’t mansplain!’ MORE (R-Ky.) on Sunday called for an investigation into the Democratic senators who sent a letter in 2018 to the prosecutor general of Ukraine requesting information on investigations into former Trump campaign manager Paul ManafortPaul John ManafortRand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter He who must not be named: How Hunter Biden became a conversation-stopper Schiff should consider using RICO framework to organize impeachment MORE. 

Paul dodged questions from Chuck ToddCharles (Chuck) David ToddRand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter White House officials stand by Syria withdrawal, sanctions delay amid bipartisan pushback Sunday shows — Officials rush to Trump’s defense on Syria, sanctions MORE on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on whether President TrumpDonald John TrumpWHCA calls on Trump to denounce video depicting him shooting media outlets Video of fake Trump shooting members of media shown at his Miami resort: report Trump hits Fox News’s Chris Wallace over Ukraine coverage MORE‘s personal attorney Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiRand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter Sunday shows — Officials rush to Trump’s defense on Syria, sanctions Cruz: ‘Of course’ it’s not appropriate to ask China to investigate Bidens MORE‘s interactions with foreign governments to get information on former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenTrump hits Fox News’s Chris Wallace over Ukraine coverage Schiff: Whistleblower testimony might not be necessary Trump warns Democrats will lose House seats over impeachment MORE bothered him. 

“If anything’s consistent here, both parties have tried to involve themselves in Ukraine,” Paul said.

“If you’re going to condemn Trump, you need to condemn the Democratic senators,” he added. “It shouldn’t just be one-sided.”

The 2018 letter Paul referred to was sent by three Democratic senators — Sens. Robert MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezRand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter Senators ask Treasury to probe Brazilian meatpacker with major US footprint Top Foreign Relations Democrat calls on Pompeo to recuse himself from Ukraine matters MORE (N.J.), Dick Durbin (Ill.) and Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahyRand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter Senator questions agencies on suicide prevention, response after Epstein’s death in federal custody During impeachment storm, senators cross aisle to lessen mass incarceration MORE (Vt.) — to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, asking for the country’s assistance in the Mueller investigation. The letter was sent after a New York Times report found the investigations into Manafort in Ukraine had stalled. 

Paul asserts the Democratic senators threatened to withhold aid from Ukraine in the letter if the country did not cooperate in the Mueller investigation.

The Kentucky senator said the Democratic senators’ sending of the letter needs to be examined.

“That’s a threat and that’s the same kind of stuff they’re accusing Trump of,” he said.

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiBiden on impeachment: ‘I’m the only reason’ it’s happening Democrats to offer resolution demanding Trump reverse Syria decision Rand Paul calls for probe of Democrats over Ukraine letter MORE (D-Calif.) launched an impeachment inquiry against Trump after a whistleblower report surfaced concerns about a July call between Trump and the Ukrainian president. In the call, Trump asked President Volodymyr Zelensky to “look into” former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter days after withholding military aid from the country.

During Biden’s vice presidency, he pushed for the dismissal of a Ukrainian prosecutor, who was looking into a Ukrainian gas company, of which Hunter Biden sat on the board. 

Click Here: NRL league Jerseys

Harley-Davidson has stopped making and delivering its electric motorcycle after a glitch was discovered during quality checks.

The motorcycle producer said in a Monday statement that it found a “non-standard condition” in the LiveWire bikes, which it has already started shipping to vendors.

ADVERTISEMENT

The company began additional testing and analysis, which it said was going “well.”

LiveWire has reportedly been available to preorder since January, and it costs $29,799, according to Reuters. 

Harley-Davidson shares were down 1 percent at $34.73 on Monday amid news that electric motorcycle production was halted.

—Updated at 6:07 p.m.

New details released Thursday as part of the Trump administration’s plan to boost ethanol are getting low marks from key corners of President TrumpDonald John TrumpWarren defends, Buttigieg attacks in debate that shrank the field Five takeaways from the Democratic debate in Ohio Democrats debate in Ohio: Who came out on top? MORE’s base: corn farmers and the oil and gas industry.

The proposal gets to the heart of what has angered farmers across the Corn Belt — waivers given to small refineries that exempt them from adding ethanol to the fuel they produce.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced earlier this month that it would require other larger refineries to add those exempted gallons into their fuels. But the formula unveiled by the agency Tuesday would require those refineries to add ethanol based on projections rather than the actual number of gallons exempted.

This is angering ethanol groups that had praised the policy just a little over a week ago.

“If the Oct. 4 announcement from EPA was a big step forward, today’s supplemental proposal is a step backward,” Renewable Fuels Association President and CEO Geoff Cooper said in a release, asking for an intervention from Trump himself. “This proposal is not what was promised by the administration.” 

Ethanol producers worry there will be a major disconnect between the actual number of gallons of ethanol that are not blended into the fuel supply after the EPA doles out waivers and the number of gallons the government projects will be exempted.  

“We are outraged the Environmental Protection Agency did not implement the details that were presented and outlined by the president only eleven days ago,” the Iowa Corn Growers Association said in a statement. “Any proposal that does not account for actual waived gallons under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) fails to restore the integrity of the law.”

The EPA in August announced it was giving out 31 such waivers to small refineries, bringing the total to 85 under the Trump administration, a sharp uptick from the fewer than 10 that were issued under former President Obama. 

That proved a catalyzing event for farmers, particularly in Iowa, who have been putting political pressure on Trump for find a fix.

Trump has since been struggling to please both corn farmers and the oil and gas industry with his attempts to reform the RFS program, alternatively angering one side or the other with each hint at a new proposal.

On Tuesday, both groups were united in their displeasure. The oil and gas industry opposes changes to the waiver process mainly because it doesn’t think larger refineries should have to take on the gallons small refineries pass up.  

“While the granting of widespread small refinery exemptions should not be occurring in the first place, there is simply no logic in forcing complying refineries to bear the burden of decisions outside of their control. We are evaluating our options and fully intend to vigorously challenge this misguided policy,” Frank Macchiarola, vice president of downstream and industry operations at the American Petroleum Institute, said in a statement to The Hill. 

The proposal still faces a 30-day comment period, and the EPA expects to finalize a new policy by the end of the year.

Though it is not popular with industry groups, Republican politicians praised the proposal.

“President Trump has made clear that he is an ally of corn and soybean farmers as well as ethanol and biodiesel producers. He is fighting for the farmer. This announcement is great news for Iowa, the Midwest and the entire country,” Sen. Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyTrump’s latest plan to boost ethanol miffs both corn groups and the fossil fuel industry Syria furor underscores Trump’s isolation GOP braces for impeachment brawl MORE (R-Iowa) said in a statement. 

Farmers in Iowa, however, have been critical of Trump’s plan, even when major trade groups praised it earlier this month.

“I don’t think he is going to win the farm vote this year. I really don’t,” Jeff Samuelson, whose family farm is near Tipton, Iowa, said of Trump. “This gets pretty personal when this affects our bottom line.” 

Click Here: pinko shop cheap

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)

 

BIG HEARING NEXT WEEK: The co-founder and CEO of Reddit and a top policy official with Google are slated to testify next week before a key House panel about the tech industry’s legal protections, the committee announced Friday.

The public hearing scheduled for Wednesday marks the latest sign that the House Energy and Commerce Committee is seriously looking at the possibility of tweaking or even partially pulling back the industry’s liability shield. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Reddit chief Steve Huffman will testify at the hearing alongside Katherine Oyama, Google’s global head of intellectual property policy, as well as leading experts on the law that protects tech — including Danielle Citron, a law professor at Boston University School of Law, and Corynne McSherry, the legal director of top privacy group the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Top Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee announced their intention to hold the hearing last month. 

“The Internet has opened America’s homes to a wealth of social, economic and educational opportunities,” Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) said in a joint statement with the heads of the committee’s panels on technology and consumer protection. “Sadly, bad actors, both foreign and domestic, have abused this access to peddle extremism, disinformation and hatred that divides our nation.”

Why Section 230 matters: At issue is a provision called Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects internet platforms from being sued over content posted by users and how it chooses to moderate those user-generated posts.

Increasingly, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in both chambers have hammered Section 230 as a “sweetheart deal” that protects Big Tech from dealing with issues on their platforms including hate speech, terrorist content and disinformation. 

While several federal lawmakers have floated changes to Section 230 over the past several months, there are still no bipartisan or bicameral proposals on the table. 

E&C’s role: The Energy and Commerce Committee has primary jurisdiction over Section 230, and over the past several months, top members of the panel have expressed interest in various proposals to hold platforms “accountable” for their content moderation decisions.  

“This hearing will explore whether online companies are appropriately using the tools they have — including protections Congress granted in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — to foster a healthier Internet,” Pallone said in the statement with Reps. Mike DoyleMichael (Mike) F. DoyleHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Reddit, Google to testify before House panel on tech’s legal protections Consequential GOP class of 1994 all but disappears MORE (D-Pa.) and Jan SchakowskyJanice (Jan) Danoff SchakowskyHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Congress must get pharma out of NAFTA 2.0 Reddit, Google to testify before House panel on tech’s legal protections MORE (D-Ill.).

Read more here.

 

MAKES ME TWITCHY: President TrumpDonald John TrumpFederal prosecutors investigating Giuliani: report House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman and top Republican to introduce sanctions bill against Turkey Trump lashes out at 2020 Dems, impeachment inquiry MORE recently joined the video streaming platform Twitch, live-streaming his Thursday night rally on the Amazon-owned site. 

Presidential contenders and politicians have been using the platform over the past several months, live-streaming Q&As and informal conversations to audiences of tens of thousands.  

Trump’s Twitch account had nearly 47,000 followers as of Friday morning. The page indicates that his Minneapolis rally had more than 40,000 views as of Friday, and that his campaign plans to broadcast his rally next week in Dallas. 

Trump also plans to hold a rally in Louisiana later on Friday.

The president is known for his prolific Twitter presence, but his aides have signaled in recent months that the president is looking to gain a foothold on other platforms as well. 

The Trump campaign advertised heavily in social media platforms such as Facebook in 2016, a strategy it has continued into the 2020 race.

The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment on joining Twitch.

Trump is not the first presidential candidate to join the platform, which is popular among the gamer community but has niches for many interests, including politics. Democratic candidates Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersTrump lashes out at 2020 Dems, impeachment inquiry Trump: ‘It looks like Bernie lost his chance’ at Democratic nomination O’Rourke campaign says path to victory hinges on top 5 finishes in Iowa, Nevada MORE (I-Vt.) and entrepreneur Andrew YangAndrew YangO’Rourke campaign says path to victory hinges on top 5 finishes in Iowa, Nevada Hillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference O’Rourke raises .5 million in third quarter MORE are also on Twitch. 

Trump joined the platform mere days after the Amazon company came under scrutiny over a shooting near a German synagogue, which was live-streamed and viewed by thousands of people on Twitch. 

Only five people tuned into the livestream, but a recorded version of the disturbing footage was viewed by more than 2,000 people before it was removed.

The footage has since circulated on Telegram, a partially encrypted app that is known to be favored by white extremists.

The incident made Amazon the latest tech giant to grapple with violent footage circulating on one of its platforms. Facebook dealt with the issue earlier this year when a mass shooter filmed himself attacking worshippers at a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, an incident that left more than 50 dead and dozens injured.

Read more on Trump’s move here.

 

SHIELD ME FROM THIS: The House will vote on legislation later this month aimed at limiting foreign interference in U.S. elections after a bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee this week called on Congress to take action on the issue.

The move by House Democrats is likely to place additional pressure on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference CBO: Pelosi bill to lower drug prices saves Medicare 5 billion Iowa Democrat tops Ernst in third-quarter fundraising for Senate race MORE (R-Ky.), whom Democrats have targeted on election security. 

House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Overnight Health Care — Presented by Coalition Against Surprise Medical Billing — Judge blocks Trump ‘public charge’ rule | Appeals court skeptical of Trump arguments for Medicaid work requirements | CDC offers guidance for treating vaping-related cases House to vote this month on legislation to combat foreign interference in elections MORE (D-Md.) announced the House will take up legislation that would require campaigns to report “illicit offers” of election assistance from foreign governments or individuals to both the FBI and the Federal Election Commission (FEC). 

The legislation, known as the SHIELD Act and just introduced this week, also includes language designed to ensure that political advertisements on social media are subject to the same sponsor disclosure rules as ads on television and radio broadcasts. 

The vote will come in the midst of a presidential impeachment inquiry that focuses on whether President Trump asked Ukraine to interfere in aspects of the upcoming 2020 U.S. presidential election. 

Hoyer praised work done by House Democrats in regards to the impeachment investigation in a letter announcing the move, writing that “the President betrayed our nation’s trust, undermined our national security, and abused his power by encouraging foreign interference in our elections, and the American people deserve answers.”

The House Administration Committee is scheduled to mark up the SHIELD Act next week prior to the full House taking it up, with committee Chairwoman Zoe LofgrenZoe Ellen LofgrenHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference House to vote this month on legislation to combat foreign interference in elections 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-Calif.) among the bill’s key sponsors. 

Read more on the legislation here.

 

MEDIA LITERACY BOOSTER SHOT: A group of House Democrats on Friday introduced legislation intended to increase media literacy among Americans in order to combat social media disinformation campaigns.

The Digital Citizen and Media Literacy Act would establish a $20 million grant program at the Department of Education to help fund K-12 media literacy curricula. The funds would be available to local education agencies to create programs on media literacy and to state agencies to create “advisory councils” to establish state-wide media literacy guidelines. 

The bill was introduced days after the Senate Intelligence Committee released its bipartisan report on Russian social media disinformation efforts in the run-up to the 2016 elections. 

The committee found that the Kremlin directed the Russian Internet Research Agency to spread disinformation with the goal of helping now-President Trump over former Secretary of State Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Saagar Enjeti rips NYT report over attacks on Warren’s authenticity House Dems introduce bill to fight social media disinformation MORE, echoing findings detailed by former special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerFox News legal analyst says Trump call with Ukraine leader could be ‘more serious’ than what Mueller ‘dragged up’ Lewandowski says Mueller report was ‘very clear’ in proving ‘there was no obstruction,’ despite having ‘never’ read it Fox’s Cavuto roasts Trump over criticism of network MORE. 

The committee also included a set of recommendations for Congress, the Trump administration and social media companies in order to prevent future foreign disinformation efforts, including the idea of creating a “public initiative” aimed at promoting “critical thinking skills” to help Americans identify disinformation online. 

Read more here. 

 

SPACEX, NASA MAKE AMENDS: NASA Director Jim BridenstineJames (Jim) Frederick BridenstineHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference NASA targeting early 2020 for first manned SpaceX mission NASA’s Bridenstine gives SpaceX a reality check MORE says that the agency could begin using SpaceX equipment for manned orbital missions as early as next year if the company does not run into unexpected hurdles with the development of its crew capsule.

Bridenstine told reporters during a visit to Elon MuskElon Reeve MuskHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference NASA targeting early 2020 for first manned SpaceX mission Hillicon Valley: Senate Intel report urges action to prevent 2020 Russian meddling | Republicans warn Microsoft of ‘urgent’ Huawei threat | Court rules FBI surveillance violated Americans’ rights MORE‘s SpaceX headquarters in California that if “everything goes according to plan,” the agency will begin manned missions using SpaceX’s capsule in the first quarter of 2020.

“If everything goes according to plan, it would be the first quarter of next year,” he said, according to Reuters, while adding that the agency is “not going to take any undue risk” by sticking to an unrealistic timeline.

Musk also addressed reporters at the news conference, explaining that despite difficulties in developing the crew capsule’s parachute, the company planned to finish testing by the end of the year.

“Testing will be complete and hardware at the Cape [Canaveral] by the end of December,” he said, according to Reuters.

NASA’s use of private contractors such as SpaceX for future space flights comes as the agency currently spends millions every year to use Russian technology necessary for reaching the International Space Station.

Read more here.

 

A LIGHTER CLICK: Footage of people who must have a death wish. 

 

AN OP-ED TO CHEW ON: Automation won’t destroy trade; it might even boost it 

 

NOTABLE LINKS FROM AROUND THE WEB:  

Study links Russian tweets to release of hacked emails. (Associated Press) 

Mississippi audit finds ‘disregard’ for cybersecurity across the state. (StateScoop)

Tech companies didn’t plan for Chinese censorship. (Vice)

Click Here: pinko shop cheap

President TrumpDonald John TrumpBusiness school deans call for lifting country-specific visa caps Bolton told ex-Trump aide to call White House lawyers about Ukraine pressure campaign: report Federal prosecutors in New York examining Giuliani business dealings with Ukraine: report MORE is touting an initial deal with China as a major victory for his trade agenda despite growing skepticism over the scope and status of the agreement.

The pending deal outlined Friday would postpone an upcoming increase of tariffs on Chinese goods in exchange for Beijing drastically increasing imports of American crops. The agreement is meant to provide a brief economic reprieve for both nations as they seek out a broader deal.

Trump has been quick to boast about scoring a major victory for “great patriot farmers & ranchers.” The president tweeted that a “Phase One” deal with China can be “finalized & signed soon” during a potential November meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Washington and Wall Street are reacting with caution to the announcement, following signals from Beijing that it still needs time to finalize the terms and amid criticism that the limited agreement does not touch on many of Trump’s top priorities for a broader trade deal.

The trade pact, announced Friday, would freeze a planned increase of tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese goods from 25 percent to 30 percent. But it doesn’t address another round of tariffs on $160 billion in Chinese-made consumer goods scheduled for December.

“The Chinese don’t want Xi to move forward with this initial phase or this initial detente if they don’t get rid of the December tariff threat as well,” said Stephen Myrow, managing partner at Beacon Policy Advisors. “No matter what they sign, they don’t really trust Trump.”

The deal’s most concrete achievement was Trump’s decision to scrap the planned tariff increase which was scheduled to take effect Tuesday. In return, China promised to purchase $40 billion to $50 billion worth of U.S. agriculture, as well as aircraft purchases from Boeing.

Trade watchers note, though, that that portion of the deal has not been signed or finalized, and China has previously retreated from similar promises.

The administration has also touted progress on issues such as financial regulation and currency. But while the deal marked at least a temporary truce, it also put off many of the most controversial issues, including technology transfers, intellectual property issues and scaling back the tariffs that have built up since the trade war began last summer.

Those lingering concerns have some questioning whether Trump can follow through and finalize a trade deal before the 2020 election, despite the administration’s public enthusiasm.

The limited nature of the deal, and the fact that its final details remain in flux even after the Friday announcement, has drawn criticism.

“I don’t think this is a big deal,” said Larry Summer, who served as Treasury secretary under President Clinton, in a CNBC interview Monday.

“The agreement may well close, but I don’t think it will address the fundamental overhang of tension and uncertainty that’s been created in the U.S.-China relationship and will inhibit spending plans, business investment on both sides of the Pacific,” he added.

“Although eliminating, or delaying, near-term tariff hikes is a positive development, we do not believe that this limited agreement materially reduces the fundamental uncertainties regarding the US-China economic relationship,” said an analysis by Japanese financial services firm Nomura.

There have also been signs of caution from China, raising concerns that Trump and Xi may not meet in November to cement even this minor truce before more tariffs kick in.

Bloomberg News reported on Monday that China is waiting on further negotiations to finalize the phase one deal announced Friday and may wait until Trump commits to scrapping the new round of tariffs scheduled to go into effect in December.

Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinTrump hypes China trade deal as new doubts emerge Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — Trump to slap sanctions on Turkey for Syria offensive | Trump calls on Turkey to broker ceasefire | Pelosi, Graham seek deal on sanctions | Ex-Trump aide testifies in impeachment probe Trump calls on Turkey to broker ceasefire MORE has admitted that the deal could still fall apart, but he also downplayed that likelihood.

“There are still some issues that need to be worked out in wording,” he said in a Monday CNBC interview, when asked about enforcement and the specifics of China’s promises to buy American agricultural goods.

“But I would say we have every expectation that phase one will close,” he added.

The danger for the administration is that additional delays in trade talks will further undercut Trump’s leverage as the 2020 election takes over.

Trump has already imposed tariffs on more than half of all U.S. imports from China, but the levies slated for December threaten to hit American consumers hard.

Trump initially planned to impose 15 percent tariffs on more than $300 billion in Chinese products on Sept. 1, then exempted a $160 billion tranche of consumer goods from the new taxes until Dec. 15.

Economists say those tariffs on Chinese-made clothes, footwear, toys, laptops and other consumer technology would pose the most direct financial threat to U.S. households — and the economy’s resilience.

“He is very unpredictable, and just because you don’t get tariffs now, it doesn’t ensure that you don’t get tariffs down the road,” Myrow said. “I think that’s what the Chinese are scared about, and I think that’s what the markets are concerned about.”

Even so, Myrow added that Trump’s eagerness to strike a deal highlights the high stakes for the president.

Trump’s success in the 2020 election could hinge on the state of the American economy, which has long been his most enticing pitch to swing voters. The president must also repeat his 2016 victories in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, where his hawkish stance on China plays well, but the trade war has taken a toll on industrial communities.

If Trump can defy the odds and secure an elusive deal with China, the victory could reassure an anxious U.S. business sector and rally his base before the election. But if negotiations collapse, the fallout could derail the economy and squander Trump’s trade agenda.

Trump’s previous tariffs have already imposed steep costs on businesses and manufacturers facing higher prices and lower global demand. And the president’s trade policy — along with a global economic slump — have frozen business investment and dampened U.S. exports.

The U.S. still boasts a 3.5 percent unemployment rate, but that could be threatened by more trade uncertainty.

And investors are showing caution.

“We continue to expect US-China trade tensions to reemerge as non-trade issues worsen and the two sides fail to make real progress on fundamental differences,” the Nomura analysis predicted.

“The US economy is showing strains is a lot of different factors. The one thing that’s still hanging in there is the consumer,” Myrow said.

“But the more you expand the tariffs, you’re going to finally start digging in hard on the consumer.”

Click Here: kanken kids cheap