Decrying 'Toxic Alliance' of Macron and Polluters, Climate Campaigners Stage One of France's Largest Ever Acts of Civil Disobedience

Parts of a major business district just outside of Paris city limits were “paralyzed” Friday when more than 2,000 climate campaigners staged what organizers described as one of France’s largest ever acts of civil disobedience.

“We want to show that in reality, it is here that France’s climate policy is decided, in the offices of the big bosses.”
—Clément Sénéchal, Greenpeace France

Peaceful demonstrators descended on La Défense to protest government complicity and companies fueling the global climate crisis.

Carrying signs that condemned Emmanuel Macron as “president of polluters,” the protesters blocked access to the buildings of three major businesses and the Ministry for the Ecological and Inclusive Transition.

The direct action was organized by Action Non-Violente (ANV) COP21 and the French chapters of Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, but members of at least 14 climate groups reportedly joined the mass mobilization.

“Through this action of extraordinary civil disobedience, the French climate movement denounces the toxic alliance that Emmanuel Macron and his government maintain with the large companies whose activity accelerates climate change, while radical and immediate action is needed to limit global warming to +1.5°C by the end of the century,” organizers said in a statement in French, referencing a key target of the Paris climate accord.

The demonstration in France came as the climate activism group Extinction Rebellion is spearheading an International Rebellion Week featuring similar civil disobedience in London. The group’s French arm supported the action Friday:

Click Here: COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES 2019

The three companies campaigners targeted were fossil fuel giant Total, a major producer of planet-warming emissions; investment bank Société Générale, which pours billions of dollars into dirty energy projects each year; and Électricité de France (EDF), the state-run electric utility that, according to protest organizers, produces only about 10 percent of renewable energy compared with more than 70 percent of nuclear energy.

“Instead of regulating the activities of these polluting multinationals, Emmanuel Macron is rolling out the red carpet!” said Cécile Marchand of Friends of the Earth France.

Marchand pointed out that last year, Macron’s government gave Total the green light to import palm oil, despite the European Parliament’s decision to ban such imports by 2021. She also slammed government investment in nuclear power and failures to block big banks from funding dirty energy development.

The French president, Marchand said, “firmly defends banks like Société Générale against any attempt to regulate and refuses to supervise them to put an end to their investments in fossil fuels.”

“By displaying Emmanuel Macron at La Défense, and blocking the activity of several strategic locations in this business district,” said Greenpeace France climate campaign manager Clément Sénéchal, “we want to show that in reality, it is here that France’s climate policy is decided, in the offices of the big bosses.”

The blockades in France came as students across the globe skipped classes and took to the streets as part of the weekly #FridaysForFuture school strikes—inspired by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg’s solitary protests launched last year to demand bolder efforts from global policymakers to stave off climate catastrophe.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Dems Introduce Bill to End Trump's 'UnAmerican' Muslim Ban

Democrats in both chambers of Congress introduced legislation to end President Donald Trump’s racist Muslim ban Wednesday, generating support from advocates and lawmakers opposed to the administration’s policy.

The No Ban Act, which faces an uphill battle in the Senate, would end a number of policies designed to stop immigration into the U.S. from Muslim majority countries. Those policies, according to Al Jazeera, include the travel ban, the ban on asylum seekers, and so-called “extreme vetting,” a technique to slow down the immigration process for applicants. 

Imraan Siddiqi, the executive director of CAIR Arizona, told Common Dreams that the bill is a step in the right direction.

“We are happy to see elected officials who are using their legislative powers to dismantle the Trump administration’s bigoted policies,” said Siddiqi. “The Muslim Ban has caused harm on untold thousands of people, based on the politicization of Islamophobia.”

“By introducing this piece of legislation, our representatives are ensuring that these abuses of executive powers are put back in check and that no one should be banned from this country based on their national origin nor religion,” Siddiqi added. 

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) are the lead sponsors of the bill in their respective chambers. During a press conference on Wednesday announcing the legislation, Coons told reporters that he was driven to act after watching the effects of the policy on families in Delaware.

“We are committed to standing against hate and intolerance and to end this cruel policy,” said Coons. 

Chu, who said Wednesday that she remembered the day the ban was put into effect with sadness, said in a tweet that the legislation was designed to ensure that not only would the ban be repealed but that the power to take racist actions like it would also be curtailed. 

“Trump’s Muslim ban is unAmerican,” Chu said. “That is why Sen. Chris Coons and I are introducing our No Ban Act today to not only repeal Trump’s hateful ban but also prevent any future president from issuing a ban based on religion or nationality.”

Chu and Coons were joined by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) at the announcement. 

“I have said this before, and let me say it again,” said Omar. “I believe this ban will go down in history as as a moral stain on our country’s history.”

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Tlaib, in her comments, pointed to the fact that the ban would affect more than just the people it initially targeted—as all such targeted actions do. 

“This is an American issue,” said Tlaib, “don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.”

Other groups weighed in to support the legislation. 

“The Democratic majority in the House and any Republicans who claim independence from President Trump have a golden opportunity to end this shameful Muslim Ban,” said National Iranian American Council executive director Jamal Abdi in a statement.

“If Congress chooses to squander this moment then they will find themselves complicit in one of the most discriminatory policies of our time,” added Abdi. 

People for the American Way signaled support in an open letter released Monday.

“The No Ban Act is a clear and unequivocal response to the Muslim Ban that would ensure no one can be banned from our country based on religious or nationality-based discrimination ever again,” the organization wrote.

In a statement, the ACLU’s senior legislative and advocacy counsel Manar Waheed said that the damage of the ban may take decades to fix—even if Chu and Coons are successful in getting their legislation through Congress. 

The bill is an “important step,” said the Brennan Center’s Faiza Patel. 

Watch Coons and Chu’s announcement:

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Click Here: brisbane lions guernsey 2019

'Difference Between Democracy and Dictatorship': Dems Threaten Barr With Contempt Over Refusal to Testify

After Attorney General William Barr announced he will not show up for his scheduled hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday and refused to comply with a subpoena for the unredacted Mueller report, House Democrats said they plan to hold Barr in contempt if he continues to flout congressional demands.

“Compliance with congressional subpoenas is not optional,” Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “If good-faith negotiations don’t result in a pledge of compliance in the next day or two, the next step is seeking a contempt citation against the attorney general.”

“Chairman Nadler just received a letter from Barr refusing to comply with our subpoena for the unredacted Mueller report and underlying materials. This is extremely dangerous behavior.”
—Rep. Pramila Jayapal

As Common Dreams reported, Barr objected to Nadler’s proposal to let committee staff lawyers question the attorney general following the time allotted to members of Congress.

Speaking to reporters after Barr announced he would not show up for the House hearing, Nadler said the attorney general is “is terrified of having to face a skilled attorney.”

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—a member of the House Judiciary Committee—said Wednesday night that she will urge Nadler to move ahead with a contempt citation against Barr.

“Chairman Nadler just received a letter from Barr refusing to comply with our subpoena for the unredacted Mueller report and underlying materials. That is unacceptable,” Jayapal tweeted. “This is extremely dangerous behavior.”

In an appearance on CNN late Wednesday, Jayapal said Barr and President Donald Trump’s refusal to comply with congressional requests and subpoenas shows the White House has “no respect” for checks and balances.

“I think what we’re talking about is the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship,” Jayapal said.

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Click Here: Cardiff Blues Store

Watch:

In a column on Thursday, The Week‘s Joel Mathis said “there’s a simple solution for the House to enact if Barr really doesn’t show up [for Thursday’s hearing]: Formally hold him in contempt of Congress, then send him to jail.”

Former labor secretary Robert Reich wrote this week that while no sitting Attorney General has ever been arrested, there were times in history when such a move was seriously considered:

According to Mathis, “Barr’s defiance of the committee isn’t happening in a vacuum: It’s part of a sweeping effort by President Trump’s administration to defy nearly all oversight by Congress.”

“There’s no point in using incremental half-measures to get him and his administration to do the right, lawful thing,” Mathis wrote. “It’s time to make a radical, unmistakable stand. If not, legislators will deserve the contempt Barr has so clearly aimed at them.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Fears for Roe V. Wade After Supreme Court Issues Decision Overruling a 40-Year Precedent

The U.S. Supreme Court’s liberal justices sounded alarm on Monday after the court issued a ruling overturning a four decades-old precedent.

“Today’s decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the Court will overrule next,” Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in his dissent (pdf), in which Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined.

Some observers expressed fear one of the those caes could be Roe v. Wade.

The new decision is in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, which centers on the issue of “sovereign immunity.”

Per The Hill:

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Civil rights lawyer Sasha Samberg-Champion broke down the ruling in a Twitter thread, and offered his thoughts on what it may say about the conservative court’s approach to what is called “stare decisis”:

“No significant change in factual circumstances or evidence of unworkability warranted the Court’s unusual decision to disturb this long-standing precedent,” said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, in a statement.

“Right now,” she said, “we are witnessing coordinated attacks on Roe v. Wade, affirmative action, and more across the country. The forces driving these cases are banking on a Supreme Court majority that will be willing to reopen guiding precedent and remake the law.”

“This action by the Supreme Court sends a dangerous message that its precedents are fair game and that prior rulings may not be adhered to,” added Clarke. “This action also suggests that it’s open season when it comes to precedents that have long safeguarded civil rights and reproductive freedom in our country.”

Click Here: All Blacks Rugby Jersey

This post has been updated to correct the spelling of Justice Stephen Breyer’s name.

Despite Trump's Threats of Retaliatory Tariffs, France Passes 'Pioneering' Tax on Tech Giants

Despite threats of retaliatory tariffs from the Trump administration, French lawmakers on Thursday passed a “pioneering” 3 percent tax targeting the revenues that giant technology firms generate within France.

The new tax applies to “revenue from digital services earned in France by firms with more than 25 million euros ($28 million) in French revenue and 750 million euros ($845 million) worldwide,” according to Reuters. The legislation “is due to kick in retroactively” from the start of the year and—barring an unlikely request from French lawmakers or the government for a final review by the Constitutional Council—it is expected to be enacted within 21 days.

The French Finance Ministry reportedly estimated that the digital services tax initially will raise about 500 million euros ($563 million) per year but projected that figure will increase quickly.

With lawmakers’ passage of GAFA tax—which stands for Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon—France is the first European nation and first major global economy to adopt such legislation, though other countries are working on similar plans.

The French Senate approved the tax Thursday, a week after the legislation passed the French National Assembly and a day after U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer announced a probe of the measure’s effects under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which paves a path for future tariffs.

Lighthizer explained in a statement that the administration is very concerned the French tax “unfairly targets American companies,” so President Donald Trump has ordered the investigation to “determine whether it is discriminatory or unreasonable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.”

The probe announcement earned bipartisan praise from the leaders of the Senate Finance Committee. Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a joint statement that “the digital services tax that France and other European countries are pursuing is clearly protectionist and unfairly targets American companies in a way that will cost U.S. jobs and harm American workers.”

Trade groups that represent tech giants, such as the Computer and Communications Industry Association and the Internet Association, also have attacked the French legislation as discriminatory. Most of companies set to be impacted by the tax are U.S-based.

Addressing potential U.S. tariffs in comments before the Senate vote Thursday, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said: “Between allies, we can and should solve our disputes not by threats but through other ways… France is a sovereign country, its decisions on tax matters are sovereign and will continue to be sovereign.”

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

“Each of us is seeing the emergence of economic giants with monopolistic attributes and who not only want to control a maximum amount of data and make money with this data, but also go further than that by, in the absence of rules, escaping taxes and putting into place instruments that could, tomorrow, become a sovereign currency,” Le Maire added.

Reuters noted that France’s move comes amid struggles to hold trade talks between the Trump administration and the European Union due to “U.S. tariffs on steel and by EU states’ reluctance to include farm products.”

France is not alone in pursuing taxes on tech giants in the absence of a global agreement. BBC reported Thursday that “the United Kingdom, Spain, and Italy are all looking at introducing their own versions of a digital tax.”

Last October, U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond announced a 2 percent tax on technology companies as part of the 2018 Budget. TechCrunch reported at the time that the U.K. tax, which would take effect in April 2020, would be “based on the money they make on digital services like advertising and streaming entertainment (but not online sales).”

Click Here: cd universidad catolica

The U.K. government on Thursday unveiled draft legislation for its proposed tax, which will be consulted on until September. Jesse Norman, a U.K. Treasury minister, said in a statement that “this targeted and proportionate digital services tax is designed to keep our tax system in this area both fair and competitive, pending a longer-term international settlement.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

2020 Tuscan Grand Prix Index

Click:98F32301007000

Welcome to our index page of the 2020 Tuscan Grand Prix. From here you will be able to find links to all our latest reports, pictures and results from the Autodromo Internazionale del Mugello.

Session Reports

FP1: Bottas edges Verstappen and Leclerc in first practice at Mugello

FP2: Bottas leads Hamiton to stay on top as Norris crashes

FP3: Bottas remains on top on Saturday but Verstappen closes in

Qualifying: Hamilton wins knife-edge Mugello pole over Bottas

Race: Hamilton survives red flags and restarts to frustrate Bottas

Photos

Gallery: All the pictures from Thursday’s build-up in Mugello

Gallery: All the pictures from practice day in Mugello

Gallery: All the pictures from qualifying day in Mugello

Gallery: All the pictures from race day in Mugello

Results
Free Practice 1 results

Pos Driver Team Time Gap Laps

1
Valtteri Bottas
Mercedes
1:17.879s

33

2
Max Verstappen
Red Bull
1:17.927s
+ 0.048s
32

3
Charles Leclerc
Ferrari
1:18.186s
+ 0.307s
27

4
Lewis Hamilton
Mercedes
1:18.409s
+ 0.530s
28

5
Pierre Gasly
AlphaTauri
1:18.676s
+ 0.797s
30

6
Esteban Ocon
Renault
1:18.805s
+ 0.926s
28

7
Daniil Kvyat
AlphaTauri
1:18.839s
+ 0.960s
31

8
Lando Norris
McLaren
1:18.981s
+ 1.102s
30

9
Alexander Albon
Red Bull
1:19.068s
+ 1.189s
34

10
Daniel Ricciardo
Renault
1:19.140s
+ 1.261s
25

11
Kimi Räikkönen
Alfa Romeo
1:19.219s
+ 1.340s
21

12
Romain Grosjean
Haas
1:19.224s
+ 1.345s
25

13
Sebastian Vettel
Ferrari
1:19.267s
+ 1.388s
27

14
Antonio Giovinazzi
Alfa Romeo
1:19.322s
+ 1.443s
28

15
Carlos Sainz
McLaren
1:19.457s
+ 1.578s
33

16
George Russell
Williams
1:19.478s
+ 1.599s
29

17
Kevin Magnussen
Haas
1:19.551s
+ 1.672s
25

18
Lance Stroll
Racing Point
1:19.836s
+ 1.957s
23

19
Sergio Pérez
Racing Point
1:19.840s
+ 1.961s
29

20
Nicholas Latifi
Williams
1:20.034s
+ 2.155s
32

Free Practice 2 results

Pos Driver Team Time Gap Laps

1
Valtteri Bottas
Mercedes
1:16.989s

28

2
Lewis Hamilton
Mercedes
1:17.196s
+ 0.207s
29

3
Max Verstappen
Red Bull
1:17.235s
+ 0.246s
25

4
Alexander Albon
Red Bull
1:17.971s
+ 0.982s
28

5
Daniel Ricciardo
Renault
1:18.039s
+ 1.050s
32

6
Esteban Ocon
Renault
1:18.115s
+ 1.126s
29

7
Sergio Pérez
Racing Point
1:18.198s
+ 1.209s
34

8
Pierre Gasly
AlphaTauri
1:18.244s
+ 1.255s
30

9
Kimi Räikkönen
Alfa Romeo
1:18.385s
+ 1.396s
38

10
Charles Leclerc
Ferrari
1:18.400s
+ 1.411s
27

11
Lance Stroll
Racing Point
1:18.462s
+ 1.473s
37

12
Sebastian Vettel
Ferrari
1:18.498s
+ 1.509s
39

13
Carlos Sainz
McLaren
1:18.651s
+ 1.662s
32

14
Lando Norris
McLaren
1:18.658s
+ 1.669s
9

15
Daniil Kvyat
AlphaTauri
1:18.736s
+ 1.747s
33

16
George Russell
Williams
1:18.843s
+ 1.854s
33

17
Antonio Giovinazzi
Alfa Romeo
1:18.944s
+ 1.955s
35

18
Nicholas Latifi
Williams
1:18.983s
+ 1.994s
31

19
Kevin Magnussen
Haas
1:19.113s
+ 2.124s
32

20
Romain Grosjean
Haas
1:19.257s
+ 2.268s
5

Free Practice 3 results

Pos Driver Team Time Gap Laps

1
Valtteri Bottas
Mercedes
1:16.530s

17

2
Max Verstappen
Red Bull
1:16.547s
+ 0.017s
10

3
Lewis Hamilton
Mercedes
1:16.613s
+ 0.083s
14

4
Lance Stroll
Racing Point
1:17.112s
+ 0.582s
10

5
Pierre Gasly
AlphaTauri
1:17.226s
+ 0.696s
14

6
Sergio Pérez
Racing Point
1:17.341s
+ 0.811s
14

7
Charles Leclerc
Ferrari
1:17.488s
+ 0.958s
15

8
Alexander Albon
Red Bull
1:17.538s
+ 1.008s
11

9
Daniil Kvyat
AlphaTauri
1:17.627s
+ 1.097s
17

10
Romain Grosjean
Haas
1:17.635s
+ 1.105s
19

11
Esteban Ocon
Renault
1:17.746s
+ 1.216s
13

12
Carlos Sainz
McLaren
1:17.768s
+ 1.238s
19

13
Antonio Giovinazzi
Alfa Romeo
1:17.812s
+ 1.282s
15

14
Kimi Räikkönen
Alfa Romeo
1:17.843s
+ 1.313s
17

15
Kevin Magnussen
Haas
1:18.039s
+ 1.509s
17

16
Nicholas Latifi
Williams
1:18.072s
+ 1.542s
16

17
Daniel Ricciardo
Renault
1:18.142s
+ 1.612s
12

18
Sebastian Vettel
Ferrari
1:18.186s
+ 1.656s
15

19
Lando Norris
McLaren
1:18.826s
+ 2.296s
19

20
George Russell
Williams

1

Qualifying results

Pos Driver Team Q1 Q2 Q3

1
Lewis Hamilton
Mercedes
1:15.778s
1:15.309s
1:15.144s

2
Valtteri Bottas
Mercedes
1:15.749s
1:15.322s
1:15.203s

3
Max Verstappen
Red Bull
1:16.335s
1:15.471s
1:15.509s

4
Alexander Albon
Red Bull
1:16.527s
1:15.914s
1:15.954s

5
Charles Leclerc
Ferrari
1:16.698s
1:16.324s
1:16.270s

6
Sergio Pérez
Racing Point
1:16.596s
1:16.489s
1:16.311s

7
Lance Stroll
Racing Point
1:16.701s
1:16.271s
1:16.356s

8
Daniel Ricciardo
Renault
1:16.981s
1:16.243s
1:16.543s

9
Carlos Sainz
McLaren
1:16.993s
1:16.522s
1:17.870s

10
Esteban Ocon
Renault
1:16.825s
1:16.297s

11
Lando Norris
McLaren
1:16.895s
1:16.640s

12
Daniil Kvyat
AlphaTauri
1:16.928s
1:16.854s

13
Kimi Räikkönen
Alfa Romeo
1:17.059s
1:16.854s

14
Sebastian Vettel
Ferrari
1:17.072s
1:16.858s

15
Romain Grosjean
Haas
1:17.069s
1:17.254s

16
Pierre Gasly
AlphaTauri
1:17.125s

17
Antonio Giovinazzi
Alfa Romeo
1:17.220s

18
George Russell
Williams
1:17.232s

19
Nicholas Latifi
Williams
1:17.320s

20
Kevin Magnussen
Haas
1:17.348s

Race results

Pos Driver Team Gap Stops

1
Lewis Hamilton
Mercedes
59 laps – 17:30.074s
5

2
Valtteri Bottas
Mercedes
+ 4.880s
5

3
Alexander Albon
Red Bull
+ 8.064s
5

4
Daniel Ricciardo
Renault
+ 10.417s
5

5
Sergio Pérez
Racing Point
+ 15.650s
5

6
Lando Norris
McLaren
+ 18.883s
5

7
Daniil Kvyat
AlphaTauri
+ 21.756s
5

8
Charles Leclerc
Ferrari
+ 28.345s
5

9
Kimi Räikkönen
Alfa Romeo
+ 29.770s
6

10
Sebastian Vettel
Ferrari
+ 29.983s
6

11
George Russell
Williams
+ 32.404s
5

12
Romain Grosjean
Haas
+ 42.036s
5

13
Lance Stroll
Racing Point
DNF
3

14
Esteban Ocon
Renault
DNF
2

15
Nicholas Latifi
Williams
DNF
0

16
Kevin Magnussen
Haas
DNF
0

17
Antonio Giovinazzi
Alfa Romeo
DNF
1

18
Carlos Sainz
McLaren
DNF
1

19
Max Verstappen
Red Bull
DNF
0

20
Pierre Gasly
AlphaTauri
DNF
0

Gallery: The beautiful wives and girlfriends of F1 drivers

Keep up to date with all the F1 news via Facebook and Twitter

Click Here: los jaguares argentina

Florida attorney general directs law enforcement to take steps to ‘guarantee integrity' in elections

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi (R) said Sunday that she is directing the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) to take steps to “guarantee integrity in our elections process” amid Republican accusations of voter fraud in two counties in the state.

Bondi’s directive comes after the FDLE said Friday that it hadn’t launched an investigation into election officials in Broward and Palm Beach counties because there was no evidence of fraud.

Click Here: cheap INTERNATIONAL jerseyADVERTISEMENT

Bondi wrote in a letter to FDLE Commissioner Rick Swearingen that she doesn’t see how the FDLE “can legitimately refuse” to open an investigation.

“I fail to see how the Florida Department of Law Enforcement can legitimately refuse to investigate where there is reasonable suspicion that may lead to the discovery of criminal conduct of the 2018 election — actions that gravely damage Floridians’ confidence in our electoral process and our democracy,” she wrote.

“I am directing you to take the necessary steps to promote public safety and to assure that our state will guarantee integrity in our elections process,” Bondi added.

Both the FDLE and the Florida Department of State have said that they’ve seen no credible allegations of elections fraud or criminal activity.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R), who is the GOP Senate candidate facing off against incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), previously called for an investigation into election fraud in the two counties.

Scott and President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Warren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases Esper orders ‘After Action Review’ of National Guard’s role in protests MORE have accused Democrats of trying to “steal” the elections in Florida, where the Senate race between Scott and Nelson, as well as the gubernatorial race between Andrew Gillum (D) and Ron DeSantisRonald Dion DeSantisGOP tentatively decides on Jacksonville for site of convention DeSantis pushing to host Republican National Convention in Florida Florida bars and theaters to reopen starting Friday, DeSantis says MORE (R), are headed for recounts.

Bondi wrote in her letter to Swearingen that she was “deeply troubled” that the FDLE had not opened an investigation.

“Transparent and fair elections are the bedrock of our democracy, and protecting the integrity of our electoral process is central to the oath you and I both took to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the State of Florida,” she wrote.

Cruz brushes off question about campaign claim on O'Rourke paying for caravan

Sen. Ted CruzRafael (Ted) Edward CruzSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote The Hill’s Morning Report – Trump’s public standing sags after Floyd protests GOP senators introduce resolution opposing calls to defund the police MORE (R-Texas) brushed off questions Wednesday about his campaign claim that Rep. Beto O’RourkeBeto O’RourkeBiden will help close out Texas Democrats’ virtual convention: report O’Rourke on Texas reopening: ‘Dangerous, dumb and weak’ Parties gear up for battle over Texas state House MORE (D) illegally funded a caravan of migrants approaching the U.S. border.

Cruz suggested in a tweet earlier this month that O’Rourke’s Senate campaign staffers had used funds for “people coming here illegally.”

When asked about that claim Wednesday, Cruz said that it was no longer relevant.

“I’m happy to talk about policy, but there’s no point in revisiting the campaign itself,” Cruz said during a brief interview in a Senate elevator, according to HuffPost.

“As I said, the election is over,” he added.

Asked for comment Thursday, a spokesperson for Cruz’s campaign referred The Hill to what was said when the question was posed: “We won our campaign and are looking ahead.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Cruz had cited a video from conservative activist organization Project Veritas claiming to show O’Rourke staffers using campaign funds to help migrants.

Project Veritas frequently targets Democrats and other left-leaning organizations through undercover videos but has faced accusations of selectively editing videos to drive a point.

The caravan of migrants seeking asylum traveling up through Central America was a major campaign point for Republicans before the midterm elections.

The administration has sent 5,800 troops to the southern border to bolster defense against the arrival of the caravan, despite the majority of migrants still being more than a thousand miles from the border. 

Updated: 1:39 p.m.

Click Here: New Zealand rugby store

Most voters won't support Trump in 2020: PBS/NPR poll

More than half of registered voters say they have made their minds up against supporting President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Warren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases Esper orders ‘After Action Review’ of National Guard’s role in protests MORE in 2020, according to a new poll.

In a PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist Institute survey released Thursday, 57 percent of registered voters said that they would definitely not support Trump for reelection.

ADVERTISEMENT

That number includes just 10 percent of Republicans but 91 percent of Democrats and almost two-thirds, 62 percent, of registered independent voters, according to the survey.

Click Here: Fjallraven Kanken Art Spring Landscape Backpacks

Just 30 percent of registered voters, by comparison, said that they would definitely vote for the president in the next election cycle, a figure that includes 69 percent of Republicans, 5 percent of Democrats and one-fourth of independent voters.

“The president has had his base and not much else,” said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, according to PBS NewsHour.

The president also receives a majority of blame in the poll for the ongoing government shutdown, which on Thursday stretched into its 27th day and affects roughly 25 percent of the federal government.

More than half of U.S. adults, 54 percent, say Trump is chiefly to blame for the shutdown, while 31 percent say congressional Democrats deserve the blame.

Both sides, Americans agree, should be doing more to compromise and end the shutdown, with more than half of registered voters saying that both sides should meet in the middle.

“What we’re seeing in each of these questions is a sense that compromise is desired and both sides should be working more with the other,” Miringoff says.

The PBS/NPR/Marist survey, conducted from Jan. 10 to Jan. 13, contacted 1,023 American adults, including 873 registered voters. The survey’s general margin of error is 3.8 percentage points and 4.2 percentage points for registered voters.

'Gatekeeper Mentality' of DCCC Blacklist Adding to Divisions Within Democratic Party

Progressive Democrats are going on record with their displeasure over the establishment higher-up’s decision to protect incumbents, a reflection of the party’s division over a vendor blacklist. 

“The only time they support getting more women is when male incumbents leave or die.”
—Lizz Winstead

On Sunday, The New York Times published an article from reporter Jennifer Steinhauer in which a number of the party’s rising stars took public positions against a March decision by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) to blacklist vendors who work with anyone—including primary challengers—who run against an incumbent Democrat. 

As Common Dreams reported at the time, the policy says the DCCC “will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting member of the House Democratic Caucus.”

Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.), who won her seat by beating fellow political newcomer Mary Glassman in a primary contest for retiring Rep. Elizabeth Esty in 2018 before winning the general election, said that the policy is choking off the possibility of fresh ideas and and a new generation of leaders. 

“If I waited my turn, I wouldn’t be here,” Hayes told the Times. “There is a gatekeeper mentality that sometimes can diminish new ideas.”

That point was echoed by Steve Welchert, a spokesperson for Crisanta Duran, who is challenging Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) in next year’s primary.

“It is having a chilling effect on everyone’s capacity to move forward,” said Welchert, who also called the DCCC policy “bullying.”

Other Democrats Steinhauer spoke to were more specific in their criticism, citing the party’s incumbent bench of white men as the main thing that will be protected by the new rules. Two-thirds of the caucus’s longest-serving members are white, and two-thirds are men. 

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Daily Show co-creator Lizz Winstead, in an angry tweet, sounded off on the policy.

“The only time they support getting more women is when male incumbents leave or die,” said Winstead.

“It makes sense that the incumbent faction would try to block the challengers,” writer David Menefee-Libey said on Twitter, adding that he was referring both to candidates and the entrenched consultant class that runs Democratic campaigns. 

Menefee-Libey’s read was similar to that of NBC News reporter Jonathan Allen, who put the DCCC action in the context of where the organization gets its money—and who it protects. They’re not necessarily the same people, said Allen.

“The DCCC is an incumbent-protection organization funded in part by member dues,” Allen said. “But, over time, its budget has grown as a result of fundraising outside of members and their big-dollar supporters. So, they’re now asking grassroots to fund incumbent-protection services.”

Thus far the policy has only been softly enforced, but it’s had an effect. 

In April, Common Dreams reported that Marie Newman, an Illinois Democrat challenging anti-choice incumbent Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), was having trouble finding people to work on her campaign due to the blacklist. Earlier that month, a story at The Intercept showed the same issue was being navigated by McKayla Wilkes, who is running to replace longtime Democrat Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.). 

“Progressive challengers like Marie Newman will see more of this cronyism,” said Progressive Change Committee’s Marissa Barrow.

“But,” Barrow said, “the progressive grassroots will have their backs.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.