A handful of witnesses have already turned over evidence to House Democrats painting what party leaders describe as a damning picture of President TrumpDonald John Trump Comey: Mueller ‘didn’t succeed in his mission because there was inadequate transparency’ During deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Bolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates MORE’s efforts to pressure Ukraine into opening politically charged investigations that might benefit his reelection.

In the weeks ahead, they seem determined to talk to many more officials. In a sign of their pace, lawmakers will depose one witness on Saturday after taking two days off at the end of the work week as former Rep. Elijah CummingsElijah Eugene CummingsSchiff says committees are making ‘rapid progress’ in impeachment probe Trump lashes out at Pelosi, slams San Francisco district as ‘very bad and dangerous’ Chairman Cummings’ ‘phenomenal’ team MORE (D-Md.) was honored with memorial services.

ADVERTISEMENT

Democrats say they intend to lock down more interviews to strengthen their case.

“As you know, five sources is better than two or three,” Rep. Tom MalinowskiThomas (Tom) MalinowskiSchiff says committees are making ‘rapid progress’ in impeachment probe Trump rages against ‘garbage’ Ukraine probe ahead of latest witness deposition Large majority says they are following impeachment inquiry closely: poll MORE (D-N.J.), a member on one of the three House committees investigating the Ukraine affair, remarked to reporters Wednesday.

Here is what we’ve learned so far from snippets of key witness depositions. 

Kurt VolkerKurt VolkerBolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates Schiff says committees are making ‘rapid progress’ in impeachment probe White House official to corroborate diplomat’s version of Ukraine events: report MORE

Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, is named as someone who tried to help Ukrainian officials “navigate” the president’s demands on Ukraine in a whistleblower’s report that helped spark the impeachment inquiry.

Volker discussed the administration’s decision to withhold aid to Ukraine in text messages with two other U.S. diplomats — U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland and William Taylor, the top diplomat to Ukraine.

Democrats, who released the text conversations, say the messages are evidence of a quid pro quo involving the aid and Trump’s demands for investigations.

“Heard from White House — assuming President Z convinces trump he will investigate / ‘get to the bottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington,” Volker said in one message with Andrey Yermak, a top adviser to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Republicans, who have called for a full transcript of Volker’s Oct. 3 testimony to be released, say his testimony and the messages show there was no promise to withhold Ukraine aid in exchange for an investigation of former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenDuring deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Bolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates Giuliani associate used small town in Ukraine to gain influence with American figures: report MORE.

“The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind,” Sondland wrote in one message to Taylor after he said he had spoken directly to the president.

But after pushing back on Taylor’s quid pro quo view, Sondland said he and the other diplomats should end their conversation, something that has been viewed with suspicion by Democrats and other observers.

“The president is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign,” Sondland wrote in a message. “I suggest we stop the back and forth by text.”

Marie Yovanovitch

Yovanovitch, the ousted U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, bluntly described what she viewed as a shadowy effort by Trump and other officials to pressure the State Department to remove her.

“Although I understand that I served at the pleasure of the President, I was nevertheless incredulous that the U.S. government chose to remove an Ambassador based, as best as I can tell, on unfounded and false claims by people with clearly questionable motives,” she testified on Oct. 11.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yovanovitch identified Trump’s personal attorney Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiDuring deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Bolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates Giuliani associate used small town in Ukraine to gain influence with American figures: report MORE and his associates as taking part in the effort to discredit her.

“I do not know Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me. 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,” her prepared remarks read.

The longtime civil servant said that when she learned of her firing, a superior at the State Department said there had been a “concerted campaign against” her and that “the Department had been under pressure from the President” to remove her since last summer.

Yovanovitch denied claims that she made disparaging remarks about Trump, which is an allegation some critics of hers passed along to Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoDuring deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Schiff says committees are making ‘rapid progress’ in impeachment probe State Dept. official broached Pompeo’s role in Ukraine in new testimony MORE.

“Equally fictitious is the notion that I am disloyal to President Trump. I have heard the allegation in the media that I supposedly told the Embassy team to ignore the President’s orders ‘since he was going to be impeached.’ That allegation is false,” Yovanovitch testified.

Fiona Hill

Hill, a former top Russia expert at State, testified on what she viewed as a dangerous shadow foreign policy led by Giuliani, Sondland and acting White House chief of staff Mick MulvaneyJohn (Mick) Michael MulvaneyCompany with ties to Trump’s brother awarded million government contract: report Kelly says he warned Trump against hiring ‘yes man’ to avoid impeachment Trump considers selling DC hotel MORE, The New York Times reported earlier this month. 

Hill, who testified on Oct. 14, told House investigators that former national security adviser John BoltonJohn BoltonBolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates US restores trade benefit to Ukraine after delay Key witness in impeachment investigation asks federal judge to rule on testifying MORE was so alarmed by news of Trump officials’ Ukraine contacts that he asked Hill to notify the chief lawyer for the National Security Council (NSC) about such efforts.

“I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Bolton told Hill, according to her reported testimony.

Hill also said she believed Sondland created a counterintelligence risk because his inexperience could be exploited, according to a separate report by the Times.

George Kent

Kent, a top State Department official, testified on Oct. 15 about efforts by Trump and Giuliani to oust Yovanovitch and get Zelensky to open a corruption investigation into Biden, according to one Democratic lawmaker who offered a series of details about what the diplomat said during his lengthy closed-door deposition. 

“What I can say is he was clearly bothered by the role Mr. Giuliani was playing and the disinformation he was spreading,” Rep. Gerry ConnollyGerald (Gerry) Edward ConnollyDemocrats say whistleblower deposition no longer central to impeachment investigation: report Speier to run for Oversight gavel Overnight Energy: Watchdog warns of threats to federal workers on public lands | Perry to step down on December 1 | Trump declines to appear in Weather Channel climate special MORE (D-Va.), a member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, told reporters after leaving the gathering.

Connolly said Kent, who serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, expressed concerns with what he described as an informal alliance between three figures wrapped up in the Ukraine affair who worked in concert against Yovanovitch.

The individuals included Giuliani; Yuriy Lutsenko, Ukraine’s former chief prosecutor; and John Solomon, a former opinion contributor at The Hill, who wrote a series of columns critical of the Bidens.

“Lutsenko had his own vendettas — one of which apparently was to get at our ambassador, to get her out of the way. And he persuaded Giuliani that she was a problem for him too. And then Giuliani then persuaded the president,” Connolly said. “And it’s sort of this unholy alliance — or unholy triad — that somehow managed to seize control of U.S. foreign policy with respect to Ukraine.”

In a win for Republicans, Kent also told congressional investigators that he had voiced concerns in early 2015 about a conflict of interest for Hunter Biden to work for Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, a source familiar with the deposition confirmed to The Hill.

The source said Kent testified that he expressed concerns to an unidentified Biden official about the situation. The official told Kent that Biden didn’t have the bandwidth to focus on Hunter’s business matters because the family was consumed with their other son, Beau, who was battling cancer. 

Gordan Sondland

Sondland in his Oct. 17 testimony further tied Giuliani to the Trump administration’s foreign policy towards Ukraine, while also seeking to distance himself from Trump officials’ efforts to get Ukraine to launch two politically motivated probes. 

Sondland testified that he was disappointed when the president directed diplomats to work with his personal lawyer on such matters, according to his prepared remarks for testimony that were widely disseminated.

“We were also disappointed by the President’s direction that we involve Mr. Giuliani. Our view was that the men and women of the State Department, not the President’s personal lawyer, should take responsibility for all aspects of U.S. foreign policy towards Ukraine,” he testified.

“However, based on the President’s direction, we were faced with a choice: We could abandon the goal of a White House meeting for President Zelensky, which we all believed was crucial to strengthening U.S.-Ukrainian ties and furthering long-held U.S. foreign policy goals in the region; or we could do as President Trump directed and talk to Mr. Giuliani to address the President’s concerns,” his remarks continue, while condemning any efforts to get a foreign nation involved in a domestic election.

Sondland denied knowledge of efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Biden, saying that he did not make the connection that Hunter Biden served on Burisma’s board — a  statement has raised some eyebrows given published reports and Giuliani’s public interviews on the matter. 

Some Democrats have claimed Sondland has some explaining to do, suggesting that he may have misled lawmakers during his deposition.

The wealthy hotelier and GOP mega-donor also maintained that Trump stressed during a phone conversation with him that there was no quid pro quo for the Ukraine financial aid.

William Taylor

Taylor told House investigators that he believed the Trump administration withheld aid to Ukraine in an effort to get Zelensky to launch politically motivated investigations, according to his opening statement.

“[T]he push to make President Zelensky publicly commit to investigations of Burisma and alleged interference in the 2016 election showed how the official foreign policy of the United States was undercut by the regular efforts led by Mr. Giuliani,” Taylor said in his prepared remarks, which were obtained by The Hill and other outlets.

Taylor also implicated several Trump officials in what he described as a secret, shadowy foreign policy led by Giuliani and Sondland.

“During our call on September 8, Ambassador Sondland tried to explain to me that President Trump is a businessman. When a businessman is about to sign a check to someone who owes him something, he said, the businessman asks that person to pay up before singing the check,” Taylor told investigators on Oct. 22, in a roughly 10-hour closed-door testimony 

Leaving Taylor’s deposition, Democrats called his interview one of the most powerful they have heard so far, while Republicans have sought his attack his record and undercut his testimony as being in conflict with other officials like Sondland.

Click Here: pandora Bracelets

Federal prosecutors have subpoenaed the brother of one of Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiDuring deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Bolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates Giuliani associate used small town in Ukraine to gain influence with American figures: report MORE‘s arrested associates, CNN reported Friday citing two people familiar with the matter. 

Steven Fruman, the brother of the indicted Igor Fruman, was subpoenaed by prosecutors in New York, according to CNN. Sources told the news network that prosecutors have issued several subpoenas and conducted property searches. 

In one instance, a door was reportedly blown off a safe to get to its contents.

ADVERTISEMENT

CNN reported that the reason for the interest in Steven Fruman is not clear, but noted that he is listed in Security and Exchange Commission documents as the vice president of the company run by Igor Fruman. It is also reportedly not clear what was wanted in the safe. 

Fruman, fellow Giuliani associate Lev Parnas and two co-defendants have been accused of funneling foreign money to Republican committees, including a $325,000 contribution in May 2018 to a pro-Trump super PAC called America First Action.

The men reportedly introduced Giuliani to people connected with Ukrainian politics, although their arrests do not appear connected to Giuliani’s dealings with Ukraine. 

Lawyers for Steven and Igor Fruman declined CNN’s request for comment. A spokesman for the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office declined CNN’s request for comment and did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment.  

Click Here: pandora Bracelets

Facebook on Friday announced the launch of a news tab for the platform, which will aggregate and highlight the top stories of the day.

The launch of the “news tab” comes as Facebook faces intense heat over whether its dominance in digital advertising has stifled the ability for newsrooms across the country to grow and retain readers.

“Today we’re starting to test Facebook News, a dedicated place for news on Facebook, to a subset of people in the US,” said news product manager Mona Sarantakos and vice president of global news partnerships Campbell Brown in a statement. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“News gives people more control over the stories they see, and the ability to explore a wider range of their news interests, directly within the Facebook app,” they added.

Facebook News will feature top stories curated by a team of reporters. It will also personalize the selection of stories for users based on news they interact with while using the feature so that people can easily find stories focused on business, entertainment, health and other subjects.

Users will also be allowed to link their paid news subscriptions and hide articles, topics and publishers they don’t want to see. 

In a New York Times op-ed published Friday, Facebook CEO Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergFacebook Green New Deal ad tests Ocasio-Cortez’s concerns about the platform Ocasio-Cortez blasts Facebook’s ad decisions, calling them ‘increasingly disturbing’ Mark Zuckerberg deserves praise for his noble stand on free speech MORE acknowledged “the internet disrupted the business model for much of the news industry.” 

“This model establishes a long-term financial partnership between publishers and Facebook for the first time,” Zuckerberg wrote.

Facebook will pay some news publishers for their content.

Click Here: France Football Shop

Publishers that appear on the platform will need to be in Facebook’s news page index and follow its publisher guidelines.

The Hill is one of the news publishers participating in the launch of the news tab.

Articles will also continue to appear on the site’s news feed as they do today.

“Journalism plays a critical role in our democracy. When news is deeply-reported and well-sourced it gives people information they can rely on. When it’s not, we lose an essential tool for making good decisions,” said Brown and Sarantakos in the Facebook announcement.

The company has maintained a strained relationship with news publishers for years, throughout several product launches intended to bring more news to Facebook’s platform.

The “news” tab will help Facebook address critics who have accused the platform of harming U.S. newsrooms and failing to stave off the spread of misinformation. 

Updated at 2:36 p.m.

 

The New York Police Department (NYPD) and Mayor Bill de BlasioBill de BlasioNYPD, de Blasio contradict Trump lawyer: President would be charged if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue New York City police officers to get free mental health care as department faces rise in officer suicides Two members of far-right ‘Proud Boys’ sentenced to prison for part in New York street brawl MORE (D) contradicted claims made by President TrumpDonald John TrumpCharles Barkley: ‘Vice President Pence needs to shut the hell up’ Democrats say whistleblower deposition no longer central to impeachment investigation: report Trump plans to appeal House subpoena for financial records to Supreme Court MORE’s lawyer that the commander in chief could not be prosecuted even if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue.

“If anybody shoots someone, they get arrested. I don’t care if they’re the president of the United States or anybody else,” de Blasio told reporters during a Thursday press conference, as reported by Politico. “If you shoot someone, you should get arrested, and we would arrest him.”

NYPD First Deputy Commissioner Ben Tucker agreed, saying that Trump would be arrested for the hypothetical shooting.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump’s personal attorney William Consovoy made the argument in a federal appeals court on Wednesday trying to block a Manhattan district attorney subpoena seeking Trump’s tax returns and financial records from his accounting firm.

The president’s legal team has argued that he has blanket immunity from criminal prosecution and even investigation while in office.

Judge Denny Chin referenced Trump’s infamous declaration on the 2016 campaign trail that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot someone” without losing supporters, asking Consovoy how that scenario would work under the president’s claims of immunity.

“What’s your view on the ‘Fifth Avenue’ example?” Chin asked. “Local authorities couldn’t investigate, couldn’t do anything about it?”

“Nothing could be done, that’s your position?” he added.

“That is correct,” Consovoy responded.

Click Here: France Football Shop

De Blasio, who dropped out of the Democratic presidential contest last month, knocked the president’s counsel. 

“Anyone who calls themselves a lawyer who would say that should not be a lawyer — let’s start with that,” the mayor said. “If you shoot someone, that’s a crime, and no one is above the law. He would be arrested, period.”

Judge Victor Marrero, a federal district court judge in New York appointed by former President Clinton, earlier this month dismissed the president’s lawsuit that sought to block enforcement of the Manhattan district attorney’s office’s subpoena for his records from accounting firm Mazars USA. The president’s lawyers quickly appealed the decision.

The district attorney’s office is seeking the records as part of a grand jury investigation into payments made ahead of the 2016 presidential election to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, women who allege that they had affairs with Trump. Trump has denied the affairs.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasAnita Hill: ‘I am ready to hold Joe Biden accountable’ Anita Hill: Trump co-opting ‘lynching’ language is ‘ludicrous and insulting’ Clarence Thomas: There’s a ‘different sets of rules’ for criticizing me because I’m conservative MORE says in an upcoming documentary that there is a “different sets of rules” for criticizing him because he is a black conservative.

“There’s different sets of rules for different people,” Thomas said in “Created Equal: Clarence Thomas In His Own Words,” which was viewed by Time. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“If you criticize a black person who’s more liberal, you’re a racist. Whereas you can do whatever to me, or to now [Housing and Urban Development Secretary] Ben CarsonBenjamin (Ben) Solomon CarsonClarence Thomas: There’s a ‘different sets of rules’ for criticizing me because I’m conservative Coulter: Debate questions that the Democrats should have been asked The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Better Medicare Alliance – Diplomat’s ‘powerful’ testimony and ‘lynching’ attract headlines MORE, and that’s fine, because you’re not really black because you’re not doing what we expect black people to do,” he added. 

According to Time, Thomas also addressed allegations by Anita HillAnita Faye HillAnita Hill: Kavanaugh’s confirmation filled me with ‘profound sadness and disappointment’ Singer Brandi Carlile drops out of Fortune event over Kirstjen Nielsen’s appearance Supreme Court session begins without ill Clarence Thomas MORE, who claimed during Thomas’s confirmation hearing that the then-nominee had sexually harassed her in the workplace. 

Thomas said that “all heck broke loose” when the Hill’s accusation became public.

He also said he felt “deflated” when questioned by the FBI and “literally under siege,” describing the media coverage.

The justice denied the allegations both at the time and in the documentary. 

Thomas also said he realized during the confirmation hearing that the type of person who held him back most in his life was not the “bigot, Klansman, and rural sheriff” as he had anticipated, but rather the “modern-day liberal.”

Time reported that the documentary was made by Manifold Productions, which is headed by conservative filmmaker Michael Pack, who has worked with former White House aide Stephen Bannon. The magazine noted that the film is sympathetic to the Supreme Court justice. 

It will be released in 2020 and air on PBS in May. 

Hill’s sexual harassment allegations have taken on renewed significance in the wake of the “Me Too” movement and sexual misconduct allegations that arose during Supreme Court Justice Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughSenate confirms Trump judicial pick labeled ‘not qualified’ by American Bar Association Clarence Thomas: There’s a ‘different sets of rules’ for criticizing me because I’m conservative Trump urged to hire chief strategist for impeachment fight MORE‘s confirmation process. Both Thomas and Kavanaugh have denied the allegations against them. 

Hill said this week that Kavanaugh’s confirmation, during which professor Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault, filled her with “profound sadness and disappointment.”

“The perception that so many had from that was that we hadn’t made any advances in 28 years. And I think that is not the case,” she said. “And I think we all know that, but then when we had the opportunity to display it, it didn’t happen.”

Click Here: France Football Shop

Vulnerable GOP senators up for reelection next year are giving the cold shoulder to a bipartisan bill aimed at lowering drug prices.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyVulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill Senators concerned impeachment will consume agenda Whistleblower exposed much more than Trump’s self-dealing MORE (R-Iowa) is pushing for passage of his measure with Sen. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenVulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill Overnight Health Care — Presented by Partnership for America’s Health Care Future — Warren faces tough choices on ‘Medicare for All’ funding | Dems demand answers on Tom Price’s charter flights | Medicaid expansion nears 2020 ballot in Oklahoma Hillicon Valley: Senators seek national security review of TikTok | TikTok denies claims of Chinese government influence | CNN chief rips Facebook policy on political ads | Dem questions DHS’ handling of personal data MORE (D-Ore.) to lower drug prices, something seen as a rare area for possible bipartisan agreement this year.

ADVERTISEMENT

Grassley is explicitly and publicly making the case to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMcConnell blasts impeachment inquiry as ‘kangaroo court’ in fundraising pitch Vulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill Romney, Collins, Murkowski only Senate GOP holdouts on Graham’s impeachment resolution MORE (R-Ky.) that his bill would help vulnerable Republicans. However, many of those incumbents have declined to support the Grassley-Wyden bill.

GOP Sens. Thom TillisThomas (Thom) Roland TillisVulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by Nareit — State of the states: Political fights heat up GOP worries it’s losing impeachment fight MORE (N.C.), Martha McSallyMartha Elizabeth McSallyVulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by Nareit — State of the states: Political fights heat up GOP worries it’s losing impeachment fight MORE (Ariz.), Cory GardnerCory Scott GardnerVulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill Hillicon Valley: Facebook launches ‘News Tab’ | Senate passes bill to take on ‘deepfakes’ | Schumer outlines vision for electric cars Romney, Collins, Murkowski only Senate GOP holdouts on Graham’s impeachment resolution MORE (Colo.) and Joni ErnstJoni Kay ErnstVulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill Hillicon Valley: Facebook launches ‘News Tab’ | Senate passes bill to take on ‘deepfakes’ | Schumer outlines vision for electric cars The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by Nareit — State of the states: Political fights heat up MORE (Iowa), who all face potentially tough races next year, have either expressed concerns about the legislation or declined to back it. Sen. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsMcConnell blasts impeachment inquiry as ‘kangaroo court’ in fundraising pitch Vulnerable Republicans balk at Trump-backed drug pricing bill Romney, Collins, Murkowski only Senate GOP holdouts on Graham’s impeachment resolution MORE (Maine) is the lone vulnerable Republican to endorse the measure.

Senators who haven’t supported the bill are highlighting the bind they face. On the one hand, the bill has the support of President TrumpDonald John Trump Comey: Mueller ‘didn’t succeed in his mission because there was inadequate transparency’ During deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Bolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates MORE, and lowering drug prices is a popular issue with voters. But on the other hand, supporting the bill breaks with GOP orthodoxy and invites a backlash from both conservatives and the pharmaceutical industry.

The most controversial provision for Republicans requires drug companies to pay money back to Medicare if their prices rise faster than inflation, something some Republicans view as too close to a “price control.”

Tillis told The Hill that he has “concerns” with the bill, saying that he wants to focus on middlemen known as pharmacy benefit managers and other parts of the supply chain, not just pharmaceutical companies themselves to lower drug prices.

“I think we need to make progress on [the bill],” Tillis said, while adding he has not made a final decision on how he would vote if the bill came to the floor.

McSally has also expressed concerns, declining to say if she would support the bill in an interview with The Arizona Republic in August.

“There are a lot of really good things in that legislation and we’re making sure there’s not any unintended consequences,” she said. “But we appreciate the intent. We definitely support the intent.”

A McSally aide said Friday that the senator “has been in close discussions” with Grassley but did not give a firm position on the measure either way.

Gardner’s office did not respond to a request for comment on whether he supports the bill.

Ernst, Grassley’s fellow Iowan, has also so far declined to endorse the bill.

“Senator Grassley and Senator Ernst share the same goal of lowering the cost of prescription drugs for their fellow Iowans, and on this particular bill, Senator Ernst generally supports the intent of the package and is still reviewing the specifics of the proposal,” said Ernst spokeswoman Kelsi Daniell.

The wavering from GOP senators comes despite support from Trump, who frequently rails against high drug prices.

“I like Sen. Grassley’s drug pricing bill very much,” Trump tweeted last month.

Lowering drug prices is also a major issue for voters. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll in September found that 70 percent of the public said lowering drug prices should be a “top priority.”

But conservative groups have attacked the bill for its limits on price increases in Medicare, and FreedomWorks called the idea “price controls” in July.

“We cannot afford to put our nation on the slippery slope towards socialized medicine,” the group’s president, Adam Brandon, said at the time.

The pharmaceutical industry — a powerful force in Washington and a major source of campaign contributions — is also staunchly opposed to the bill.

Some vulnerable Republican senators are pointing to smaller, less controversial bills to show their commitment to lowering drug prices.

Ernst and McSally, for example, point to their support for the Creates Act, a smaller bipartisan measure aimed at lowering drug prices by cracking down on delay tactics that drug companies use to fend off competition from cheaper generic drugs.

The pharmaceutical industry also supports that measure, helping make it less controversial than the Grassley-Wyden bill.

Grassley last month publicly called on McConnell to support his bill, arguing that it would help Republicans keep control of the Senate in next year’s elections.

He’s pitched his bill to Republicans as the “moderate” alternative to Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiWSJ: Sondland told the House that Trump’s Ukraine pressure was a quid pro quo Schiff says committees are making ‘rapid progress’ in impeachment probe McConnell blasts impeachment inquiry as ‘kangaroo court’ in fundraising pitch MORE’s (D-Calif.) drug pricing measure in the House, which is far more sweeping but has at least some chance of receiving Trump’s support given his focus on drug costs.

“There’s a great deal of disgust with the rapidly increasing price of drugs, and every Republican up for election’s going to have to have a place to land,” Grassley told reporters in September.

“And this is the place to land, because they’re surely not going to land with what Pelosi’s [doing],” he continued. “If McConnell wants to keep the Republican majority, then this drug pricing bill is part of that plan.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Grassley spokesman Michael Zona said Friday that support is growing and more Republican supporters will be announced “in the coming days.”

Click Here: Germany Football Shop

Asked about the path forward for Grassley’s bill and whether it would get a vote, McConnell’s office referred back to the majority leader’s comments to Politico last month, when he said the path forward is still “under discussion” and the Senate is still “looking at doing something on drug pricing.”

However, given the bill’s ability to divide McConnell’s caucus, he could be hesitant to give it a vote.

Many lobbyists expect that Grassley’s bill will not come up for a vote as a standalone measure and that its only chance is to have sections included in a larger package, such as a government funding deal. However, that could be a more likely scenario for smaller measures such as the Creates Act.

With the election ahead, both sides are already throwing jabs over the issue.

“Voters are worried about prescription drugs getting more expensive, but many Republican incumbents on the ballot haven’t taken meaningful steps to bring down prices and are now dodging questions about legislation,” said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokesman Stewart Boss.

Jesse Hunt, a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, countered that Republicans “are firmly committed to addressing the rising cost of prescription drugs through a variety of different measures.”

“These attacks from Democrats are nothing more than an effort to distract voters from their party’s embrace of plans that would eliminate employer-based health care coverage,” he added.

The Pentagon announced Friday that it has awarded its $10 billion “war cloud” computing contract to Microsoft over rival Amazon.

The announcement from the Department of Defense (DOD) marked a surprising turn of events — for months, Amazon was viewed as the favorite to win the contract amid an increasingly political lobbying battle.

The Pentagon said that awarding Microsoft the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure contract (JEDI) “continues our strategy of a multi-vendor, multi-cloud environment,” adding that “the department’s needs are diverse and cannot be met by any single supplier.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“Today, the Department of Defense has taken another step forward in the implementation of our Cloud Strategy with the award of an enterprise general-purpose cloud contract to Microsoft,” the Pentagon said in a statement. “This contract will address critical and urgent unmet warfighter requirements for modern cloud infrastructure at all three classification levels delivered out to the tactical edge.”

The JEDI contract will allow Microsoft to develop cloud-computing infrastructure for the U.S. military for up to 10 years, ending in October 2029, though it begins at only two. The deal could adds at least $10 per share to Microsoft’s stock, and bolsters its position in the multi-billion dollar cloud-computing “wars.”

For months, analysts and experts said Amazon was the obvious front-runner for the highly contested contract because its lucrative cloud computing arm, Amazon Web Services, is likely best equipped to meet the standards necessary to store the DOD’s top-secret and classified data. The military has designated Amazon Web Services with the highest data management certification possible. 

But the intense political battle around the JEDI contract turned up a notch in July, when President TrumpDonald John Trump Comey: Mueller ‘didn’t succeed in his mission because there was inadequate transparency’ During deposition, official says he made several efforts to advocate for Marie Yovanovitch Bolton looms large as impeachment inquiry accelerates MORE called on the DOD to look “very closely” at whether the contract was written specifically for Amazon.

“I’m getting tremendous complaints about the contract with the Pentagon and with Amazon,” Trump said at the time. “They’re saying it wasn’t competitively bid.” 

Shortly after, the newly appointed Pentagon chief Mark EsperMark EsperRussia calls increased US military presence in Syrian oil fields ‘banditry’ Pentagon awards billion cloud contract to Microsoft over Amazon Overnight Defense: Pentagon chief says ‘mechanized’ forces headed to Syria | Troops would protect oil fields | House subpoenas State, OMB officials in impeachment inquiry | Trump keeps up attacks on key diplomat MORE ordered a review into the contract, which had delayed the award of JEDI for several months.

Earlier this week, Esper recused himself from the process due to his son’s employment with one of the companies that sought the deal.

Over the past several months, a stream of Republican lawmakers have sent dueling letters to the DOD and White House urging them to delay the contract over the Amazon bias allegations, while others urged against delaying the contract any further.

Oracle, a smaller cloud-computing company, has acted as the prime JEDI antagonist, taking the DOD to court over claims that the cloud-computing procurement process was unfair and biased. A federal judge dismissed Oracle’s claims over the summer, saying the company did not provide proper evidence. And multiple government investigations have cleared the DOD of the allegations.

ADVERTISEMENT

Still, concerns around JEDI have persisted, as lawmakers and advisers to Trump have raised the issue with the president. In August, the Defense Department’s inspector general announced that it was looking into “matters related to” JEDI, which were referred to the office by “members of Congress and through the DOD hotline.”

A speechwriter for former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis this week alleged that Trump wanted to “screw” Amazon by giving the contract to another company, according to an excerpt of his upcoming book published by The Washington Post this week. Trump regularly attacks Amazon founder Jeff BezosJeffrey (Jeff) Preston BezosTrump told Mattis to ‘screw Amazon’ out of Defense contract: book Pentagon awards billion cloud contract to Microsoft over Amazon Hillicon Valley: Facebook launches ‘News Tab’ | Senate passes bill to take on ‘deepfakes’ | Schumer outlines vision for electric cars MORE, who owns The Washington Post, a paper Trump accuses of being biased against him. 

Daniel Ives, an equity analyst with Wedbush Securities, on Friday night said he “fully expect[s] Amazon and others to challenge this decision in the courts.” 

Microsoft is a top government contractor and provides technology across a range of sectors, including the defense and intelligence communities. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday.

“We’re surprised about this conclusion,” an Amazon Web Services spokesperson said in a statement on Friday night. “AWS is the clear leader in cloud computing and a detailed assessment purely on the comparative offerings clearly lead to a different conclusion.”

“We remain deeply committed to continuing to innovate for the new digital battlefield where security, efficiency, resiliency and scalability of resources can be the difference between success and failure,” the spokesman added.

The Defense Department said in its description of the contract on Friday that it will “provide enterprise level, commercial Infrastructure” to “support Department of Defense business and mission operations.”

“The National Defense Strategy dictates that we must improve the speed and effectiveness with which we develop and deploy modernized technical capabilities to our women and men in uniform,” DOD Chief Information Officer Dana Deasy said.

“The DOD Digital Modernization Strategy was created to support this imperative. This award is an important step in execution of the Digital Modernization Strategy.” 

The contract is expected to supercharge DOD’s war capabilities, including on the battlefield. 

“Ultimately, this is a paradigm changer for Microsoft … to be declared victor in this hard fought technology/K Street battle that took place over the last year,” Ives wrote.

Tal Axelrod contributed

Click Here: Germany Football Shop

Nearly 900 children in the Pakistani city of Ratodero tested positive for HIV this year and suffered from fevers that resisted treatment, according to a New York Times report released Saturday.

After the disease was on its heels in April, the city became the epicenter of a new outbreak that disproportionally impacted children. Health officials initially said a single pediatrician who was accused of reusing syringes was to blame, according to The Times.

ADVERTISEMENT

Since April, about 1,100 citizens have tested positive for HIV, including 900 patients under 12 years old. Health officials suspect the real numbers could be much higher.

Officials arriving to the city discovered that many of the infected children were patients of the same pediatrician, Muzaffar Ghanghro, who served many of the city’s poorest families.

“It was devastating,” Gulbahar Shaikh, a local journalist who broke the news of the epidemic in April and whose children are patients of Ghanghro’s, told The Times.

“He said, ‘If you don’t want my treatment, go to another doctor’,” added Imtiaz Jalbani, a laborer who had his six children treated by Ghanghro. “My wife and I had to starve ourselves to pay for the medicine.”

Four of his children contracted HIV and two have already died.

Ghanghro was ultimately arrested and charged with negligence, manslaughter and causing unintentional harm. He has yet to be convicted and has maintained his innocence, saying he never reuses syringes.

Health officials say that Ghanghro is not likely to be the sole cause of the outbreak, noting that visiting health workers saw many other doctors reuse syringes, barbers use the same razors to shave customers, and roadside dentists use unsterilized tools. 

The uptick in the number of HIV-positive people in Ratodero is part of a nationwide trend; according to estimates by UNAIDS, the United Nations task force that specializes in HIV and AIDS, the number of HIV-positive people in Packistan has nearly doubled to about 160,000 since 2010.

Click Here: Germany Football Shop

Protesters march to an Amazon store to raise awareness of Amazon’s facilitation of surveillance efforts by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

At the place where music, technology and politics converge, you’ll find … discord. A group of more than 380 musicians — including well-known indie artists like Ted Leo, Deerhoof, Damon & Naomi, Zola Jesus, Downtown Boys and Sheer Mag — pledged in an open letter on Thursday to cut all business ties with Amazon over the work of its gargantuan Amazon Web Services subsidiary.

The letter, organized in part by the activist group Fight for the Future and the public introduction to No Music for ICE, was spurred by AWS’ plans for a music festival called Intersect. The letter demands that AWS cancel all contracts with independent businesses and government agencies, such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, over human rights abuses it alleges they have committed. It also demands that Amazon end work on “projects that encourage racial profiling and discrimination,” such as facial recognition technology. (A form of this tech has been deployed broadly in China, where it’s reportedly used to target members of the Uighur community and arrest suspects outside concerts.) Amazon’s connection to ICE is through the database services it provides to Palantir, a data analytics company that has contracts with the agency. “We will not allow Amazon to exploit our creativity to promote its brand while it enables attacks on immigrants, communities of color, workers, and local economies. We call on all artists who believe in basic rights and human dignity to join us,” it reads.

The letter comes one week after the Black Madonna, a highly regarded and internationally popular DJ, expressed surprise at Amazon’s involvement in a festival she had been booked to play. “If you were shocked I’d play for Amazon, well that makes two of us,” she wrote on Twitter. The Black Madonna claimed that the ownership of the festival, scheduled for Dec. 6 and 7 in Las Vegas, was not made clear at the time she signed the performance contract. After the DJ had burned “some bridges,” as she wrote, AWS agreed to release her from the contract.

Regardless, the festival’s current lineup is formidable, including mainstream acts such as Foo Fighters, Spoon and Beck; lauded and laureled artists such as Kacey Musgraves, Brandi Carlile and Thundercat; and younger talents Japanese Breakfast, Jpegmafia and Sudan Archives.

Amazon did not respond to a request for comment on the letter or confirm whether any of the scheduled performers have canceled their contracts since the letter’s publication.

The letter is the latest public challenge to tech companies’ relationships with agencies such as ICE and CBP. Last year, 650 employees of business software company Salesforce petitioned Marc Benioff, its CEO, to cancel its contract with CBP. In August, more than 1,000 employees of Google did the same. This past July, Amazon Web Services itself was protested against over the same issue, this time outside the Javits Center in New York City, where it was holding an AWS summit.

Amazon Web Services bills itself as a cloud platform that provides the infrastructure — the highway part of the information superhighway — for things like the music that you hear when clicking play on Spotify, the show you’re watching on Netflix or the airline tickets you’re thinking of purchasing on Expedia. (Spotify, for what it’s worth, is now in the midst of migrating to Google’s cloud platform.) But the scale of AWS means that it has essentially become a backbone — or, at least, a healthy number of vertebrae — supporting the Internet. That includes the databases of agencies like the Transportation Security Administration and CBP. In 2018, the research group Synergy classified the company’s market share as being “in a league of its own.” As of the most recent financial quarter, AWS was worth more to Amazon than its retail segment, bringing in over $600 million in net income above Amazon.com in North America.

Correction Oct. 24, 2019

An earlier version of this story mistakenly called Customs and Border Protection by the name Customs and Border Patrol.

Click Here: pinko shop cheap

The author of an anonymous op-ed in that ran in The New York Times on September 5, 2018, and created a stir both inside the White House and beyond, has expanded the article into a book that will be published next month. It will be called A Warning, and published by Twelve Books, an imprint of Grand Central Publishing/Hachette Book Group, which announced the publication on Tuesday.

The op-ed titled, “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration,” bore the heading, “I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.” It became famous for its insider criticism of President Trump. Its author claimed to be a “senior official” in the current administration. That description was backed up by Times Op-Ed editor James Dao, who said in an interview in the newspaper, that “the writer was introduced to us by an intermediary whom we know and trust,” and that the Times staff verified the person’s identity “through direct communication with the author, some background checking and the testimony of the trusted intermediary.”

Trump responded to the op-ed calling its author “gutless.” Sarah Sanders, the press secretary at the time, called on the person to resign.

The article read, in part:

The new book will be published on Nov. 19. Hachette has said the author will remain anonymous, and royalties from the book will be donated to nonprofit organizations that focus on government accountability and support “those who stand up for truth in repressive countries around the world.”