Trang Ánh Nam has left a new comment on your post "CNN's Erin Burnett says "You cannot make this up ....":
TReport Pokes More Holes In Dubious Claim Soleimani Was Plotting 'Imminent' Attack
A lengthy new report pokes yet more holes in the Trump administration's already-dubious claims that it needed to kill a top Iranian general in order to prevent an "imminent" threat.
The general, Qassem Soleimani, was killed by a done strike outside Baghad International Airport last Friday.
The administration has argued that Soleimani's killing was necessary to prevent an "imminent" attack, but its changing rhetoric about the danger Soleimani posed has weakened its case.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, for example, said Thursday that "we don't know precisely when and we don't know precisely where" the supposedly imminent attack, or attacks, plotted by Soleimani would've occurred.
"Soleimani was actively planning new attacks, and he was looking very seriously at our embassies, and not just the embassy in Baghdad," President Trump said in an interview with Fox News' Laura Ingraham aired Friday, adding: "I believe it probably would've been four embassies."
That was the first time the administration had offered that detail.
Meanwhile, a lengthy report from The New York Times published Saturday matched multiple outlets' reporting that Soleimani's killing was one of a number of options presented to Trump as a response to the storming of the U.S. embassy compound in Baghdad by an Iranian-backed militia.
One unnamed State Department official told the Times it was "a mistake" for Pompeo to refer to the purported attack being plotted by Soleimani as "imminent."
At the CIA, officers referred to a "mosaic effect" of information about a large-scale attack Soleimani was planning that targeted American assets.
But several unnamed officials told the Times that there was not sufficient information to describe the threat as "imminent."
Other unnamed officials told the Times there was no specific intelligence supporting Pompeo's claim that the attack could've killed "hundreds" of people.
The administration's classified briefings to members of Congress about the Soleimani killing — which Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) called "the worst briefing" on a military issue he'd seen — was similarly fraught.
In the briefings, several top Trump administration officials attempted to sell Congress on the imminent threat Soleimani posed, but many legislators left unconvinced after the briefers skimped on detail.
At one point, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reportedly listed three specific dates on which Soleimani had discussed potential attacks.
"What were the threats?" lawmakers shouted, per the Times. Milley didn't say.
One lawmaker, unnamed in the report, noted that the dates Milley listed, in late December or early January, had passed before Soleimani's killing without any attacks.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 12, 2020 at 12:40 AM
Sunday, January 12, 2020
[Erin Burnett] New comment on CNN’s Erin Burnett says "You cannot make this up .....
Trang Ánh Nam has left a new comment on your post "CNN's Erin Burnett says "You cannot make this up ....":
Trump Indicates He'll Seek To Block Key Impeachment Witnesses' Testimonies At Trial
President Donald Trump signaled in an interview aired Friday that he would seek to block key witnesses from testifying in the Senate's impeachment trial, including former National Security Adviser John Bolton, former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.
Trump ordered the men, and several other witnesses, not to cooperate with the House of Representatives' impeachment inquiry about his pressure campaign on Ukraine to produce political dirt against Democrats.
Now, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) prepares to transmit two articles of impeachment to the Senate for an impeachment trial, Trump implied he would seek to do the same in that chamber.
Asked by Fox News host Laura Ingraham if he would invoke executive privilege in an attempt to prevent Bolton from testifying, Trump said "I think you have to, for the sake of the office."
Bolton witnessed several attempts by Trump administration officials to pressure Ukraine to do the President's political bidding.
At one point, referring to the EU ambassador and the White House chief of staff, Bolton reportedly told a deputy "I am not part of whatever drug deal [Gordon] Sondland and [Mick] Mulvaney are cooking up."
After a judge dismissed his lawsuit seeking an answer on whether he was obliged to testify, Bolton announced last week that he would testify if subpoenaed.
Trump similarly suggested Friday he would seek to prevent potential testimony from Pompeo, Mulvaney and Perry.
"I would love everybody to testify," he said. "I would like Mick to testify, I like Mike Pompeo to testify. I like Rick Perry to testify. I want everybody. But there are things that you can't do from the standpoint of executive privilege."
"You have to maintain that," Trump continued. "So we'll see where it all goes. But especially a national security adviser, you can't have him explaining all of your statements about national security concerning Russia, China, North Korea, everything. You just can't do that."
A few GOP senators have hinted that they would be open to hearing witnesses later on in the Senate trial, but that hasn't reassured Democrats; Pelosi has withheld the articles of impeachment from the Senate for weeks in an attempt to build political pressure on Senate Republicans to allow witnesses that were not part of the House's hearings to testify.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 12, 2020 at 12:38 AM
Trump Indicates He'll Seek To Block Key Impeachment Witnesses' Testimonies At Trial
President Donald Trump signaled in an interview aired Friday that he would seek to block key witnesses from testifying in the Senate's impeachment trial, including former National Security Adviser John Bolton, former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.
Trump ordered the men, and several other witnesses, not to cooperate with the House of Representatives' impeachment inquiry about his pressure campaign on Ukraine to produce political dirt against Democrats.
Now, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) prepares to transmit two articles of impeachment to the Senate for an impeachment trial, Trump implied he would seek to do the same in that chamber.
Asked by Fox News host Laura Ingraham if he would invoke executive privilege in an attempt to prevent Bolton from testifying, Trump said "I think you have to, for the sake of the office."
Bolton witnessed several attempts by Trump administration officials to pressure Ukraine to do the President's political bidding.
At one point, referring to the EU ambassador and the White House chief of staff, Bolton reportedly told a deputy "I am not part of whatever drug deal [Gordon] Sondland and [Mick] Mulvaney are cooking up."
After a judge dismissed his lawsuit seeking an answer on whether he was obliged to testify, Bolton announced last week that he would testify if subpoenaed.
Trump similarly suggested Friday he would seek to prevent potential testimony from Pompeo, Mulvaney and Perry.
"I would love everybody to testify," he said. "I would like Mick to testify, I like Mike Pompeo to testify. I like Rick Perry to testify. I want everybody. But there are things that you can't do from the standpoint of executive privilege."
"You have to maintain that," Trump continued. "So we'll see where it all goes. But especially a national security adviser, you can't have him explaining all of your statements about national security concerning Russia, China, North Korea, everything. You just can't do that."
A few GOP senators have hinted that they would be open to hearing witnesses later on in the Senate trial, but that hasn't reassured Democrats; Pelosi has withheld the articles of impeachment from the Senate for weeks in an attempt to build political pressure on Senate Republicans to allow witnesses that were not part of the House's hearings to testify.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 12, 2020 at 12:38 AM
[Erin Burnett] New comment on CNN’s Erin Burnett says "You cannot make this up .....
Trang Ánh Nam has left a new comment on your post "CNN's Erin Burnett says "You cannot make this up ....":
WSJ: Trump Admin Threatened Iraq's Access To NY Fed Account Over Proposed Troop Withdrawal
The Trump administration reportedly threatened to cut off Iraq's access to its account with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York over a proposed withdrawal of American troops.
The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday that the State Department threatened to cut off Iraq's New York Fed account in a phone call Wednesday with Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, according to unnamed Iraqi officials. The resulting cash shortage would hurt Iraq's economy.
Many countries maintain accounts with the New York Fed in order to store government revenue in the form of U.S. dollars. In Iraq's case, much of that comes from oil sales.
The State Department didn't respond to TPM's request for comment on Saturday.
Abdul-Mahdi and Iraq's parliament have called for American troops to exit the country following the killing, ordered by President Donald Trump, of the top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani outside Baghdad International Airport a week ago.
Trump in turn threatened to sanction Iraq if U.S. troops were expelled. The State Department has refused to recognize Iraq's call for the troops to leave.
"At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how best to recommit to our strategic partnership — not to discuss troop withdrawal," the State Department said in a statement quoted by The Washington Post Friday.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 12, 2020 at 12:37 AM
WSJ: Trump Admin Threatened Iraq's Access To NY Fed Account Over Proposed Troop Withdrawal
The Trump administration reportedly threatened to cut off Iraq's access to its account with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York over a proposed withdrawal of American troops.
The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday that the State Department threatened to cut off Iraq's New York Fed account in a phone call Wednesday with Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, according to unnamed Iraqi officials. The resulting cash shortage would hurt Iraq's economy.
Many countries maintain accounts with the New York Fed in order to store government revenue in the form of U.S. dollars. In Iraq's case, much of that comes from oil sales.
The State Department didn't respond to TPM's request for comment on Saturday.
Abdul-Mahdi and Iraq's parliament have called for American troops to exit the country following the killing, ordered by President Donald Trump, of the top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani outside Baghdad International Airport a week ago.
Trump in turn threatened to sanction Iraq if U.S. troops were expelled. The State Department has refused to recognize Iraq's call for the troops to leave.
"At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how best to recommit to our strategic partnership — not to discuss troop withdrawal," the State Department said in a statement quoted by The Washington Post Friday.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 12, 2020 at 12:37 AM
Wednesday, January 8, 2020
[Erin Burnett] New comment on David Gergen discusses President Trump taking a sh....
Trang Ánh Nam has left a new comment on your post "David Gergen discusses President Trump taking a sh...":
Iran's missiles intended to 'kill personnel' in Iraq, Pentagon says
Pentagon officials believe that the more than a dozen missiles launched at two bases in Iraq housing U.S. forces Tuesday night were designed to kill Americans, but the Iranian efforts were thwarted by the military's Early Warning Systems, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters on Wednesday.
"I believe based on what I saw and what I know is that they were intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft and to kill personnel," Milley said.
U.S. military officials were warned about Iran's pending ballistic missile strike "when the air defense systems went active," he said.
Milley added that "a little bit of early warning" and "normal defensive procedures" at Al-Assad Air Base prevented American troops from being killed in the missile strike.
"In my estimation from what I know now, I think it has more to do with the defensive techniques that our forces used as opposed to intent," Milley said, adding that U.S. forces "took sufficient defensive measures."
Speaking to reporters after a returning from a briefing with Congress, Esper said that the 16 short-range ballistic missiles (originally estimated to be 15), were fired from three locations inside Iran during the attack early Wednesday local time, and were intended to avenge the death of Iranian Quds Force Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a U.S.-led drone strike at Baghdad International Airport last week.
Milley said that between 1,000- to 2,000-pound warheads were sitting on top of the Iranian missiles fired into Iraq.
The defense secretary also said he believes the U.S. has reestablished deterrence from another Iranian attack but added that he expects to be challenged by Shiite proxy militias in the region.
Esper confirmed that the missiles hit two military bases -- the Al-Assad Air Base and a separate military base in Erbil, which house U.S. forces in Iraq. Eleven of those missiles hit Al-Assad and one hit Erbil. Four of the missiles malfunctioned and failed to hit their target.
The damage at the bases was largely contained to "tentage, taxiways, the parking lot, damaged helicopter, things like that, nothing I would describe as major," Esper said.
Pentagon officials met with President Trump twice in the past 24 hours following the attack, Esper said. Trump announced earlier Wednesday in a nine-minute address to the nation that he would be imposing even more sanctions on Iran in response to the attack.
Democrats on Capitol Hill criticized Trump's initial decision to take out Soelimani without first consulting Congress or allies in the region, which has led to escalating tensions in the Middle East, and have since demanded answers from the administration about the alleged imminent threat that sparked the Soleimani attack, and how Trump will de-escalate the tensions with Iran and keep Americans safe.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced plans for the House to vote Thursday on a War Powers Resolution that aims to limit Trump's military action toward Iran, saying Democrats have "serious, urgent concerns about the administration's decision to engage in hostilities against Iran and about its lack of strategy moving forward."
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle expressed concerns coming out of Wednesday's Iran briefing about the administration bypassing Congress' approval for military escalations.
"Most members of Congress do not have access to the intelligence that I think is the most compelling. That's simply the nature of the intelligence and it's restricted the Gang of 8," Esper said, referring to the term for the bipartisan group of eight lawmakers who are briefed on classified intelligence matters.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 8, 2020 at 7:04 PM
Iran's missiles intended to 'kill personnel' in Iraq, Pentagon says
Pentagon officials believe that the more than a dozen missiles launched at two bases in Iraq housing U.S. forces Tuesday night were designed to kill Americans, but the Iranian efforts were thwarted by the military's Early Warning Systems, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters on Wednesday.
"I believe based on what I saw and what I know is that they were intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft and to kill personnel," Milley said.
U.S. military officials were warned about Iran's pending ballistic missile strike "when the air defense systems went active," he said.
Milley added that "a little bit of early warning" and "normal defensive procedures" at Al-Assad Air Base prevented American troops from being killed in the missile strike.
"In my estimation from what I know now, I think it has more to do with the defensive techniques that our forces used as opposed to intent," Milley said, adding that U.S. forces "took sufficient defensive measures."
Speaking to reporters after a returning from a briefing with Congress, Esper said that the 16 short-range ballistic missiles (originally estimated to be 15), were fired from three locations inside Iran during the attack early Wednesday local time, and were intended to avenge the death of Iranian Quds Force Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a U.S.-led drone strike at Baghdad International Airport last week.
Milley said that between 1,000- to 2,000-pound warheads were sitting on top of the Iranian missiles fired into Iraq.
The defense secretary also said he believes the U.S. has reestablished deterrence from another Iranian attack but added that he expects to be challenged by Shiite proxy militias in the region.
Esper confirmed that the missiles hit two military bases -- the Al-Assad Air Base and a separate military base in Erbil, which house U.S. forces in Iraq. Eleven of those missiles hit Al-Assad and one hit Erbil. Four of the missiles malfunctioned and failed to hit their target.
The damage at the bases was largely contained to "tentage, taxiways, the parking lot, damaged helicopter, things like that, nothing I would describe as major," Esper said.
Pentagon officials met with President Trump twice in the past 24 hours following the attack, Esper said. Trump announced earlier Wednesday in a nine-minute address to the nation that he would be imposing even more sanctions on Iran in response to the attack.
Democrats on Capitol Hill criticized Trump's initial decision to take out Soelimani without first consulting Congress or allies in the region, which has led to escalating tensions in the Middle East, and have since demanded answers from the administration about the alleged imminent threat that sparked the Soleimani attack, and how Trump will de-escalate the tensions with Iran and keep Americans safe.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced plans for the House to vote Thursday on a War Powers Resolution that aims to limit Trump's military action toward Iran, saying Democrats have "serious, urgent concerns about the administration's decision to engage in hostilities against Iran and about its lack of strategy moving forward."
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle expressed concerns coming out of Wednesday's Iran briefing about the administration bypassing Congress' approval for military escalations.
"Most members of Congress do not have access to the intelligence that I think is the most compelling. That's simply the nature of the intelligence and it's restricted the Gang of 8," Esper said, referring to the term for the bipartisan group of eight lawmakers who are briefed on classified intelligence matters.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 8, 2020 at 7:04 PM
[Học Để Thi] New comment on Meghan McCain confronted Elizabeth Warren: Why is ....
Trang Ánh Nam has left a new comment on your post "Meghan McCain confronted Elizabeth Warren: Why is ...":
Meghan McCain blasts People's 'bizarre fake news headline' about Elizabeth Warren interview on 'The View'
ABC News' "The View" co-host Meghan McCain blasted People over the magazine's "bizarre fake news headline" about her Tuesday confrontation with 2020 Democratic hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
McCain pressed Warren, D-Mass., over the way she described Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the now-deceased head of the Quds forces within Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard. McCain noted how Warren had called Soleimani a "murderer" and later described his death as an assassination.
At one point, McCain asked Warren whether she thought Soleimani was a terrorist. After twice describing Soleimani as "part of a group" designated as terrorists, Warren said "of course" Soleimani was himself a terrorist.
People covered the exchange by writing that McCain "couldn't get a word in" during the Warren interview, but the fiery "View" co-host didn't appreciate the magazine's narrative.
"What kind of bizarre fake news headline is this? Did you not see us have a discussion about her labeling Soleimani a terrorist, OR her take on AOC's statements about moderates in the dem party? We had a very interesting and respectful conversation. Warren didn't ignore anything," McCain tweeted.
"Warren ... seemingly didn't hear McCain amid applause from the crowd and other hosts' comments," People's article read, ignoring that McCain had already pressed Warren to declare that Soleimani was a terrorist.
People did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Warren explained her "wealth tax" plan and McCain attempted to chime in at one point, but the Massachusetts Democrat didn't acknowledge her.
Warren also responded to questions from McCain about other topics, such as whether or not she agrees with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., about moderates in the Democratic Party. Warren responded directly to McCain's question about the comments made by AOC and the duo later joked about "wine cellars," which Warren famously evoked to mock rival Pete Buttigieg at a debate last year.
People wasn't the only publication to claim Warren ignored McCain, as the New York Daily News and HuffPost ran similar headlines.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Học Để Thi at January 8, 2020 at 10:10 PM
Meghan McCain blasts People's 'bizarre fake news headline' about Elizabeth Warren interview on 'The View'
ABC News' "The View" co-host Meghan McCain blasted People over the magazine's "bizarre fake news headline" about her Tuesday confrontation with 2020 Democratic hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
McCain pressed Warren, D-Mass., over the way she described Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the now-deceased head of the Quds forces within Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard. McCain noted how Warren had called Soleimani a "murderer" and later described his death as an assassination.
At one point, McCain asked Warren whether she thought Soleimani was a terrorist. After twice describing Soleimani as "part of a group" designated as terrorists, Warren said "of course" Soleimani was himself a terrorist.
People covered the exchange by writing that McCain "couldn't get a word in" during the Warren interview, but the fiery "View" co-host didn't appreciate the magazine's narrative.
"What kind of bizarre fake news headline is this? Did you not see us have a discussion about her labeling Soleimani a terrorist, OR her take on AOC's statements about moderates in the dem party? We had a very interesting and respectful conversation. Warren didn't ignore anything," McCain tweeted.
"Warren ... seemingly didn't hear McCain amid applause from the crowd and other hosts' comments," People's article read, ignoring that McCain had already pressed Warren to declare that Soleimani was a terrorist.
People did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Warren explained her "wealth tax" plan and McCain attempted to chime in at one point, but the Massachusetts Democrat didn't acknowledge her.
Warren also responded to questions from McCain about other topics, such as whether or not she agrees with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., about moderates in the Democratic Party. Warren responded directly to McCain's question about the comments made by AOC and the duo later joked about "wine cellars," which Warren famously evoked to mock rival Pete Buttigieg at a debate last year.
People wasn't the only publication to claim Warren ignored McCain, as the New York Daily News and HuffPost ran similar headlines.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Học Để Thi at January 8, 2020 at 10:10 PM
Tuesday, January 7, 2020
[Erin Burnett] New comment on CNN on Tuesday settled a defamation lawsuit filed ....
Trang Ánh Nam has left a new comment on your post "CNN on Tuesday settled a defamation lawsuit filed ...":
CNN settles lawsuit with Nick Sandmann stemming from viral video controversy
New York (CNN Business) CNN has settled a lawsuit with a Kentucky high school student who was at the center of a viral video controversy, a spokesperson for the news network confirmed Tuesday.
No other details were immediately available. An attorney for the student, Nicholas Sandmann, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Sandmann only tweeted, "Yes, we settled with CNN."
The news was first reported by WXIX-TV. The local outlet said a settlement figure was not made public at a court hearing in Covington, Kentucky.
The settlement will allow CNN to avoid a lengthy and potentially unpredictable trial. Sandmann sought $275 million in damages in the lawsuit he filed against CNN last March.
Sandmann, a student at Covington Catholic High School, became a national news story when he was in Washington on January 18, 2019, for the annual March for Life rally.
In a video that gained national attention, Sandmann was in an encounter with Omaha tribe elder Nathan Phillips, who was beating a hand-held drum and singing at the Indigenous Peoples March at the Lincoln Memorial on the same day.
Another video that surfaced days later provided additional context for the encounter, but the first video had gone viral, touching off widespread controversy as photos of the teenager and the red Make America Great Again hat he was wearing spread across social media.
In the second video, a group of black men who identified as members of the Black Hebrew Israelites were seen taunting the students from Covington Catholic High School with disparaging language and shouting racist slurs at participants in the Indigenous Peoples Rally and other passersby.
Sandmann at the time strongly denied accusations against him, saying he had been trying to "defuse the situation" by "remaining motionless and calm."
Major news outlets, including the Washington Post, the Associated Press and CNN, covered the aftermath of the incident.
Sandmann also filed lawsuits against NBC Universal and The Washington Post. In July, a federal judge in Kentucky dismissed the lawsuit against The Washington Post. Part of that lawsuit, however, was later reinstated in October.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 7, 2020 at 6:27 PM
CNN settles lawsuit with Nick Sandmann stemming from viral video controversy
New York (CNN Business) CNN has settled a lawsuit with a Kentucky high school student who was at the center of a viral video controversy, a spokesperson for the news network confirmed Tuesday.
No other details were immediately available. An attorney for the student, Nicholas Sandmann, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Sandmann only tweeted, "Yes, we settled with CNN."
The news was first reported by WXIX-TV. The local outlet said a settlement figure was not made public at a court hearing in Covington, Kentucky.
The settlement will allow CNN to avoid a lengthy and potentially unpredictable trial. Sandmann sought $275 million in damages in the lawsuit he filed against CNN last March.
Sandmann, a student at Covington Catholic High School, became a national news story when he was in Washington on January 18, 2019, for the annual March for Life rally.
In a video that gained national attention, Sandmann was in an encounter with Omaha tribe elder Nathan Phillips, who was beating a hand-held drum and singing at the Indigenous Peoples March at the Lincoln Memorial on the same day.
Another video that surfaced days later provided additional context for the encounter, but the first video had gone viral, touching off widespread controversy as photos of the teenager and the red Make America Great Again hat he was wearing spread across social media.
In the second video, a group of black men who identified as members of the Black Hebrew Israelites were seen taunting the students from Covington Catholic High School with disparaging language and shouting racist slurs at participants in the Indigenous Peoples Rally and other passersby.
Sandmann at the time strongly denied accusations against him, saying he had been trying to "defuse the situation" by "remaining motionless and calm."
Major news outlets, including the Washington Post, the Associated Press and CNN, covered the aftermath of the incident.
Sandmann also filed lawsuits against NBC Universal and The Washington Post. In July, a federal judge in Kentucky dismissed the lawsuit against The Washington Post. Part of that lawsuit, however, was later reinstated in October.
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Trang Ánh Nam to Erin Burnett at January 7, 2020 at 6:27 PM
Sunday, January 5, 2020
[Trang Ánh Nam] New comment on Sen. Lindsey Graham said: "My goal is to start thi....
Erin Burnett has left a new comment on your post "Sen. Lindsey Graham said: "My goal is to start thi...":
Graham gives Pelosi ultimatum, proposes Senate rule change to remove her from impeachment process
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., insisted Sunday that if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not deliver articles of impeachment against President Trump to the Senate by the end of the week, the Senate should "take matters in our own hands."
Graham accused Pelosi of playing political games and trying to exert control over the Senate trial by keeping it from starting. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., recognized Friday on the Senate floor the chamber's rules prevented him from doing anything until Pelosi does her part, but Graham proposed a solution that could remove what McConnell has called an "impasse" in the process.
"What I would do, if she continues to refuse to send the articles as required by the Constitution, I would work with Senator McConnell to change the rules of the Senate so we could start the trial without her, if necessary," Graham proposed on "Sunday Morning Futures."
When asked how long he would wait before taking this step, Graham replied, "Days, not weeks."
Graham justified this by claiming that Pelosi was engaging in a "political stunt" by holding off on sending the impeachment articles to the Senate, weeks after they were approved by a House vote. He said McConnell would not let her dictate how events unfold.
"Well, we're not going to let Nancy Pelosi use the rules of the Senate to her advantage. This is dangerous to the presidency as an institution," Graham said. "They impeached the president, but the speaker of the House is holding the articles back, trying to extort from the majority leader of the Senate a trial to her liking. They're trying to hold these articles over the head of the president."
Graham laid out how he would expect the trial to go, allowing both sides to present arguments before determining whether witnesses were needed.
"We'll use the Clinton model, where you take the record established in the House, let the House managers appointed by Pelosi make the argument, let the president make his argument why the two articles are flawed, and then we'll decide whether we want witnesses. But this should be done in a couple of weeks," he said.
Graham expressed hope that the Senate could conclude the impeachment trial before the end of January, but reiterated that this may require the Senate to push Pelosi out of the equation.
"If we don't get the articles this week, then we need to take matters in our own hands and change the rules, deem them to be delivered to the Senate so we can start the trial, invite the House over to participate if they would like," he said. "If they don't come, dismiss the case and get on with governing the country."
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Erin Burnett to Trang Ánh Nam at January 5, 2020 at 10:31 PM
Graham gives Pelosi ultimatum, proposes Senate rule change to remove her from impeachment process
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., insisted Sunday that if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not deliver articles of impeachment against President Trump to the Senate by the end of the week, the Senate should "take matters in our own hands."
Graham accused Pelosi of playing political games and trying to exert control over the Senate trial by keeping it from starting. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., recognized Friday on the Senate floor the chamber's rules prevented him from doing anything until Pelosi does her part, but Graham proposed a solution that could remove what McConnell has called an "impasse" in the process.
"What I would do, if she continues to refuse to send the articles as required by the Constitution, I would work with Senator McConnell to change the rules of the Senate so we could start the trial without her, if necessary," Graham proposed on "Sunday Morning Futures."
When asked how long he would wait before taking this step, Graham replied, "Days, not weeks."
Graham justified this by claiming that Pelosi was engaging in a "political stunt" by holding off on sending the impeachment articles to the Senate, weeks after they were approved by a House vote. He said McConnell would not let her dictate how events unfold.
"Well, we're not going to let Nancy Pelosi use the rules of the Senate to her advantage. This is dangerous to the presidency as an institution," Graham said. "They impeached the president, but the speaker of the House is holding the articles back, trying to extort from the majority leader of the Senate a trial to her liking. They're trying to hold these articles over the head of the president."
Graham laid out how he would expect the trial to go, allowing both sides to present arguments before determining whether witnesses were needed.
"We'll use the Clinton model, where you take the record established in the House, let the House managers appointed by Pelosi make the argument, let the president make his argument why the two articles are flawed, and then we'll decide whether we want witnesses. But this should be done in a couple of weeks," he said.
Graham expressed hope that the Senate could conclude the impeachment trial before the end of January, but reiterated that this may require the Senate to push Pelosi out of the equation.
"If we don't get the articles this week, then we need to take matters in our own hands and change the rules, deem them to be delivered to the Senate so we can start the trial, invite the House over to participate if they would like," he said. "If they don't come, dismiss the case and get on with governing the country."
Unsubscribe from comment emails for this blog.
Posted by Erin Burnett to Trang Ánh Nam at January 5, 2020 at 10:31 PM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)