Alors qu’un Noël sous les cocotiers séduit de plus en plus de célébrités, certaines comme Shy’m, Laury Thilleman ou Madonna ont décidé de partir à la montagne pour les fêtes de fin d’année.

Si de plus en plus de stars préfèrent fêter Noël sous les cocotiers, d’autres restent fidèles à leurs premiers amours, la montagne. Flocons de neige, chalet en bois, soirée au coin du feu : tous les ingrédients sont réunis pour un Noël traditionnel. Et pour retrouver la ligne après le réveillon, rien n’est plus efficace que de chausser les skis et s’élancer sur les pistes.

La station de ski d’Aspen, dans le Colorado (Etats-Unis) reste la destination incontournable des célébrités qui optent pour un Noël sous la neige. Habituée des lieux, Paris Hilton y est retournée cet hiver pour profiter de l’air pur et du beau temps. Bella Hadid, élue mannequin de l’année par models.com, profite de ses vacances entre amis à Aspen pour skier et pour faire du shopping.

Sur les pistes, l’humoriste américain Kevin Hart et sa femme Eniko Parrish skient en amoureux tandis qu’Heidi Klum, rayonnante, s’amuse avec ses quatre enfants. Dans une vidéo qu’elle a postée hier sur Instagram, la top-model allemande fait de la luge avec Henry, Leni, Johan et Lou. Pendant ce temps, son ex-mari Seal a été aperçu, seul, se baladant dans les rues d’Aspen. On y croise d’ailleurs d’autres célébrités, qui préfèrent le shopping aux pistes de ski : Elthon John ou encore Kurt Russell.

Click Here: kenzo online españa

Les pistes françaises sont aussi très prisées. Laury Thilleman profite de la neige à la Tania, en Savoie. Caroline de Maigret a opté pour des vacances relaxantes, plutôt que sportives. Sur une photo postée sur son compte Instagram hier, elle est tranquillement assise devant un chalet, un livre à la main.

Shy’m, Jérémy Frérot ou encore Madonna ont aussi choisi de passer leurs vacances à la montagne cette année. Les photos qu’ils partagent sur Instagram pourraient en inciter plus d’un à les imiter…

Orlando, le frère de la chanteuse Dalida, n’a visiblement pas apprécié le sketch de Mathieu Madénian et Thomas VDB sur le plateau d’AcTualiTy le 11 janvier, et il l’a bien fait savoir.

On ne peut pas rire de tout. C’est du moins l’opinion d’Orlando, frère cadet de la chanteuse Dalida qui s’est suicidée à 54 ans. Alors qu’un film retraçant sa vie est actuellement à l’affiche, les humoristes Mathieu Madénian et Thomas VDB sont allés un peu trop loin dans leur sketch diffusé pour l’émission AcTualiTy sur France 2.

Orlando et Lisa Azuelos la réalisatrice du biopic Dalida étaient les invités de Thomas Thouroude pour la promotion du film. Déguisé en Dalida au moyen d’une perruque blonde ridicule et une robe en lamé, Thomas VDB a critiqué sur un ton ironique le jeu d’actrice de Sveva Alviti, qui n’a pas respecté le strabisme de l’icône des années 70. Le sketch a également tourné en dérision son suicide qui prouverait que c’était une vraie star.

Ça n’a pas fait rire du tout Orlando qui a tenu à mettre les points sur les i à la fin de l’émission : « Je ne pas laisser passer ça, s’est-il offusqué, si c’est ça le talent […] Y’a quand même des limites ! » On sait que le frère de Dalida s’est beaucoup investi dans la réalisation du film et semble d’autant plus sensible aux critiques.

Click Here: Cheap France Rugby Jersey

Ukraine and Canada are demanding accountability for Iran after it admitted to shooting down a Ukrainian jet shortly after it took off from Tehran this week, killing all 176 people on board.

After first blaming the crash on technical issues, Iran said early Saturday that it shot down the plane headed for Kyiv due to a “human error.” Among the victims of the crash were 11 Ukrainians and 57 Canadians.

“Ukraine insists on a full admission of guilt,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tweeted Saturday. “We expect Iran to bring those responsible to justice, return the bodies, pay compensation and issue an official apology. The investigation must be full, open & continue without delays or obstacles.” 

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Prime Minister and the President agreed on the need for a full, credible, and complete investigation of the crash and discussed Canada’s continued support for the investigation. Both leaders highlighted the need for cooperation to build a complete picture of the event, so that all those who suffered losses can get the answers they deserve,” Canadian Prime Minister Justin TrudeauJustin Pierre James TrudeauIran denies shooting down Ukrainian plane, calls for evidence The Hill’s Morning Report — Impeachment tug-of-war expected to end soon Overnight Defense: House passes measure to limit Trump on Iran | Pelosi vows vote to end 2002 war authorization | Officials believe Iran accidentally shot down passenger plane MORE’s office said in a readout of a call with Zelensky.

Reports first emerged Thursday that officials believed the Boeing 737-800, which belonged to to Ukraine International Airlines, “was shot down by an Iranian surface to air missile” early Wednesday morning, though for days Tehran denied any role before changing its story.

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: jean paul gaultier perfume

“Preliminary conclusions of internal investigation by Armed Forces: Human error at time of crisis caused by US adventurism led to disaster,” Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif tweeted. “Our profound regrets, apologies and condolences to our people, to the families of all victims, and to other affected nations.” 

Shortly before the crash, Iran had launched ballistic missiles at two Iraqi military bases housing U.S. troops in response to last week’s killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani in an American drone strike in Baghdad.

Tensions between the two sides had reached a boiling point in recent weeks, but President TrumpDonald John TrumpIran says it ‘unintentionally’ shot down Ukrainian plane Puerto Rico hit with another major earthquake as aftershocks continue Trump empathizes with Queen Elizabeth II after Harry and Meghan’s royal exit MORE on Wednesday appeared to signal that there would be no immediate further military action after the Iranian attacks on Iraqi bases saw no casualties. 

Reps. Diana DeGetteDiana Louise DeGetteOvernight Energy: Trump moves to rollback bedrock environmental law | Dems, greens blast changes | Trump says ‘nothing’s a hoax’ about climate change | Youth climate group endorses Sanders Bipartisan lawmakers attempt to drum up opposition to proposed changes of environmental law The Hill’s 12:30 Report — Presented by UANI — Pelosi looks to play hardball on timing of impeachment trial MORE (D-Colo.) and Francis RooneyLaurence (Francis) Francis RooneyOvernight Defense: House passes measure to limit Trump on Iran | Pelosi vows vote to end 2002 war authorization | Officials believe Iran accidentally shot down passenger plane The lawmakers who bucked their parties on the war powers resolution Overnight Energy: Trump moves to rollback bedrock environmental law | Dems, greens blast changes | Trump says ‘nothing’s a hoax’ about climate change | Youth climate group endorses Sanders MORE (R-Fla.) sent a letter to the entire House on Thursday, urging their colleagues to oppose President TrumpDonald John TrumpProfessor fired for Facebook post suggesting Iran should tweet out list of American cultural sites to threaten NY judge denies Trump request to dismiss lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll Rep. Omar: ‘War trauma never leaves you’ MORE‘s proposed changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Trump earlier that day outlined changes he hopes to make to the rule that would allow more industry involvement in environmental reviews and lessen the extent to which climate change is a factor in those assessments.  

“We invite you to join us in expressing our strong opposition to the Trump Administration’s plans, announced today, to revise the regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in a way that, among other things, ignores the full extent of the climate crisis,” DeGette and Rooney wrote in their letter. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The members of Congress went on to talk about the damage that human-caused climate change has had in the U.S already. 

“With billions of dollars in damage already being inflicted on our homes, businesses and infrastructure from storms, floods, and wildfires exacerbated by human-caused climate change; with health impacts already being experienced from increased heat waves, pollution and disease vectors; and with threats to our national security already being amplified by climate impacts in other countries, turning a blind eye towards climate change is exactly the wrong direction for federal policy to take,” they added. 

The proposed changes to the NEPA were also met with opposition from some Democrats and environmental groups on Thursday like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), who described the alterations as neutering the law that ensures the government accounts for climate change.

“We didn’t need more proof that the fossil fuel industry has hardwired the Trump administration to deliver on its interests, but we got it anyway,” he said.  

Trump administration officials spoke out in favor of the proposal.

ADVERTISEMENT

Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said on a call to present the proposal that NEPA has “paralyzed commonsense decision making for a generation.”

“This is a really, really big proposal. It affects virtually every big decision made by the federal government that affects the environment, and I think it will be the most significant deregulatory proposal you ultimately implement,” he also told President Trump.  

 

‘FOREVER CHEMICALS’ BILL HEADS TO SENATE: The House on Friday passed legislation to broadly regulate a cancer-linked chemical over objections from the White House that Congress is sidestepping agencies.

The bill, which passed 247 to 159, targets a class of chemicals abbreviated as PFAS that have been leaching into the water supply across the country, causing health problems in communities where water has been contaminated.

Democrats have argued the bill is necessary due to a lack of action from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Environmental Protection Agency has known about these risks for decades and has allowed this contamination to spread. Last year, EPA announced its PFAS Action Plan. It was woefully inadequate, and since that time, we’ve learned that EPA is not even keeping the weak commitments it made in that plan,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) said on the floor during debate late Thursday, referencing the EPA missing a self-imposed deadline for announcing how it would regulate the substance.

“It is time for Congress to take action and use every tool available to stop the flow of PFAS pollution into our environment and our bodies,” Pallone added.

PFAS are used in a variety of nonstick products such as raincoats, cookware and firefighting foam. They are considered “forever chemicals” because of their persistence in the environment and in the human body, with 99 percent of those tested found to have PFAS traces in their body.

The legislation is Democrats’ latest attempt to regulate PFAS after similar, but less far-reaching measures were stripped from the must-pass defense policy bill. 

Under the bill the EPA would be required to set a mandatory drinking water standard for PFAS.

The EPA currently recommends water contain no more than 70 parts per trillion of PFAS, but Democrats and public health groups say the agency needs an actual requirement — one that will likely need to be below that level to protect public health.

Republicans lamented that negotiations to require that drinking water standard fell apart in December.

ADVERTISEMENT

But now that the legislation incorporates measures from 11 previous PFAS bills, Republicans, including those in the White House, say the bill is too broad, making little distinction between the more than 6,000 forms of PFAS. And they say the bill opens up too many parties to liability.

“Innocent parties like drinking water utilities that just treated what they got from their source water are hostage to endless liability for cleanup, regardless of their personal contribution. In fact, I would argue, they didn’t do any contribution. Why not exclude the water district from Superfund liability if they are just the pass through?” asked Rep. John ShimkusJohn Mondy ShimkusOvernight Energy: Dems outline legislation to make US carbon neutral by 2050 | 2019 was second warmest year on record | Top Republican says ‘forever chemical’ bill won’t move in Senate Top Republican: ‘Forever chemical’ bill has ‘no prospects’ in Senate Koch campaign touts bipartisan group behind ag labor immigration bill MORE (R-Ill.). 

Republicans have also argued Congress is jumping ahead of regulatory processes that should be handled by the EPA.

Read more about the bill here.

 

HAPPY FRIDAY! Welcome to Overnight Energy, The Hill’s roundup of the latest energy and environment news.

Please send tips and comments to Rebecca Beitsch at rbeitsch@thehill.com. Follow her on Twitter: @rebeccabeitsch. Reach Rachel Frazin at rfrazin@thehill.com or follow her on Twitter: @RachelFrazin.

CLICK HERE to subscribe to our newsletter.

 

More on forever chemicals…

 

BURNING UP: A group of environmental organizations is raising alarms about the Defense Department’s alleged incineration of PFAS chemicals, also called “forever chemicals” due to their persistence in the environment and human body.

The green groups, which include the Sierra Club and legal group Earthjustice, argued in a letter to Defense Secretary Mark EsperMark EsperOvernight Energy: House passes sweeping bill on ‘forever chemicals’ | Green groups question Pentagon about burning of toxic chemicals | Steyer plan would open US to climate refugees Green groups raise alarms about alleged Pentagon incineration of ‘forever chemicals’ Dem senators say Iran threat to embassies not mentioned in intelligence briefing MORE that incineration is now in violation of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and that the department “must immediately cease all PFAS incineration until it has come into compliance.”

Lawmakers originally included broad provisions to deal with PFAS chemicals in an early version of the NDAA, many of which were cut. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The law now requires, however, that incineration is conducted at a temperature range “adequate to break down PFAS chemicals while also ensuring the maximum degree of reduction in emission of PFAS,” among other stipulations. 

The letter argues that this and other requirements are being violated by the Department of Defense (DOD).

“The incineration of chemicals that are designed to not combust at facilities known to violate environmental laws places the public at risk,” it said. “Several of the signatories to this letter represent members who live and work in the communities surrounding the incinerators that DOD has chosen for the incineration of [PFAS-containing Aqueous Film Forming Foam.]”

DOD did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment. 

Read more here.

 

CLIMATE REFUGEES: Democratic presidential candidate Tom SteyerTom Fahr SteyerHill.TV’s Krystal Ball on Steyer: ‘We can do better than billionaires’ Overnight Energy: House passes sweeping bill on ‘forever chemicals’ | Green groups question Pentagon about burning of toxic chemicals | Steyer plan would open US to climate refugees Steyer unveils proposal to make climate change refugees eligible for legal US entry MORE wants to make people fleeing the effects of climate change eligible for legal entry to the U.S.

ADVERTISEMENT

His immigration plan, unveiled Friday, called for the creation of new “legal categories” to help people trying to escape “climate-related catastrophes” to legally come into the country. 

Steyer has placed climate initiatives at the center of his platform. He has said he would declare climate change a national emergency his first day in office and has called the issue “the most important international problem we’re facing.”

The sprawling plan also called for reinstating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, creating a pathway to citizenship for undocumented individuals and reforming immigration agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

“I will make it my duty to not only undo the policies that are systematically attacking immigrant communities of color, but create a system that allows immigrants of every background a chance to build a life in our country,” Steyer said in a statement.

Read more about the plan here. 

 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

ON TAP NEXT WEEK:

On Tuesday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee will examine legislation to phase down hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), heat-trapping chemicals that are used in air conditioners and other products. 

The House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife will hold a hearing on a series of bills. 

On Wednesday, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology will hear from Chris Fall, the Energy Department’s director of the Office of Science. 

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Wednesday will examine the implementation of the  Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act.

Also Wednesday, the House Science, Space and Technology committee will look at climate science and solutions. 

 

OUTSIDE (AND INSIDE) THE BELTWAY: 

Tens of thousands march in Australian climate protests, we report

Under fire for use of coal, Tri-State to accelerate closure of plants, mine in Colorado and New Mexico, The Denver Post reports

Enormous ‘Megafire’ In Australia Engulfs 1.5 Million Acres, NPR reports

PFAS Bill Could Spark Tort ‘Bonanza,’ National Journal reports 

 

ICYMI: Stories from Thursday…

House passes sweeping bill to target spread of toxic ‘forever chemicals’

Steyer unveils proposal to make climate change refugees eligible for legal US entry

Tens of thousands march in Australian climate protests

Green groups raise alarms about alleged Pentagon incineration of ‘forever chemicals’

President TrumpDonald John TrumpProfessor fired for Facebook post suggesting Iran should tweet out list of American cultural sites to threaten NY judge denies Trump request to dismiss lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll Rep. Omar: ‘War trauma never leaves you’ MORE said Thursday that the U.S. killed a top Iranian military commander in Iraq because Iran was “looking to blow up” the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

“We did it because they were looking to blow up our embassy,” Trump told reporters at the White House, referring to the U.S. strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani a week ago.

“We also did it for other reasons that were very obvious. Somebody died, one of our military people died. People were badly wounded just a week before, and we did it,” Trump continued, pointing to the death of an American contractor killed in a rocket attack in Iraq.

ADVERTISEMENT

“And we had a shot at him and I took it and that shot was pinpoint accurate, and that was the end of a monster,” Trump said of Soleimani.

When asked later to elaborate on his comments, Trump referred back to the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad at the end of December by pro-Iranian crowds protesting U.S. airstrikes against Shiite militia forces in Syria and Iraq. He described the effort as an “organized plot” aimed at destroying the American facility.

“If you look at those protesters, they were rough warriors, they weren’t protesters. They were Iranian-backed. Some were from Iraq, but they were Iranian-backed, absolutely,” Trump said. “They were looking to do damage, and they were breaking the windows.”

“Had they gotten through, I believe we would have had a hostage situation or worse. We would have had a lot of people killed,” the president said. “They were soldiers, they were warriors, and we stopped it.”

Trump described the assault on the embassy as a “totally organized plot” that Soleimani was behind, saying he “had more than that particular embassy in mind.”

The Trump administration has described the strike against Soleimani as a defensive measure, saying the general — who commanded Iran’s Quds Force, a designated terror group — had been planning imminent attacks that threatened American casualties.

ADVERTISEMENT

Officials have declined to provide many of the details of the plots, citing the need to protect intelligence sources in methods. Democrats in Congress and two Republicans have complained about the lack of information provided by administration officials in classified briefings on the strike.

Trump and his administration have also pointed back to escalating provocations by Iran, including the Dec. 27 rocket attack that killed the American contractor in Iraq, when explaining the decision to kill Soleimani.

Soleimani is said to be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American troops in the Middle East over the years, but the decision by the U.S. to launch a drone strike against him has prompted concerns about the stability of the region and the prospect of escalating military conflict. 

Iran retaliated for the Soleimani killing late Tuesday by launching more than a dozen missiles at Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops and coalition forces.

Trump announced Wednesday that no American or Iraqi lives were lost and that Iran appeared to be “standing down” in the wake of the missile attacks.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Friday found that most Americans think the rich should contribute more in taxes, as several Democratic presidential candidates push wealth taxes for multimillionaires and billionaires.

Sixty-four percent of respondents in the survey said that they agreed that “the very rich should contribute an extra share of their total wealth each year to support public programs.” Seventy-seven percent of Democrats agreed with this statement, as did 53 percent of Republicans.

In contrast, a majority of respondents, 54 percent, disagreed with the statement that “the very rich should be allowed to keep the money they have, even if that means increasing inequality.” Democrats and Republicans diverged on this question, with 71 percent of Democrats disagreeing with the statement but a majority of Republicans agreeing with it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Several Democratic presidential candidates, including progressive Sens. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenHill.TV’s Saagar Enjeti: ‘Woke cultural left’ could complicate Sanders’s economic message Klobuchar releases names of bundlers On The Money: Economy adds 145K jobs, meeting expectations | Dow briefly surpasses 29,000 for first time | Poll finds majority back tax hike for richest Americans MORE (D-Mass.) and Bernie SandersBernie SandersHill.TV’s Saagar Enjeti: ‘Woke cultural left’ could complicate Sanders’s economic message Klobuchar releases names of bundlers On The Money: Economy adds 145K jobs, meeting expectations | Dow briefly surpasses 29,000 for first time | Poll finds majority back tax hike for richest Americans MORE (I-Vt.), have proposed taxes on wealthy Americans’ net worth in order to help combat inequality and raise revenue to pay for their spending priorities.

Polling has consistently found wealth taxes to have majority support. President TrumpDonald John TrumpIran says it ‘unintentionally’ shot down Ukrainian plane Puerto Rico hit with another major earthquake as aftershocks continue Trump empathizes with Queen Elizabeth II after Harry and Meghan’s royal exit MORE‘s tax-cut law, on the other hand, has not received widespread support in polls.

While wealth taxes have public support, they have been criticized by Republicans as well as by moderate Democrats. Critics of wealth taxes argue that they could be harmful to the economy, difficult to administer and potentially unconstitutional. 

Democratic presidential candidates who have been skeptical about wealth taxes back other ideas to increase taxes on the rich, such as increasing capital gains taxes and raising the top tax rate on individuals’ ordinary income.

Ipsos and Reuters surveyed 4,441 U.S. adults online between Dec. 17 and Dec. 23. The poll has a credibility interval of plus or minus 1.7 percentage points.

Happy Wednesday 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: Tensions with Iran appear to be easing for now after the crisis seemed to reach a fever pitch Tuesday night.

Tuesday’s missile attack on Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops did not kill or injure any Americans, and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif made clear the attack would be the extent of Iran’s retaliation for the death of Gen. Qassem Soleimani if the United States didn’t fire back.

So Trump, addressing the nation Wednesday morning, took the off-ramp.

In his prepared remarks Trump claimed Tehran is “standing down.”

He said the administration would impose additional economic sanctions on Tehran, called on European allies to play a larger role in ensuring stability in the region and appealed to Iranian leaders to work with the U.S. on “shared priorities.”

“The United States is ready to embrace peace with all who seek it,” Trump said.

The big picture: Trump’s tone on Wednesday was a welcome development for his allies on Capitol Hill. His words appeased hawkish Republicans who had celebrated the strike against Soleimani, while not further risking a break with his “America First” campaign rhetoric of ending U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts.

More from The Hill’s Brett Samuels and Morgan Chalfant on how Trump found an off-ramp in the Iran crisis.

Congress gets briefed: Later Wednesday, Defense Secretary Mark EsperMark EsperTrump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike MORE, Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoPressure building on Pelosi over articles of impeachment Trump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers MORE, CIA Director Gina HaspelGina Cheri HaspelThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump says Iran ‘standing down’ after missile strike Trump puts US exit from Iraq on hold amid fallout of Soleimani killing The Hill’s Morning Report – Worries about war in world capitals, Congress MORE and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley descended on Capitol Hill to brief lawmakers on the Soleimani strike.

After the briefings, Democrats said the Trump administration failed to present evidence supporting the claim that Soleimani was planning an imminent attack.

Sen. Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineGraham predicts Senate will take up impeachment trial next week Trump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Paul fires back at Graham over Iran criticism: ‘He insults the Constitution’ MORE (D-Va.) said the evidence represented a “far cry” from an imminent attack, while Rep. Gerry ConnollyGerald (Gerry) Edward ConnollyTrump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike MORE (D-Va.) called the briefing “sophomoric.”

“I was utterly unpersuaded about any evidence about the imminence of a threat that was new or compelling,” Connolly said.

Sen. Robert MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezOvernight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike Schumer: Senate must vote on resolution limiting Trump on Iran MORE (D-N.J.), the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said the administration did not provide clarity on a potential attack and questioned why they were withholding information from Congress.

“I walk away unsatisfied in the key questions that I went into this briefing with, and it just makes me concerned that we cannot have clarity on those key questions — imminency, target, all of those things,” Menendez said.

Sen. Chris Van HollenChristopher (Chris) Van HollenSenators introduce resolution warning that Congress has not authorized Iran war Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike MORE (D-Md.) said the administration “did not establish in any way” that “an imminent threat was posed.” Asked whether she was convinced, presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenTrump trade deal faces uncertain Senate timeline Trump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Senators introduce resolution warning that Congress has not authorized Iran war MORE (D-Mass.) said flatly “no.”

Republicans disagree: Republicans have backed up the Trump administration’s assessment of Soleimani’s threat and walked away from Wednesday briefing saying the evidence was clear.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim RischJames (Jim) Elroy RischOvernight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike Senators see off-ramp from Iran tensions after Trump remarks MORE (R-Okla.) said the evidence was “crystal clear,” adding that Democrats used the briefing to “question these people’s judgment on something that really shouldn’t have been questioned.”

“One of the things that came out of all of this is the tremendous hate and vitriol against this president, which is really coloring a lot of these people’s judgement on the defense of this country,” he added.

Sen. Roy BluntRoy Dean BluntPressure building on Pelosi over articles of impeachment Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike MORE (R-Mo.) said the administration did not give many details at the briefing on the plot itself, but described a timing “that would have made it imminent.”

Rep. Mac ThornberryWilliam (Mac) McClellan ThornberryOvernight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike Trump enters uncharted territory with Iran MORE (R-Texas), the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said he was “persuaded that we had strong intelligence that meant we had to take action.”

Rep. Mark MeadowsMark Randall MeadowsTrump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike MORE (R-N.C.) said the briefing showed Soleimani was a “clear and present danger.”

Lee, Paul rip briefing: GOP Sens. Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeTrump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Paul fires back at Graham over Iran criticism: ‘He insults the Constitution’ Senators introduce resolution warning that Congress has not authorized Iran war MORE (Utah) and Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulTrump, Democrats set for brawl on Iran war powers Paul fires back at Graham over Iran criticism: ‘He insults the Constitution’ Senators introduce resolution warning that Congress has not authorized Iran war MORE (Ky.) ripped the administration over the briefing, announcing they will now support a resolution reining in Trump’s military powers.

Lee characterized it as “the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue.”

Lee said the officials warned that Congress would “embolden” Iran if lawmakers debated Trump’s war powers.

“I find this insulting and demeaning … to the office that each of the 100 senators in this building happens to hold. I find it insulting and demeaning to the Constitution of the United States,” Lee said.

Lee did not say which briefer made the assertion but specified that no administration representative contradicted them. He added that he was going to have a “conversation” with Trump about the remarks.

“I find that absolutely insane. I think that’s unacceptable,” Lee added.

Paul added that he found the briefing “less than satisfying” and knocked the administration for using the 2002 war authorization as the basis for last week’s airstrike against an Iranian general.

House to vote on war powers: The House will vote Thursday on a resolution to limit Trump’s ability to take future military action against Iran without congressional authorization, Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiGraham predicts Senate will take up impeachment trial next week Pressure building on Pelosi over articles of impeachment Trump trade deal faces uncertain Senate timeline MORE (D-Calif.) announced Wednesday afternoon after the briefing.

The resolution directs the president to end the use of U.S. armed forces to engage in hostilities in or against Iran unless Congress has formally authorized it or if there is an “imminent armed attack upon the United States.” It was introduced on Wednesday by freshman Rep. Elissa SlotkinElissa SlotkinOvernight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers House to vote Thursday on war powers resolution after Iran attacks Hoyer: War powers vote coming ‘sooner rather than later’ MORE (D-Mich.), a former CIA analyst who served three tours in Iraq and represents a competitive district.

“Members of Congress have serious, urgent concerns about the Administration’s decision to engage in hostilities against Iran and about its lack of strategy moving forward. Our concerns were not addressed by the President’s insufficient War Powers Act notification and by the Administration’s briefing today,” Pelosi said.

 

IMPEACHMENT LATEST: Democratic senators are growing impatient over the delayed start of Trump’s impeachment trial and some say it’s time for Pelosi to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

Democratic lawmakers in the upper chamber say Pelosi has achieved her goal of putting a spotlight on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellGraham predicts Senate will take up impeachment trial next week Pressure building on Pelosi over articles of impeachment Brent Budowsky: Bloomberg should give billion to Democrats MORE‘s (R-Ky.) opposition to witness testimony and they’re ready to start hearing House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team make their arguments.

“Time plays an unknown role in all of this, and the longer it goes on, the less the urgency becomes. So if it’s serious and urgent, it should come over. If it isn’t, don’t send it over,” said Sen. Dianne FeinsteinDianne Emiel FeinsteinMnuchin aims to wait until end of 2020 to disclose Secret Service costs for Trump’s travel: report Pressure building on Pelosi over articles of impeachment Trump trade deal faces uncertain Senate timeline MORE (Calif.), the top-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.

Asked if colleagues are starting to get impatient, Feinstein said, “If it’s going to happen, yes,” referring to the likelihood of a trial actually taking place.

“I’m not a big fan of impeachment but I think there’s enough to take a good look, and we should,” she said.

Feinstein said she doesn’t have “any sense” when the trial may start and neither do her colleagues.

Sen. Jon TesterJonathan (Jon) TesterPressure building on Pelosi over articles of impeachment Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democratic senators growing impatient with Pelosi on impeachment MORE (D-Mont.) said he’s ready to get the trial started.

“As far as I’m concerned, she can send them over at any time. I’m fine with that,” he said.

 

ON TAP FOR TOMORROW

Rep. Seth MoultonSeth MoultonOvernight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Congress reacts to US assassination of Iranian general Key moments in the 2020 Democratic presidential race so far MORE (D-Mass.) and Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyOvernight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran ‘standing down’ | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers Democrats ‘utterly unpersuaded’ by evidence behind Soleimani strike Democratic senators growing impatient with Pelosi on impeachment MORE (D-Conn.) will speak at an Atlantic Council event on U.S.-Iran tensions at 2 p.m. https://bit.ly/2FxUiAB

 

ICYMI

— The Hill: Trump rips Obama’s Iran policy in address to nation

— The Hill: NATO agrees to up contribution in ‘fight against international terrorism’ after Iran missile attacks

— The Hill: Senators see off-ramp from Iran tensions after Trump remarks

— The Hill: Army warning of fake texts telling people they’ve been drafted

— The Hill: FBI, DHS issue bulletin warning of potential Iranian cyberattacks

— The Hill: Opinion: Withdrawal from Iraq would dangerously undermine American national security

— The Hill: Opinion: Trump’s strike will not save Iran’s hardliners

Click Here: nrl shops

A spontaneous round of applause broke out at Sydney International Airport for a group of American firefighters who arrived this week to help fight the wildfires hitting Australia. 

Video posted on Twitter on Thursday by the commissioner of the New South Wales Rural Fire Service showed Australians at the airport bursting into applause and cheers as the Americans walked through the arrivals hall.

“U.S. firefighters arrived at Sydney Int Airport this week, on their way to assist with fire fighting in Victoria,” NSWRFS Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons wrote on Twitter.  

ADVERTISEMENT

“Coming through, all gathered gave a spontaneous & lengthy round of applause, reflecting the gratitude & admiration we all have for their generosity,” she also said.

 

 

Australia and the United States have been sending firefighters to each other to help fight wildfires, according to ABC7 Chicago.

Citing officials, the local affiliate reported that there are already 159 U.S. firefighters in Australia and the U.S. plans to send at least another 100.

Australia has been hit by the worst wildfires in decades, which have killed over two dozen people and caused devastation among the animals living in the affected areas.

 

Click Here: cheap kanken backpack

Friction is flaring in Congress between defense hawks and opponents of so-called forever wars after President TrumpDonald John TrumpIranian diplomat after strike: ‘We do not seek escalation or war’ Graham: Iran missile attack ‘an act of war’ ‘All is well’ Trump tweets after Iran hits Iraq bases housing US troops MORE’s order to kill a top Iranian general.

The clash has made for some unlikely bedfellows, as typical Trump allies such as Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulRand Paul warns Trump admin after Iran retaliatory strike: War must go through Congress Rand Paul: Trump ‘got bad advice’ on killing of Soleimani Schumer: Senate must vote on resolution limiting Trump on Iran MORE (R-Ky.) and Fox News host Tucker CarlsonTucker CarlsonLawmakers clash on war powers after Soleimani strike Tucker Carlson: ‘America appears to be lumbering towards a new Middle East war’ Fox News hits highest viewership in network’s 23-year history MORE rail against the president’s decision and echo Democrats’ concerns about the possibility of military conflict with Iran.

To be sure, most Republicans have lined up behind Trump and a House vote this week on the issue is expected to largely break along party lines, as is a Senate vote expected to follow in the coming weeks. The proposed war powers resolution would mandate military hostilities related to Iran end within 30 days absent further congressional action.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We’re going to have a vote, and everybody’s going to declare,” said Sen. Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineTrump and Pelosi clash over Iran, impeachment Rand Paul: Trump ‘got bad advice’ on killing of Soleimani Overnight Defense: Washington returns to Iran crisis | Defense chief denies US troops leaving Iraq | House sets vote on Iran war powers | Bolton willing to testify in impeachment trial MORE (D-Va.), who is sponsoring the Senate resolution. “I don’t know what the total will be, but we have some reason to believe from those earlier votes that there are people who believe in the congressional imperative, whatever they think about war with Iran, that it should be Congress that should decide it rather than the president on his own.”

The full House and Senate will be briefed Wednesday behind closed doors on the strike against Gen. Qassem Soleimani, providing an opportunity for lawmakers to air their grievances to top administration officials. The so-called Gang of Eight – the top Democrats and Republicans in the House, Senate and each chamber’s Intelligence Committee — was briefed on the intelligence Tuesday, with lawmakers declining to comment when they left.

Some Republicans who have previously cautioned against a military strike on Iran have come out in support of the Soleimani attack.

Rep. Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzMeadows says Matt Gaetz should be part of Trump’s impeachment defense team Republicans came to the table on climate this year Trump invokes son Barron while attacking Warren at rally MORE (R-Fla.), who last year co-sponsored a House measure aimed at blocking military action against Iran, defended the president’s decision as an effort to protect U.S. troops.

“The president would need congressional authorization to start a war with Iran, but as the president made very clear, this was an effort to protect our troops and to stop a war, not to start one,” Gaetz said recently on Fox News.

Administration officials have argued the strike was necessary to preempt an imminent attack Soleimani was planning against U.S. troops and diplomats in the Middle East, but they have offered no proof to back up their assertions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Asked Tuesday for specifics about the supposed imminent threat, Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoOvernight Defense: Iran takes credit for rocket attack on US base | Trump briefed | Trump puts talk of Iraq withdrawal on hold | Progressives push to block funding for Iran war | Trump backs off threat to hit Iranian cultural sites House chairman asks Pompeo to testify on Iran next week Progressives push for votes to block funding for war against Iran MORE spoke about past events.

“We know what happened at the end of last year, in December, ultimately leading to the death of an American,” he told reporters. “So if you’re looking for imminence, you need to look no further than the days that led up to the strike that was taken against Soleimani.”

But the administration’s reliance on citing undisclosed intelligence has rankled even Trump supporters such as Carlson, who has used his Fox News show in recent days to warn against “jumping into another quagmire.”

On Monday, Carlson highlighted Trump’s previous dismissal of the intelligence community as the “deep state.”

“It seems like about 20 minutes ago we were denouncing these people as the ‘deep state’ and pledging never to trust them again without verification,” he said. “But now, for some reason, we do trust them, implicitly and completely.”

He went on to raise the issue of the Iraq War.

“And by the way, they also lied about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction back in 2002 and got us into an utterly pointless war that dramatically weakened our country,” Carlson said. “The people pushing conflict with Iran did that.”

Paul, meanwhile, said recently on CNN that Trump got “bad advice” on the Soleimani strike and that the general’s death means “the death of diplomacy with Iran.”

Paul’s comments on CNN elicited a rebuke from Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamGraham: Iran missile attack ‘an act of war’ ‘All is well’ Trump tweets after Iran hits Iraq bases housing US troops McConnell takes round one in impeachment battle MORE (R-S.C.), who has become a hawkish voice in Trump’s ear, spending the days before the Soleimani strike with Trump in Florida.

“Senator @RandPaul – like the Obama Administration – is under the illusion there are multiple voices making decisions for the Iranian theocracy – from moderate to hardliner,” Graham tweeted Tuesday. “I would encourage my Senate colleagues to not fall for this Iranian mythology.”

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim RischJames (Jim) Elroy RischLawmakers clash on war powers after Soleimani strike North Korea tops foreign crises confronting Trump in 2020 Trump faces pivotal year with Russia on arms control MORE (R-Idaho), on whose committee Paul serves, would not comment Tuesday on the Kentucky senator, saying “any conversations I have with Sen. Paul will be between he and I.”

Asked more generally about concerns about a broader regional conflict stemming from the Soleimani strike, Risch said “just to talk about a general question like that, doesn’t work for me.”

“Before I would respond to them, I’d want to know exactly what you’re talking about in detail. Who’s involved? What’s the intelligence on it that that’s going to happen? What are the size of both the forces and the military equipment they’re going to use?” Risch said.

Paul has not said yet whether he’s supporting Kaine’s war power resolution, telling reporters Tuesday “we’re looking at it.”

“We’re going to wait to hear the intelligence on Wednesday,” Paul added.

Paul also sent a letter Tuesday with Sen. Tom UdallThomas (Tom) Stewart UdallImpeachment trial complicates efforts to rein in Trump on Iran Lawmakers clash on war powers after Soleimani strike Schumer: Senate must vote on resolution limiting Trump on Iran MORE (D-N.M.) to their Senate colleagues seeking their support on a separate measure that would block funding for military action against Iran.

“As the New Year began, President Trump entered the United States into hostilities against Iran without congressional approval,” Paul and Udall wrote. “This important bipartisan bill would work to restore the Constitutional balance between the Congress and the executive and curtail this administration’s reckless actions in the Middle East against Iran.”

The Senate voted on the same measure last year. Then, four Republicans sided with Democrats to give the legislation majority support, but it needed 60 votes to pass. In addition to Paul, Republican Sens. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsMcConnell takes round one in impeachment battle Overnight Defense: Iran takes credit for rocket attack on US base | Trump briefed | Trump puts talk of Iraq withdrawal on hold | Progressives push to block funding for Iran war | Trump backs off threat to hit Iranian cultural sites Poll: Majority say House should send impeachment articles to Senate MORE (Maine), Jerry MoranGerald (Jerry) MoranImpeachment trial complicates efforts to rein in Trump on Iran Lawmakers clash on war powers after Soleimani strike Schumer: Senate must vote on resolution limiting Trump on Iran MORE (Kan.) and Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeSchumer: Senate must vote on resolution limiting Trump on Iran Congress to clash over Trump’s war powers Taking concrete steps to address domestic terrorism MORE (Utah) voted for the bill.

ADVERTISEMENT

But it remains to be seen whether the war powers resolution can muster even that much Republican support.

Collins and Moran have said they are reviewing Kaine’s war powers resolution.

Lee said Tuesday he is inclined to oppose Kaine’s resolution over the legislation’s “findings of fact,” which he said “really overstate things.” But in general, he added, war powers resolutions are “something I’ve supported in the past.”

Sen. Todd YoungTodd Christopher YoungLawmakers clash on war powers after Soleimani strike Congress to clash over Trump’s war powers Trump faces pivotal year with Russia on arms control MORE (R-Ind.), who didn’t support the previous Iran measure but voted for a war powers resolution about Yemen, said Tuesday he would talk with Kaine about his resolution.

But setting aside legal arguments about the Soleimani strike, Young added, “the world is better off in the absence of having this terrorist mastermind walk the earth.”

 

Jordain Carney contributed.