Un livre sur Emmanuel Macron décrit la grande influence de Brigitte Macron auprès de la grande bourgeoisie dans l’élection de son mari à la présidence de la République, puis dans l’exercice de ses fonctions.

Brigitte Macron indispensable. Au-delà du soutien indéfectible qu’elle a montré à son époux avant son élection, Brigitte Macron a œuvré pour qu’il se fasse une place dans les cercles les plus élevés. C’est ce qu’explique Marc Endeweld dans son livre Le grand manipulateur, les réseaux secrets de Macron, sorti en avril, aux éditions Stock.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

“Brigitte Macron va démultiplier son carnet d’adresse personnel, pour en faire bénéficier son mari, explique l’auteur. Cette discrète institution scolaire gérée par des jésuites, que les initiés appellent entre eux “Franklin” (car installée rue Benjamin Franklin), est un temple de la reproduction sociale.” En effet, nombreuses sont les personnalités du monde politique français sont passées par cette institution, et en y faisant sa place, elle compte obtenir le soutien de ces élites pour la carrière politique de son mari. “Dirigé un temps par la mère de Bruno Le Maire, Viviane Fradin de Belâbre, Franklin concentre une bonne partie des rejetons de la grande bourgeoisie de l’Ouest parisien.”

Selon Marc Endeweld, la première dame est très à l’aise parmi ses nouvelles fréquentations. “Cet environnement particulièrement conservateur convient parfaitement à Brigitte Macron, issue de la bonne bourgeoisie d’Amiens et du Touquet. La future première dame assume ses préférences politiques et dit à qui veut l’entendre qu’elle a voté Nicolas Sarkozy pour les présidentielles de 2007 et 2012. Emmanuel n’est pas en reste puisque c’est un an après les débuts de sa femme à Franklin qu’il devient banquier d’affaires chez Rothschild, établissement financier au cœur du capitalisme français, dirigé par David de Rothschild, qui dispose d’un imposant carnet d’adresses parmi la droite française.” Un carnet d’adresses qui a, sans conteste, participé à son ascension.

L’éducation, son “domaine réservé”

Mais Brigitte Macron ne s’est pas arrêtée là. Selon le livre, une fois son mari au pouvoir, “la vigilance de Brigitte Macron se trouve démultipliée. Et contre toutes les convenances, elle n’hésite pas à être en contact direct avec certains ministres, notamment Jean-Michel Blanquer. L’Education nationale est son domaine réservé.” L’ancienne professeure n’hésite pas à s’impliquer dans les dossiers, comme le 4 juillet au G7 de l’éducation où elle a pris la parole sur le harcèlement scolaire aux côtés du ministre de l’éducation. La première dame y a martelé le même message aux élèves réunis face à elle : “Il y a une seule urgence : parler. Si vous ne parlez pas, on ne pourra rien faire.” Il ne faut pas compter sur elle pour rester inactive

Crédits photos : Stephane Lemouton / Bestimage

Vin Diesel face à Dwayne Johnson dans “Fast & Furious 8”, une affiche flashy pour “Les Gardiens de la Galaxie 2”, François Damiens et Cécile de France partenaires dans “Otez-moi d’un doute”… Découvrez les 20 visuels incontournables de la semaine !

1. Les Gardiens de la Galaxie 2 avec Chris Pratt et Zoe Saldana
+

L’histoire : Les Gardiens de la Galaxie chercheront à percer le mystère de la véritable filiation de Star-Lord…

Tout savoir sur “Les Gardiens de la Galaxie 2”
Lire la suite

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Welcome to Thursday’s Overnight Health Care.

The House passed Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiVulnerable Democrats tout legislative wins, not impeachment Photographer leaves Judiciary hearing after being accused of taking photos of member notes Overnight Health Care — Presented by That’s Medicaid — House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices | Senate confirms Trump FDA pick | Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina MORE‘s drug pricing bill, and while it’s a big win for the Speaker it’s unlikely to go anywhere in the Senate. Meanwhile, the upper chamber confirmed President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate gears up for battle over witnesses in impeachment trial Vulnerable Democrats tout legislative wins, not impeachment Trump appears to set personal record for tweets in a day MORE‘s nominee to lead the Food and Drug Administration, and the Trump administration approved South Carolina’s Medicaid work requirements. 

We’ll start with the big drug pricing vote in the House.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices

After months of negotiations (and reporters staking out meetings) the drug pricing bill finally passed the House. 

(But it’s likely dead in the Senate). 

The bill passed on a largely party-line vote of 230-192. The measure, which would allow the government to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, is one of House Democrats’ top priorities and is expected to be touted by vulnerable Democrats up for reelection next year.

The party is also looking to show that it is focused on kitchen table issues like lowering drug costs even as lawmakers prepare for an impeachment vote against President Trump.

So what’s next on drug prices? It is possible that smaller measures to lower drug prices could become law, given a bipartisan push to do something on the topic, but a path forward remains unclear amid divisions and multiple competing proposals. 

ADVERTISEMENT

This House bill is almost certain to die in the GOP-led Senate, given that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellSenate gears up for battle over witnesses in impeachment trial McConnell: I doubt any GOP senator will vote to impeach Trump McConnell says he’ll be in ‘total coordination’ with White House on impeachment trial strategy MORE (R-Ky.) has called it “socialist” and vowed to block it. Republicans warn the measure would hinder the development of new treatments and impose “price controls.”

The 2020 angle: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) is still going to spend $5 million on Facebook ads in battleground districts to sell the bill, though. 

Read more on the bill here. 

 

 

Senate confirms Trump’s FDA pick

The Senate on Thursday confirmed President Trump’s nominee to lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in a 72-18 vote.

Stephen Hahn, a cancer doctor from Texas, joins the agency at a challenging time as it tries to find a solution to rising youth vaping rates.

While the Trump administration announced it would clear the market of flavored e-cigarette products in September, the president has since said he wants to find a compromise that preserves flavors for adults while keeping them from children.

The FDA is facing pressure from public health groups to follow through on the ban, arguing flavors are fueling a youth vaping epidemic.

Hahn hasn’t commented on whether he would clear the market of flavors as FDA commissioner. But his assurances that he would take the issue seriously were enough to garner votes from Senate Democrats who are typically wary of Trump’s nominees.

Sens. Dick DurbinRichard (Dick) Joseph DurbinSenators zero in on shadowy court at center of IG report Senate gears up for battle over witnesses in impeachment trial Overnight Health Care — Presented by That’s Medicaid — House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices | Senate confirms Trump FDA pick | Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina MORE (Ill.), Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineOvernight Health Care — Presented by That’s Medicaid — House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices | Senate confirms Trump FDA pick | Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina Senate confirms Trump’s nominee to lead FDA Democrats worried by Jeremy Corbyn’s UK rise amid anti-Semitism MORE (Va.), Bob MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezDemocrats worried by Jeremy Corbyn’s UK rise amid anti-Semitism Lankford to be named next Senate Ethics chairman Foreign Relations Democrat calls on Iran to release other American prisoners MORE (N.J.), Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyMcConnell: I doubt any GOP senator will vote to impeach Trump Overnight Health Care — Presented by That’s Medicaid — House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices | Senate confirms Trump FDA pick | Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina Senate confirms Trump’s nominee to lead FDA MORE (Conn.), Jeanne ShaheenCynthia (Jeanne) Jeanne ShaheenOvernight Health Care — Presented by That’s Medicaid — House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices | Senate confirms Trump FDA pick | Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina Senate confirms Trump’s nominee to lead FDA Senate panel advances Turkey sanctions bill despite Trump objections MORE (N.H.) and Chris Van HollenChristopher (Chris) Van HollenOvernight Health Care — Presented by That’s Medicaid — House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices | Senate confirms Trump FDA pick | Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina Senate confirms Trump’s nominee to lead FDA GOP senator blocks bill aimed at preventing Russia election meddling MORE (Md.) are among the Democrats who also voted for Hahn.

Read more about the confirmation here.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Trump officials approve Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina

The Trump administration will allow South Carolina to impose work requirements on certain Medicaid beneficiaries, state and federal officials announced Thursday.

“South Carolina’s economy is booming, wages are up, and our unemployment rate is at an all-time low,” Gov. Henry McMaster (R) said in a statement. “Competition for workers is fierce and businesses are struggling to fill vacancies. In this economy there is no excuse for the able bodied not to be working.”

Under South Carolina’s requirements, adults on Medicaid will need to work or volunteer at least 80 hours a month, beginning in July, in order to keep their eligibility.

What’s unique: South Carolina restricts Medicaid eligibility to only its poorest residents, meaning the state is poised to become the first to impose work requirements on people who earn below the federal poverty level. South Carolina also did not expand Medicaid under ObamaCare, which means work requirements will be targeting low-income parents.

The politics: The administration, particularly CMS Administrator Seema Verma, has endured a string of high-profile losses in the courts in relation to work requirements. Other states have decided to put their requirements on hold because of expensive lawsuits. Verma can tout the approval of South Carolina’s waiver as a victory. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Read more on the approval here.

 

Physicians arrested after protesting denial of flu shots to migrants in US custody

At least two volunteer physicians were among a group of people arrested after protesting the refusal of the federal government to give migrant detainees a flu shot.

U.S. immigration authorities blocked the physicians from administering flu vaccines to migrants being held at a border patrol station just south of San Diego. They were arrested earlier this week after demonstrating outside of the facility.

The protests occurred after the Trump administration denied the same group of doctors permission to open a free pilot flu clinic for detained migrants.

According to a Border Patrol spokesperson, the agency has never had a policy to vaccinate detained migrants, and has no plans to implement one in the future.

ADVERTISEMENT

A spokesperson previously told The Hill that the agency has significantly expanded medical support efforts along the southern border, but “to try and layer a comprehensive vaccinations system onto that would be logistically very challenging.”

Tensions between physicians and immigration authorities have been building as a result of the administration’s policy of not providing flu shots to detainees in Border Patrol custody. 

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security mocked the protesters on Twitter, saying the physicians were “radical political activists” who wanted to inject migrants with drugs.

Read more here.

 

Click Here: USA Rugby Shop

 

What we’re reading 

Drug prices and health care are wild cards in the 2020 election (CNBC)

Former NFL players charged with defrauding league health care program (USA Today)

The turf war between Trump’s top 2 health care officials, explained (Vox) 

Could greater access to Medicaid reduce high death rates for new moms? (PBS Newshour) 

 

State by State

PhRMA sues Oregon over drug pricing transparency laws, calling them ‘unconstitutional’ (Stat News)

Massachusetts marijuana store given OK to resume sales of some vaping products (Boston Globe)

 

From The Hill’s opinion page: 

Kamala Harris dropped out, but let’s keep her mental health plan alive

Doping epidemic will persist as long as we expect athletes to be superhuman

The Trump administration will allow South Carolina to impose work requirements on certain Medicaid beneficiaries, state and federal officials announced Thursday.

South Carolina restricts Medicaid eligibility to only its poorest residents, meaning it is poised to become the first state to impose work requirements on people who earn below the federal poverty level.

“South Carolina’s economy is booming, wages are up, and our unemployment rate is at an all-time low,” Gov. Henry McMaster (R) said in a statement. “Competition for workers is fierce and businesses are struggling to fill vacancies. In this economy there is no excuse for the able bodied not to be working.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Under South Carolina’s requirements, adults on Medicaid will need to work or volunteer at least 80 hours a month, beginning no earlier than next December, in order to keep their eligibility.

Unlike other states that have tried to impose work requirements, South Carolina won’t completely end Medicaid benefits for people who don’t comply.

Instead, people who can’t meet the requirements for three consecutive months will have their benefits suspended until the work requirements are met, and will be able to re-enroll whenever they can prove their compliance.

Single parents who are caregivers for children will have to apply for an exemption, but one adult in two-parent families will still need to meet the requirements.

“South Carolina’s requirements — complete with appropriate protections — will lift South Carolinians out of poverty by encouraging as many as possible to participate in the booming Trump economy,” Seema Verma, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator, said in a statement. 

One of the main criticisms of work requirements is that they are merely a way to eliminate people from the Medicaid rolls and trim state health care spending.

ADVERTISEMENT

South Carolina’s own estimates found that 7,100 beneficiaries could lose their coverage as a result of the requirements. However, the state’s approval letter noted that the actual coverage impact “will greatly depend on the choices made by each individual.”

South Carolina did not expand Medicaid under ObamaCare. Adults in the state who are able to qualify for Medicaid must earn below 67 percent of the federal poverty level, which is $12,490 for an individual or $21,330 for a family of three. 

The state will join Wisconsin as the only non-expansion state to gain approval for work requirements, although Wisconsin will allow coverage for people earning up to 100 percent of the poverty level.

The Trump administration has made state innovation a priority and has promised to fast-track Medicaid waivers, especially those that will impose work requirements on beneficiaries. The administration has approved 10 states so far, but has suffered a series of setbacks.

A federal judge blocked implementation of work requirements in Kentucky and Arkansas, and an appeals court recently seemed skeptical of the administration’s arguments in the case.

New Hampshire suspended its work requirements last summer, and they were also later blocked by a judge.

Indiana and Arizona have also suspended their work requirements in the face of expensive lawsuits, and Virginia is moving to drop work requirements after Democrats took full control of the state legislature.

Advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers were quick to denounce the South Carolina approval. 

“South Carolina already has one of the strictest Medicaid programs in the country,” said Sen. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenSenators zero in on shadowy court at center of IG report Trump administration approves Medicaid work requirements in South Carolina Senate Republicans air complaints to Trump administration on trade deal MORE (D-Ore.). “Thanks to Trump, new and existing parents stand to lose their health coverage unless they hack their way through arbitrary and slapdash paperwork requirements.”

“Even after similar work requirement laws were recently struck down by the courts and proven ineffective, the Trump administration continues to be hellbent on pursuing this draconian policy that put Americans’ health care in harm’s way,” said Brad Woodhouse, executive director of Protect Our Care. 

Click Here: USA Rugby Shop

The National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) published a draft report addressed to President TrumpDonald John TrumpLawmakers release defense bill with parental leave-for-Space-Force deal House Democrats expected to unveil articles of impeachment Tuesday Houston police chief excoriates McConnell, Cornyn and Cruz on gun violence MORE this week that found cyber threats to critical infrastructure pose an “existential threat” to national security and recommended “bold action” in response.

The NIAC, which is made up of industry officials and those from state and local governments involved in critical infrastructure, including former National Security Agency Deputy Director Richard Ledgett, strongly urged Trump to take action to protect energy-, communications- and financial-critical infrastructure.

“Mr. President, escalating cyber risks to America’s critical infrastructures present an existential threat to continuity of government, economic stability, social order, and national security,” the NIAC wrote. “U.S. companies find themselves on the front lines of a cyber war they are ill-equipped to win against nation-states intent on disrupting or destroying our critical infrastructure.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The members wrote in the draft report that “bold action is needed to prevent the dire consequences of a catastrophic cyber attack on energy, communication, and financial infrastructures. The nation is not sufficiently organized to counter the aggressive tactics used by our adversaries to infiltrate, map, deny, disrupt, and destroy sensitive cyber systems in the private sector.”

In order to combat threats, the NIAC recommended that Trump establish a “Critical Infrastructure Command Center” to help share classified threat information between government agencies and companies at risk and to also make it a top priority of the intelligence community to gather and disseminate information on nation-states and other malicious actors trying to target U.S. critical infrastructure.

Beyond these steps, the NIAC urged Trump to issue an executive order to create the “Federal Cybersecurity Commission,” a government entity that would be charged with mitigating potential “catastrophic” cyber risks or attacks on critical infrastructure.

The NIAC zeroed in on threats to the supply chain involved in providing equipment for critical infrastructure systems and recommended that Trump “provide liability protections” to allow for blacklisting of cybersecurity products that may pose a threat to critical infrastructure.

“Incremental steps are no longer sufficient; bold approaches must be taken,” NIAC members wrote to Trump. “Your leadership is needed to provide companies with the intelligence, resources, and legal protection necessary to win this war and avoid the dire consequences of losing it.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The report was compiled following a request from the National Security Council in September that the NIAC look into how the government and private industry can collaborate on ways to fight back against cyber threats.

The members referenced as evidence of critical threats findings of the annual Worldwide Threat Assessment compiled by the intelligence community and presented by former Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats to Congress in January.

The report found that China, Iran and Russia have the ability to launch disruptive cyberattacks on U.S. critical infrastructure, including the electric grid, with Coats noting specifically that “Moscow is mapping our critical infrastructure with the long-term goal of being able to cause substantial damage.”

NIAC members sounded the alarm in the report, writing that “it is not a matter of if, but when, an attack will happen. Our window of opportunity to thwart a cyber 9-11 attack before it happens is closing quickly.”

The report is dated Dec. 12, which is the day the NIAC is scheduled to discuss the draft report. The meeting will also include comments from Christopher Krebs, the director of the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Happy Monday and welcome to Overnight Defense. I’m Rebecca Kheel, and here’s your nightly guide to the latest developments at the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. CLICK HERE to subscribe to the newsletter.

 

THE TOPLINE: The Washington Post was out with a bombshell report Monday documenting how U.S. officials have misled the public about progress in Afghanistan since the early days of the 18-year war.

The six-part series was based largely on private interviews with the officials done by a government watchdog that the Post obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

In the interviews, U.S. officials frequently acknowledged a lack of understanding, strategy and progress in a war they regularly described publicly as being on the cusp of success.

“After the killing of Osama bin Laden, I said that Osama was probably laughing in his watery grave considering how much we have spent on Afghanistan,” retired Navy SEAL Jeffrey Eggers, a White House staffer in the Bush and Obama administrations, said in a private interview.

Interviewees also describe a deliberate disinformation campaign meant to spin discouraging statistics as evidence the United States was prevailing in the war.

“Every data point was altered to present the best picture possible,” Bob Crowley, an Army colonel and senior counterinsurgency adviser to U.S. military commanders in 2013 and 2014, said in an interview.

“Surveys, for instance, were totally unreliable but reinforced that everything we were doing was right and we became a self-licking ice cream cone,” he added.

In 2015, Ret. Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, who served as a top advisor on the war during the Bush and Obama administrations, told government interviewers, “We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan — we didn’t know what we were doing,” according to the Post.

Context: The United States has about 13,000 troops fighting in America’s longest war. Most are focused on training Afghan forces to fight the Taliban, while a smaller number of special forces conduct counterterrorism operations against groups such as al Qaeda and ISIS.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration was close to a deal with the Taliban that would have seen U.S. troops withdraw in exchange for assurances from the insurgents that they would not allow Afghanistan to be a safe haven for terrorists to plan attacks on the United States.

The deal crumbled after Trump invited Taliban leaders to Camp David and then disinvited them. But this past weekend, U.S.-Taliban talks resumed for the first time since the scuttled Camp David meeting, with Trump’s envoy for the talks meeting with Taliban officials in Qatar.

Trump has expressed a strong desire to withdraw from Afghanistan with or without a deal with the Taliban. But U.S. military officials have consistently warned against a “premature” withdrawal from the country, assuring lawmakers and the public that progress was being made.

About the documents: The interviews were conducted by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) for its “Lessons Learned” series of reports.

SIGAR has published seven Lessons Learned reports based on the interviews and other research, but those omitted the most blunt language and grim judgments found in the raw interviews published by the Post, boiling them down into more bureaucratic assessments.

The Post obtained more than 2,000 pages of unpublished notes and more than 400 interview transcripts after suing SIGAR for them twice. Numerous names are redacted, and the Post has sued for the names to be revealed. While a decision is still pending, the newspaper wrote that it chose to publish them now amid U.S.-Taliban negotiations.

“We didn’t sit on it,” Sopko, whose office has issued some of the harshest official assessments of the war, told the Post. “We’re firm believers in openness and transparency, but we’ve got to follow the law… I think of any inspector general, I’ve probably been the most forthcoming on information.”

Sopko also told the Post the documents show “the American people have constantly been lied to” on Afghanistan.

Reaction: Those who have been pushing for an end to so-called forever wars held up the Post’s report as evidence that it is time to bring troops home from Afghanistan.

“This vital investigation goes to show that Congress and the American people have been grossly misled about the nearly two decade-long war in Afghanistan. It’s long past time to bring our troops home and end what has become an endless war,” Sen. Tom UdallThomas (Tom) Stewart UdallOvernight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing Senate Democrats ask Pompeo to recuse himself from Ukraine matters Bureau of Land Management staff face relocation or resignation as agency moves west MORE (D-N.M.) tweeted.

“We’ve spent $2 trillion on a war our own government knew we couldn’t win, and still lack the courage to end the conflict,” Rep. Ro KhannaRohit (Ro) KhannaLawmakers release defense bill with parental leave-for-Space-Force deal Overnight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Impeachment fight shifts to House Judiciary MORE (D-Calif.) said in his own tweet. “We need to withdraw from Afghanistan.”

Sen. Kirsten GillibrandKirsten GillibrandOvernight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing Gillibrand demands hearing following release of ‘Afghanistan Papers’ White House, Congress near deal to give 12 weeks paid parental leave to all federal workers MORE (D-N.Y.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, wrote a letter to the committee leaders requesting a hearing on the issue.

“Given these costs in American lives and funds, it is deeply troubling to read a report of interviews with U.S. government officials that appear to contradict the many assurances we have heard at committee hearings that the continuing war in Afghanistan has a coherent strategy and an end in sight,” Gillibrand wrote.

“The committee owes it to the American public to hold hearings to examine the questions raised by this reporting and provide clarity with respect to our strategy in Afghanistan, a clear definition of success, and an honest and complete review of the obstacles on the ground,” she added.

 

AMAZON ACCUSES TRUMP OF ‘IMPROPER PRESSURE’: Amazon is accusing President TrumpDonald John TrumpLawmakers release defense bill with parental leave-for-Space-Force deal House Democrats expected to unveil articles of impeachment Tuesday Houston police chief excoriates McConnell, Cornyn and Cruz on gun violence MORE of exerting “improper pressure” to influence the Pentagon to award a lucrative cloud-computing contract to Microsoft instead of Amazon, which was a clear front-runner before Trump began intervening in the process over the summer.

In a court filing made public on Monday, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Amazon’s cloud-computing arm, alleged Trump engaged in “public and behind-the-scenes attacks” to steer the contract away from AWS out of spite for his “perceived political enemy — Jeff BezosJeffrey (Jeff) Preston BezosHillicon Valley: Amazon alleges Trump interfered in Pentagon contract to hurt Bezos | Federal council warns Trump of cyber threats to infrastructure | China to remove foreign technology from government offices Overnight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ to influence Pentagon contract decision MORE,” the CEO and owner of Amazon, as well as The Washington Post.

“The publicly available record of President Trump’s statements and actions demonstrates that he repeatedly attacked and vilified his perceived political enemy – Mr. Bezos, the founder and CEO of AWS’s parent company, Amazon, and who separately owns the Washington Post and then intervened in this procurement process to thwart the fair administration of DoD’s procurement of technology and services critical to the modernization of the U.S. military,” Amazon wrote in the filing.

Amazon is asking the court to declare that the award was not doled out legally, and is seeking to prevent the Pentagon from moving forward with Microsoft. If Amazon wins its challenge, the Department of Defense (DOD) would have to start the bidding process over.

Background: While it’s relatively common for companies to protest government contract award decisions in court, Amazon’s case in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims is unprecedented as one of the largest companies in the country takes on the president himself over allegations of improper intervention and personal animus.

Click Here: South Africa Rugby Shop

The cloud-computing contract, dubbed the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure contract – or JEDI – is worth up to $10 billion and enables one company to develop the cloud infrastructure across the entire DOD. The contract will allow Microsoft to develop cloud-computing infrastructure for the U.S. military for up to 10 years, ending in October 2029. The deal bolsters Microsoft’s position in the multi-billion dollar cloud-computing “wars.”

Amazon is the No. 1 player in the cloud-computing space with an approximately 48 percent market share. And the military has given AWS, which provides cloud-computing for the CIA, its highest data-management certification, while Microsoft’s certification is one level lower.

Industry watchers were stunned by the Pentagon’s decision to award the contract to Microsoft, arguing that Amazon seemed to be best-positioned to take on the task. But Microsoft is also a popular cloud-computing partner for the federal government, and the Pentagon has maintained that the company was simply best-equipped to create the DOD’s cloud infrastructure.

Pentagon response: A DOD spokeswoman on Monday said there were “no external influences” on the decision to award the JEDI contract to Microsoft over Amazon.

“This source selection decision was made by an expert team of career public servants and military officers from across the Department of Defense and in accordance with DOD’s normal source-selection process,” said Elissa Smith. “There were no external influences on the source selection decision. The department is confident in the JEDI award and remains focused on getting this critical capability into the hands of our warfighters as quickly and efficiently as possible.”

Smith declined to comment on specific claims in litigation “at this time.”

 

IMPEACHMENT LATEST: The House Judiciary Committee held the latest impeachment hearing Monday, with testimony from Democratic and Republican counsel on the Judiciary and Intelligence committees.

The hearing, which was an opportunity for Democrats and Republicans to try to win the public relations battle ahead of the impending vote on impeachment, repeatedly grew heated.

The drama started minutes into the hearing, when a pro-Trump protester stood up in the public seating area and yelled accusations that Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerGOP lawmaker criticizes Democratic counsel over facial expression: ‘Be very careful’ Watchdog report finds FBI not motivated by political bias in Trump probe Judiciary fireworks: GOP accuses Democratic counsel of impugning Trump’s motives MORE (D-N.Y.) was committing treason by trying to remove President Trump from office.

Fireworks also flew when Republicans on the committee accused a Democratic counsel impugning Trump’s motives.

The Judiciary hearing began to go off the rails almost immediately after it began as GOP members began making points of order demanding a minority hearing.

A little more than an hour into the hearing, Republicans expressed outrage at Democratic counsel Barry Berke’s evidence, as Rep. Mike JohnsonJames (Mike) Michael JohnsonOvernight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing Judiciary hearing gets heated as Democratic counsel interrogates GOP staffer Judiciary fireworks: GOP accuses Democratic counsel of impugning Trump’s motives MORE (R-La.) accused him of impugning Trump.

Johnson interrupted Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) as he attempted to recognize Republican counsel Stephen Castor, with Johnson accusing Berke of violating Rule 17 of the House of Representatives, which deals with decorum and debate.

“The witness has used language which impugns the motives of the president and suggests that he’s disloyal to his country, and those words should be stricken from the record and taken down,” Johnson said.

A full rundown of the hearing is at TheHill.com’s liveblog.

Nadler dismisses GOP requests: Separate from Monday’s hearing, Nadler has dismissed a Republican request for eight witnesses to testify as part of the impeachment inquiry, including House Intelligence Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffHouse Democrats expected to unveil articles of impeachment Tuesday Tempers flare at tense Judiciary hearing on impeachment Overnight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing MORE (D-Calif.) and the whistleblower who first brought forward the allegations about President Trump’s contacts with Ukraine.

Nadler in a letter Monday to the top Republican on the Judiciary panel, Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsGOP lawmaker closes: Impeachment a ‘scam,’ Judiciary a ‘rubber stamp’ Tempers flare at tense Judiciary hearing on impeachment Overnight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing MORE (R-Ga.), took issue with the witnesses the Republicans intended to call.

“[T]he Committee has previously tabled motions with regards to these matters … and I see no reason to reconsider these requests,” Nadler wrote, adding that there is “no need” to hear from Schiff and the whistleblower.

Nadler also shot down other witnesses Republicans requested, including Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, and witnesses related to unfounded GOP-claims of Ukrainian interference during the 2016 election.

Nadler said five of Collins’s remaining requests were previously made by Rep. Devin NunesDevin Gerald NunesTempers flare at tense Judiciary hearing on impeachment Overnight Defense: Bombshell report reveals officials misled public over progress in Afghanistan | Amazon accuses Trump of ‘improper pressure’ in Pentagon contract decision | House Judiciary holds final impeachment hearing Nadler dismisses GOP witness requests MORE (R-Calif.), the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, and that he concurs with Schiff’s earlier “assessment” that hearings “will not serve … as a vehicle to undertake the same sham investigations” into 2016 interference and the Bidens.

 

ON TAP FOR TOMORROW

The House Foreign Affairs Committee has three hearings scheduled:

— A subcommittee hearing on U.S. policy in Haiti at 10 a.m. at the Rayburn House Office Building, room 2172. https://bit.ly/2LDjMjy

— A subcommittee hearing on political and religious human rights challenges in China 1:30 p.m. at Rayburn 2200. https://bit.ly/2Yz1Mft

— A subcommittee hearing on the way forward in Iraq at 2 p.m. at Rayburn 2172. https://bit.ly/2P4OPqq

A House Armed Services Committee subpanel will hold a hearing on diversity in recruiting and retention at 2 p.m. at Rayburn 2118. https://bit.ly/2YzQDLb 

 

ICYMI

— The Hill: Impeachment, Ukraine, Syria and warheads color Washington visit by Russian top diplomat

— The Hill: Trump, Russian foreign minister to meet Tuesday

— The Hill: Military bases increase security after shootings in Hawaii, Florida

— The Hill: US to ask UN Security Council to discuss recent North Korean missile launches

— The Hill: Opinion: ‘Rocket Man’ and ‘The Dotard,’ redux

— The Hill: Opinion: Israel needs US-made weapons to contain Iran’s aggression

— Associated Press: Pensacola gunman got around a ban on foreigners buying guns

— The New York Times: NATO conference is canceled after U.S. ambassador barred a Trump critic

Myanmar’s civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi rejected allegations of genocide against her country at the International Court of Justice Wednesday, The Washington Post reported.

The civilian leader defended Myanmar Wednesday in response to the genocide accusations described by West African country Gambia the day before. Gambia detailed stories of systematic rape and mass murder of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar, including the burning of babies and villages with people locked in their homes, according to the Post.

Suu Kyi called the issue a domestic problem for her country to internally solve. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“If war crimes have been committed by members of Myanmar’s defense services, they will be prosecuted through our military justice system, in accordance with Myanmar’s constitution,” she said, according to the Post.

The civilian leader was not required to appear in court and ended up becoming the first national leader to answer to the court while the alleged genocide is still continuing. She acknowledged that some military officials may have used “disproportionate force” but said Gambia did not have the required evidence to accuse Myanmar of genocide, the Post reported.

Her appearance in court also comes before Myanmar will hold elections next year. Reporters at the Post have postulated that this may be a calculated effort by the leader to “take matters into her own hands” and redefine the narrative before the people of Myanmar head to the polls. 

The charges were filed by Gambia last month, and a decision could be announced in weeks or months, according to the Post. United Nations officials have said Myanmar’s military acted with genocidal intent when removing Rohingya Muslims from their villages, but the country denies this and accused the minority group of the violence.

Suu Kyi won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for opposing military rule and promoting democracy in her country.

Click Here: South Africa Rugby Shop

Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page on Wednesday pushed back on a claim by President TrumpDonald John TrumpThe Hill’s Morning Report – Sponsored by AdvaMed – House panel expected to approve impeachment articles Thursday Democrats worried by Jeremy Corbyn’s UK rise amid anti-Semitism Warren, Buttigieg duke it out in sprint to 2020 MORE that former FBI agent Peter Strzok needed a restraining order to keep away from her, calling it a “lie.”

“This is a lie. Nothing like this ever happened,” Page tweeted, alongside the clip of Trump making the claim at his rally on Tuesday. 

At his rally in Hershey, Pa., Trump said, “Did I hear he needed a restraining order after this whole thing to keep him away from Lisa? That’s what I heard. I don’t know if it’s true.”

His comment followed the Monday release of a report on a Justice Department internal watchdog investigation which found some issues with the application process for surveilling a former Trump campaign aide, but did not find evidence of political bias. 

The president and his allies have alleged that there was political bias behind the surveillance, and have pointed to texts between Page and Strzok that were critical of Trump.  

Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who led the probe, testified Wednesday before the House. 

House Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiTrump trade deal likely to sow division in Democratic presidential field Trump supporters at Pa. rally ‘upset’ after Democrats introduce impeachment articles California GOP candidate arrested on stalking charges MORE‘s bill that would let Medicare negotiate prices with drug companies would save the government $456 billion over ten years, according to an analysis released Tuesday.

The bill, which will get a vote on the House floor this week, would require that federal health officials negotiate the prices of at least 35 brand-name drugs per year.

 

Medicare price negotiation, which is prohibited under current law, has been presented by Democrats as a solution to rising drug costs. 

 

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Congress’ nonpartisan scorekeeper, cautioned in its report that the estimates are “uncertain.” 

 

But the estimate is a win for House Democrats, who argue they won back the House majority in 2018 in part because they promised to work on lowering drug prices and health care costs.

 

The bill would also provide dental, vision and hearing benefits to Medicare beneficiaries, with the CBO putting the cost at $358 billion over ten years. In all, the CBO estimates the bill would reduce the deficit by $5 billion over ten years. 

 

Republicans have argued allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices would lead to fewer new drugs being introduced in the U.S. 

 

The CBO estimates the bill would result in eight fewer drugs being introduced to the market over the 2020-2029 period. Under current law, about 30 new drugs are approved by the Food & Drug Administration every year. 

Click Here: Ireland Rugby Shop

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell on Wednesday said that the approval of President TrumpDonald John TrumpThe Hill’s Morning Report – Sponsored by AdvaMed – House panel expected to approve impeachment articles Thursday Democrats worried by Jeremy Corbyn’s UK rise amid anti-Semitism Warren, Buttigieg duke it out in sprint to 2020 MORE’s proposed North American trade reboot could help soothe uncertainty hindering the economy.

Powell told reporters that while he would not weigh in on the details of Trump’s update to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), cementing the changes could clear some global economic headwinds.

“If the deal were to be enacted then it would certainly remove some of the trade policy uncertainty and that would be, I believe, a positive for the economy,” Powell said moments after the Fed announced it would hold interest rates steady.

ADVERTISEMENT

After more than six months of intense negotiations, House Democrats announced Tuesday a deal with the Trump administration to pass the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Democrats touted their ability to secure stronger environmental and labor standards, an enhanced enforcement regime, and the removal of protections for certain pharmaceuticals.

The deal will also create greater access markets for U.S. farmers, including long-sought provisions to allow American dairy producers to sell more products in Canada.

Trump and House Democrats are eager to pass the USMCA before the end of 2019, though Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellDemocrats seek leverage for trial Democrats spend big to put Senate in play House Democrats to vote on flavored e-cigarettes ban next year MORE (R-Ky.) said Tuesday it would be impossible to clear the deal until the end of a potential impeachment trial.

Passing USMCA holds political promise for Trump, who pledged during his 2016 campaign to rip-up NAFTA, as well as Democrats eager to show they can still legislate while pursuing impeachment against the president. Securing a new North American trade pact would also take Trump’s threat to pull out of NAFTA off the table and close a front in his global trade war.

Trump is also seeking a resolution to his trade war with China ahead of a slate of new tariffs set to take effect on Dec. 15. Powell said Wednesday that an end to the U.S.-China trade war could give the economy an even bigger boost by eliminating a deeper level of volatility.

ADVERTISEMENT

“One way to look at it is, ‘What’s been moving financial markets?’ It’s been news about the negotiations with China, not so much USMCA,” Powell said.

“The difference between NAFTA and USMCA is smaller than the difference between arrangements with China and what’s being negotiated,” he said.

Click Here: France Rugby Shop

Powell and the Fed have been forced to navigate the rising costs and anxiety driven by Trump’s trade battles with China, Mexico, Canada and the European Union. Trade-related uncertainty was among several factors that pushed the Fed to cut rates three times in 2019 after hiking four times in 2018.

Trump has also sought to bully the Fed into lower rates, insisting the independent central bank should match ultralow and negative rates in countries engaged in trade talks with the White House. Powell has brushed off Trump’s pressure, asserting that the Fed’s decisions would be driven by data.