Staat ook letterlijk in je artikel hè?quote:
quote:Former Al Jazeera Islamabad bureau chief Ahmad Zaidan and freelance journalist Bilal Kareem filed a lawsuit Thursday in U.S. District Court in Washington, contending that they were erroneously placed on the "kill list" during the Obama administration and that Trump has illegally maintained that designation.
Gelukkig vroegen die 5 Clinton aides dat niet, gebeurt normaal gesproken ook nooit in een zaak, oh wacht..quote:
Ik ben wel nieuwsgierig naar wat Flynn allemaal te vertellen heeft. Jij niet?quote:
Antiderative is meer geinteresseerd in de dagelijkse agenda van Trump.quote:
bronquote:Flynn seeks 'assurances against unfair prosecution' from Russia-Trump investigators
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn is seeking “assurances against unfair prosecution” in order to provide interviews to congressional panels investigating possible collusion between Trump aides and Moscow, his lawyer said in a written statement.
The statement came after a report in The Wall Street Journal that Flynn has told the FBI and congressional committees he is willing to testify in exchange for immunity from prosecution.
“General Flynn certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit,” said Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner. But Kelner said there had been “vicious innuendo" against Flynn in the news media and that “no reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution.”
The FBI is conducting a counterintelligence investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign — an investigation FBI Director James Comey has said could include criminal prosecutions.
The House and Senate intelligence committees are also investigating Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, including possible collusion with Trump aides. Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr said Wednesday his panel is setting up an initial 20 private witness interviews and could seek additional witnesses later.
Kelner acknowledged in his letter that there had been discussions with both committees about interviewing Flynn.
But a spokesman for the House intelligence panel denied that the committee had received a request for immunity from Flynn.
“No, Michael Flynn has not offered to testify to HPSCI in exchange for immunity,” said the spokesman, Jack Langer. A committee aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said Flynn had not offered to testify in exchange for immunity.
Kelner’s statement, though, made clear Flynn has some conditions before he’ll agree to congressional interviews.
Flynn resigned as President Donald Trump’s national security adviser last month after it became clear he had misled his colleagues about the nature of his pre-inauguration phone calls with Russia’s ambassador.
The former three-star Army general also delivered a paid speech in Moscow in 2015 at a gala celebrating the Russian propaganda outlet RT at which he was seated at a table with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Price Floyd, who was Flynn’s crisis communications director until earlier this week, had no comment Thursday. Floyd also would not comment in recent days about rumors floating around the White House and elsewhere that the former national security adviser was cooperating. Floyd said there was nothing unusual about the timing of his departure as a Flynn spokesman on Monday.
One person close to Flynn said that unless new information becomes available, the retired general’s mistakes were innocent ones that arose out of political and perhaps even legal naiveté, but that shouldn’t create any criminal liability for him.
“I’m not privy to what he is saying to his lawyers or what his lawyers are suggesting to him,” the Flynn associate said. “But I have seen nothing that would lead me to believe that he has made anything but judgment miscues.”
Nevertheless, the associate said Flynn is doing what anyone in his position would do —working with a lawyer to negotiate whatever protections he can, given the ongoing investigations by the FBI and congressional committees. The associate added that despite earlier media reports that the FBI has signaled that Flynn won’t face any charges for his pre-inauguration communications with the Russian ambassador, Flynn has said he was never told that, leaving open that possibility.
“I know of no official at the FBI telling him, 'Hey, we’re not prosecuting you.' Only in the press,” the associate said. “If he is talking to them, if he is cooperating,” or considering cooperating, “it is news to me.”
Earlier this month, Flynn filed a belated foreign agent disclosure with the Justice Department, after his lawyer concluded that lobbying work Flynn did last year “could be construed to have principally benefited the Republic of Turkey.”
The FBI and Justice Department declined to comment.
bronquote:The Republican Majority in Congress Is an Illusion
The recriminations following the GOP’s health-care failure obscure a simple reality: The party doesn’t have as much power as its leaders thought it did.
Legislating is often described as more art than science, but it’s really just grade-school arithmetic: Bills either have the votes needed to pass, or they don’t.
Republicans have a president in the White House and a numerical majority in Congress—237 seats out of the 430 currently occupied in the House, and 52 out of 100 in the Senate. In theory, that’s enough to run the show. “Welcome to the dawn of a new unified Republican government,” an ebullient House Speaker Paul Ryan declared to reporters the week after the November election.
He was using the word “unified” in a general sense. Republicans now had, in the presidency, the capstone to their decade-long crawl back to power in Washington. But as the last week has made abundantly clear, the idea of unification was wishful thinking, and mostly an illusion. As Ryan and Trump surveyed the results of the elections, they each seemed to see a much bigger victory than the GOP had actually won.
The president described his relatively narrow Electoral College margin—paired with a popular vote loss—as a “massive landslide.” And Ryan moved swiftly to enact a conservative agenda with Republican votes alone. He envisioned a GOP version of the Democrats’ legislative burst in 2009, when President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid teamed up to enact a major stimulus bill, the Affordable Care Act, Wall Street reform, and countless other more modest pieces of legislation in under two years.
But there was a big difference between the unified Democratic government of 2009-2010 and the Republican majorities of today: votes. The Democrats simply had many more of them. In the House, Obama’s party controlled at least 255 seats during most of the 111th Congress, and for a seven-month stretch in late 2009, Democrats had 60 votes in the Senate—enough to defeat a GOP filibuster. When the House approved the final version of Obamacare in March 2010, the bill passed despite opposition from 34 Democrats. Republicans could have survived no more than 22 defections on the American Health Care Act last week, and when Ryan withdrew the bill, Trump said the party leadership was about 10 to 15 votes short. In other words, if Republicans had the same number of seats as Democrats did seven years ago, the legislation would have passed.
The failure of the GOP health-care bill has, rather predictably, unleashed a circular firing squad within the party. Ryan blamed the compromise-averse members of the House Freedom Caucus, who in turn blamed the moderates. Conservative activists and Trump loyalists blamed the speaker, while the president is lashing out at just about anyone who didn’t support the bill, including Democrats who were excluded from the process from the beginning.
“The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast,” Trump tweeted Thursday morning. “We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!”
If the president is battling both conservatives and Democrats for the next 20 months, who does that leave to pass his agenda? Subtracting the three dozen or so members of the Freedom Caucus leaves Trump with about 200 votes in the House—well short of a 218-vote majority. At other moments in the past week, though, the president has talked about working with Democrats to strike a deal on health care.
That’s not sitting well with Ryan, who is clinging to his dream of a Republican-only agenda, however fast it might be fading. “I worry we’ll push the president into working with Democrats,” the speaker told CBS’s Norah O’Donnell in an interview broadcast Thursday morning. “I don’t want that to happen.”
The bluntness of Ryan’s remark shocked even his fellow Republican, Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, who responded on Twitter: “We have come a long way in our country when the speaker of one party urges a president NOT to work with the other party to solve a problem.”
The speaker clarified later in the day that his comment was limited to health care and that he was not foreclosing the possibility of bipartisanship altogether. But the exchange underscored that the gulf within the Republican Party is just not about policy, but about governing philosophy. Ryan’s vision of legislating has rarely included Democrats, which is one reason he worked so carefully to craft health-care and tax bills that could circumvent the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate.
That strategy has always been iffy, however, because Republicans have barely enough votes to assemble a simple majority in the upper chamber, let alone a three-fifths supermajority. In the first three months of the new Congress, the Senate has not passed a single piece of significant legislation that was subject to a filibuster. Aside from confirming a couple dozen nominees to Trump’s Cabinet, all Republicans have been able to do is clear resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, which by law need only 51 votes to pass.
And even those have been arduous. On Thursday morning, as Ryan was scoffing at the notion of bipartisanship, Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia was casting his first vote in six weeks across the Capitol. Battling Parkinson’s disease and recovering from two back surgeries, he appeared on the Senate floor with the help of a walker and gave Republicans their 50th vote for a measure that would kill an Obama administration rule prohibiting states from blocking federal grants from going to Planned Parenthood. Two GOP senators supportive of Planned Parenthood, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, had already voted no on the bill, and Vice President Mike Pence was waiting for Isakson so he could cast a tie-breaking vote in favor of the resolution.
It was an unfortunate picture of the Republican congressional majority at the moment—slim and halting, and much shakier than it once seemed.
even terugkomen op Infra, Elaine Chao zegt dat breedband internet en veterans hospitals ook onderdeel gaan zijn van de infrastructure billquote:Op woensdag 29 maart 2017 16:19 schreef antiderivative het volgende:
Inzake infrastructuur projecten waar weinig tot geen federale investeringen voor nodig zijn:
Labor unions representing construction workers have sent an infrastructure priority list to President Donald Trump at his request, as his White House searches for projects to greenlight that require little if any federal funding.
North America’s Building Trades Unions sent the White House the wish list of 26 projects, including more than $80 billion worth of energy transmission lines, water and wind projects, and pipelines across the country.
More than half of the projects on the list given to Trump aide Stephen Miller are privately financed. All but one are in the midst of permitting and could use the Trump administration’s help in the form of regulatory relief.
The lone project seeking taxpayer dollars is the $20 billion Gateway project, which would add passenger rail capacity between densely populated New Jersey and New York and replace 100-year-old rail tunnels damaged by Hurricane Sandy in 2012.
The unions’ president, Sean McGarvey, told McClatchy his organization gave the list to Trump’s team in mid-February following a meeting with the president on Jan. 23. Trump met that day with McGarvey and a dozen other leaders from the building trades’ affiliated unions.
If the Trump administration can clear the regulatory hurdles in the way of major infrastructure projects, the union officials told Trump, they can deliver the workers. Trump, in turn, could fulfill his pledge to create good-paying jobs for his working-class voters.
McGarvey said he had told Trump that the unions’ 14 affiliates around the country could train the skilled workers needed to get the projects moving — including the pipe fitters, boilermakers or underwater welders, jobs that pay anywhere from $20 to $100 per hour.
Hier de lijst van projecten plus alle details
Het 'grote trillion dollar' project moet nog komen en staat op stapel. Daar zal met het Huis over gesproken moeten worden. Laatste nieuws is dat men dat samen met Tax Reform wil gaan doen, in een koppeling.
Hier het document van de eerste 50 projecten:
Trump priority list
Waarom eigenlijk? Trump krijgt toch niets van zijn agenda door het Congres.quote:
President Trump is planning to decide by late May on whether the U.S. should stay in the Paris climate change agreement, the White House announced Thursday. White House aides “are currently reviewing issues related to the agreement.”quote:Op vrijdag 24 maart 2017 12:59 schreef antiderivative het volgende:
voor de klimaat fans, een oproep vanuit congress inzake Paris-climate deal:
Please join me in signing the letter below to address imperative conditions which must be met for
the United States to remain in the Paris Agreement. We must ensure the Agreement works for the American people and utilize our seat at the table to prevent harmful policies which undermine economic growth and energy security here and abroad.
Dear President Trump,
As you contemplate your actions related to the Paris Agreement we would like to share with you the following conditions we believe should be met if the United States of America is to remain a party to the Agreement.
As you know, President Obama pledged a 26 to 28 percent reduction in U.S. greenhouse gas emission by 2025, compared to a 2005 baseline. This target would cause irreparable harm to our economy, particularly our manufacturing and energy sectors, and should be rejected. A recent report by the American Council for Capital Formation, for example, found achieving this pledge would reduce our gross domestic product by $250 billion by 2025 and reduce economy-wide employment by 2.7 million jobs.
In response, the U.S. should present a new pledge that does no harm to our economy. Unlike President Obama’s opaque process to determine his pledge, the determination should be transparent, reflect a range of economic scenarios, and take in adequate input from the private sector and other interested parties. We should showcase the energy security, consumer, and emission benefits produced by the shale revolution and emphasize the importance of baseload power generation, including highly efficient and low emission coal-fired and nuclear power plants, to
grid reliability. We must include plans to drive technology innovation to help ensure a future for fossil fuels within the context of the global climate agenda.
The U.S. should not make additional transfers to the Green Climate Fund. The Obama Administration gave $1 billion to this Fund, including a $500 million payment shortly before your Inauguration. Given this investment, we shouldn’t relinquish our seat on the Green Climate Fund. We should use our power to veto any projects deemed wasteful and harmful to global energy security efforts and poverty eradication objectives in the developing world.
Lastly, the U.S. should use its seat at the Paris table to defend and promote our commercial interests, including our manufacturing and fossil fuel sectors. Our engagement must prevent the development of harmful policies which undermine economic growth and energy security here and abroad. We should work closely with our allies to develop, deploy, and commercialize cleaner technologies to help ensure a future for fossil fuels within the context of the global climate agenda, including support for the deployment of highly efficient and low emission coal, as well as carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies, in global markets.
Thank you for your genuine consideration of these conditions we believe must all be met in order to make the Paris Agreement work for the American people.
Member of Congress
Cramer is ook een energy adviseur van Trump
Hij mag brandjes blussen nadat El Trumperino weer eens alles in de fik stak. Wat een kutbaan.quote:Op vrijdag 31 maart 2017 12:46 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
Tillerson belooft de NAVO dat de VS zich aan eerdere afspraken houdt.
Gesproken over o.a. ISIS, de veiligheid in Europa en de onzekerheid, en NATOquote:Op donderdag 30 maart 2017 11:03 schreef antiderivative het volgende:
Trump agenda vandaag:
* Intelligence briefings
* Meeting with Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin
* Legislative affairs and strategy session on opioid and drug abuse
* Meeting with Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen of Denmark
* Business meeting to consider the nomination of Sonny Perdue, of Georgia, to be Secretary of Agriculture
* Business meeting to consider the nomination of R. Alexander Acosta, of Florida, to be Secretary of Labor
* Hearings to examine the nomination of Heather Wilson, of South Dakota, to be Secretary of the Air Force, Department of Defense
* Hearings to examine United States interests, values, and the American people
* Hearings to examine the potential for infrastructure improvements to create jobs and reduce the cost of living through all-of-the-above energy and mineral production in Alaska
Dat waren ze toch al van plan.quote:Op vrijdag 31 maart 2017 13:02 schreef antiderivative het volgende:
Gesproken over o.a. ISIS, de veiligheid in Europa en de onzekerheid, en NATOtwitter:
quote:Op dinsdag 28 maart 2017 18:52 schreef antiderivative het volgende:
Pelosi doet een oproepje voor ideeen om Obamacare te gaan fixen
even with the president
Vóór Juni komen de verzekeraars met de nieuwe premiums voor 2018.
Hier trouwens een overzicht van maatregelen hoe Trump O'care kan slopen en ondermijnen als hij echt zou willen, via NBC