You are hereFeed aggregator

Feed aggregator

Elizabeth Banks Mocks Donald Trump's RNC Entrance, Compares Him To Her 'Hunger Games' Character

Huffington Post News - 24 min 10 sec ago

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Elizabeth Banks stole Donald Trump’s grand entrance, but she was only returning the favor.

On Tuesday night, the actress reenacted Trump’s bizarre entrance at the Republican National Convention, where he appeared in silhouette as Queen’s “We Are The Champions” blared over the loudspeakers. Banks mimicked the GOP presidential candidate’s dramatic moves, self-applause and even his approach to the podium.

“Some of you know me from ‘The Hunger Games,’ in which I play Effie Trinket ― a cruel, out-of-touch reality TV star who wears insane wigs while delivering long-winded speeches to a violent dystopia,” Banks said to the crowd of delegates at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. “So when I tuned in to Cleveland last week, I was like, ‘Uh, hey ― that’s my act!’”

ABC Australia played the two entrances side-by-side for comparison: 

.@ElizabethBanks trumps others at #DemsInPhilly with "over-the-top" inspiration | Live:

— ABC News (@abcnews) July 27, 2016

Queen blasted the Republicans for using “We Are The Champions” at the RNC, but so far has not responded to the use of the song at the DNC. According to Rolling Stone, Queen guitarist Brian May has previously said he doesn’t want the band’s music used for any political purpose.

“Regardless of our views on Mr. Trump’s platform, it has always been against our policy to allow Queen music to be used as a political campaigning tool,” May wrote last month, after Trump used the song at another event. “Our music embodies our own dreams and beliefs, but it is for all who care to listen and enjoy.”


Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liarrampant xenophoberacistmisogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims ― 1.6 billion members of an entire religion ― from entering the U.S.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

HuffPost Rise: What You Need To Know On July 27

Huffington Post News - 1 hour 22 min ago

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Welcome to the HuffPost Rise Morning Newsbrief, a short wrap-up of the news to help you start your day.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Today's Democrats Booted Anthony Weiner For Sexting. How Would They Treat Bill Clinton's Scandal?

Huffington Post News - 1 hour 41 min ago

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible);

PHILADELPHIA ― Former President Bill Clinton told most of the story of his marriage in a speech at the Democratic National Convention Tuesday night. He skipped a key bit: his affair with Monica Lewinsky, a 22-year-old White House intern.

It’s no surprise that, on the night Hillary Clinton became the first woman to win a major party’s nomination for president, her husband chose not to revisit a deeply painful moment when he did something she later wrote was “morally wrong.”

But make no mistake: Clinton’s affair with Lewinsky is a central part of his legacy. After lying to his wife and the nation about it, even he eventually acknowledged that it was “inappropriate.” When he left office, 68 percent of respondents to a CNN poll said he’d be more remembered for his “involvement in personal scandal” than for his presidential accomplishments.

As the scandal broke and Republicans pushed to impeach Clinton, the vast majority of Democrats stood behind him. But that was nearly 20 years ago. In the years since Clinton left office, another young Democratic leader, Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York (whose wife, Huma Abedin, is a top aide to Hillary Clinton), saw his career crash and burn over sending sexual text messages to much younger women who were not his wife.

That suggests today’s Democratic Party might not be as forgiving of a Clinton-like figure. Federal politicians in the midst of sex scandals have been much less likely to remain in office since Clinton left office, a 2014 analysis by The Washington Post found. “In 15 scandals since 2000, just three officeholders (or 20 percent) facing personal scandals have won reelection. Several resigned in short order, including Reps. Anthony Weiner (lewd twitter messages), David Wu (untoward sexual advances plus a tiger costume) and Chris Lee (sharing a topless photo with a Craigslist contact),” the Post’s Scott Clement wrote.

Even delegates at the Democratic National Convention ― the quintessential gathering of party loyalists ― said they weren’t sure how Clinton-like sexual misconduct allegations would be treated today.

Richard Komi, a delegate from New Hampshire supporting Hillary Clinton, said he would most likely stand behind the former president if the scandal were to go down today because it has no effect on his job as commander in chief.

“There is a clear [difference] between your responsibilities as president and your personal life,” Komi said. “Now, I also understand that the president took an oath, before God and man, to be faithful to his wife in good times and in bad times,” Komi said. “But I do not think that he should have been impeached for that scandal. As far as I’m concerned, I feel like it was overblown and it was done along partisan lines.”

Other delegates said they thought the scandal might land differently today.

“Social media has changed things,” Samantha Harrieg, a Hillary Clinton-supporting delegate from Florida, told HuffPost. “Things are so different. It probably would have a different effect today. That is one issue that doesn’t sit well with me. It’s sort of like, you completed your presidency successfully, and those discussions are gone, but now those are being rekindled. It’s bringing life to old scars.”

Levon Bracy, another delegate from Florida, also said Clinton’s transgressions would be perceived differently today. But she maintained that one dark chapter in the former president’s presidency shouldn’t define his entire legacy.

“We got a mean society right now, and we’re not as forgiving as we once was,” Bracy said. “It would be real different, to be honest. We would have to institute love and forgiveness again. But as bad as that was, he made terrific contributions in stabilizing the whole world.”

Clinton did much to humanize his wife in his keynote address Tuesday evening, affirming her character and life story fighting for women’s rights, gay rights, children’s health and climate change. The speech was laced with personal anecdotes of their meeting and falling in love, the birth of daughter Chelsea, and their path to the White House. It was well received in the arena.

“I think [Hillary Clinton] loved Bill Clinton. They loved each other,” Texas delegate Linda Chavez-Thompson said of the Lewinsky episode. “It happens in marriages all across this country. And many, many people are still together, having passed through some very traumatic times in their lives and their marriages. For them to have this life together, for her to be so supportive of him, and him to be so supportive of her, I think it’s a love story that I feel very good about.”

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who has also been accused of sexual harassment ― and worse ― has happily resurfaced the Lewinsky scandal and other sexual misconduct allegations against Bill Clinton. Earlier this year, Trump’s campaign released a video accusing Hillary Clinton of being an “enabler,” using the allegations against her husband to undermine her fight for women’s rights.

But Bill Clinton on Tuesday sought to dispel those and other GOP characterizations by dismissing what he called the “cartoon” portrayal of his wife.

“One is real, the other is made up,” he said of Hillary Clinton. “Earlier today, you nominated the real one.”

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

46 Rescued From Sinking Fishing Vessel Off Alaska's Aleutian Islands

Huffington Post News - 1 hour 59 min ago

(Reuters) - The 46-member crew of a fishing vessel that sank more than 600 miles off the coast of Alaska in the Bering Sea on Tuesday had to be rescued by boats in the area and taken to a nearby island, the U.S. Coast Guard said.

The crew of Alaska Juris issued a distress alert to the Coast Guard and put on survival suits before leaving their ship at about 11:30 a.m. Alaska time near Kiska Island, about 690 miles west of Dutch Harbor, Alaska, the U.S. Coast Guard said in a statement.

The Coast Guard said it issued an urgent call to ships in the area, and four vessels diverted from their routes to help.

All 46 crewmembers were rescued and taken to the Aleutian Island of Adak in Alaska.

The Coast Guard deployed a Cutter Midgett and an Air Station Kodiak Hercules airplane to the site of the sinking ship and two Air Station Kodiak Jayhawk helicopters to Adak, the Coast Guard said.

No injuries were reported and the incident was under investigation, the Coast Guard said.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Trevor Noah: Bernie Sanders Is 'Like A Disillusioned Peter Pan'

Huffington Post News - 2 hours 37 min ago

Bernie Sanders has quite a task to convince his followers to throw their support behind Hillary Clinton. But Trevor Noah said he admired how the Vermont senator attempted to calm his supporters on the first night of the Democratic National Convention.

On Tuesday’s episode of “The Daily Show,” Noah showed Sanders getting booed by his own backers as he tried to convince them that a vote against Clinton was a vote for Donald Trump.

“You’ve got to love Bernie Sanders,” Noah said. “He spent the last year teaching people to dream the impossible dream ― universal health care, trillions in infrastructure, free college, all paid for with historic tax hikes ― and now, in a room full of the people who love those ideas, he’s coming out like a disillusioned Peter Pan.” 

Noah then did his best Sanders impression: “Clap all you want. Tinker Bell is not coming back. This is real life!”

Noah said he was surprised by the way Sanders supporters were acting.

“[They’re like,] ‘We love you, Bernie! We’ll follow you anywhere!’” Noah said. “[And then when he says] ‘I think we should vote for Hillary,’ [They’re like] ‘Fuck you, old man!’”


(H/T: The Daily Beast)

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

HEY! Seth Meyers Has A Reality Check For The Bernie-Or-Bust Crowd

Huffington Post News - 2 hours 47 min ago

Seth Meyers unveiled a new segment on Tuesday called “HEY!” ― and it was aimed squarely at the Bernie Sanders diehards who have been raising a ruckus at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

I know you’re ‘Bernie or Bust’ but the results are in,” the “Late Night” host said. “Bust won. We don’t have time for this.”

He added:

“We’re on the cusp of electing a racist demagogue, and that never ends well. I don’t know which class you ditched to go to those Bernie rallies, but I have a feeling it was history.”

See his full “HEY!” segment in the clip above. 

Meyers and Trump have been feuding for far longer than the presidential campaign. In 2011, Meyers, then head writer of “Saturday Night Live,” mocked Trump’s presidential ambitions at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

“Donald Trump has been saying he will run for president as a Republican, which is surprising, because I just assumed that he was running as a joke,” Meyers said at the time.

In 2014, when Meyers was named host of the Emmys, Trump blasted him on Twitter.

That Seth Meyers is hosting the Emmy Awards is a total joke,” Trump wrote. “He is very awkward with almost no talent. Marbles in his mouth!”

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Forget the DNC. The Real Scandal is in Florida

Huffington Post News - 3 hours 40 min ago

Try as I might, I can't really find a scandal in the wikileaks dump of the DNC's emails. It may turn out that Russia was involved - that would certainly be upsetting. But other than getting a refreshingly candid look inside major party fundraising techniques, I - like Dana Houle from the New Republic - can't find much to get worked up about. But this is not to say there isn't something disturbing happening inside the Democratic Party's process of selecting nominees. It's just that the problem is out in the open, not in the vault. So open, in fact, that no one seems to be paying attention to it.

The Party is getting involved in primaries, and is spending money defeating Democrats - but not at the top of the ticket. It's happening in Senate races. In Pennsylvania and Florida, two of the most important states in this upcoming election, the Party is working against itself, and it has to stop.

Two of the most interesting, compelling, and passionate Democrats who chose to run for Senate this year are Admiral Joe Sestak and Congressman Allan Grayson. They are incredibly strong candidates, with proven ability to attract voters (both unlikely and likely). And yet the Democratic Party has, inexplicably, spent huge amounts of money to defeat them in their primaries.

Grayson, in particular (as documented in Slate Magazine by David Weigel) is literally the most effective member of Congress, with an uncanny ability to raise small campaign donations, to fire up voters, to raise the roof with his speeches. Even more importantly, he has a proven ability to get out the vote. He is one of the incredibly rare politicians who can stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders when it comes to giving life and energy to the Party. Poll after Poll shows he's the best option the Democrats have against Marco Rubio. And you only need to see him on Politically Incorrect, or hear him speak on the House Floor, to understand why. He's among the most knowledgeable, clear thinking, tough-talking politicians the Democrat Party has seen in a generation.

And yet the Party has already spent a million dollars - with the primary still a full month away - supporting Grayson's rival, a two-term Congressman who was a registered Republican until four years ago, who has voted to censure Barak Obama, and who has accepted more money from Wall Street than any other member of the House from either party.

In Pennsylvania, the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee (DSCC) spent three million dollars against Admiral Sestak, even though his Democratic primary opponent consistently polled poorly compared to Sestak against incumbent Republican Senator Pat Toomey. Three million dollars against Sestak, when his military experience mixed with liberal views are sorely needed in the Party, in the Senate, and in the Government itself. When he started out the front runner in the primary. When polls suggested he was the Democrats best chance to beat Toomey.

The Democratic Party spending millions of dollars to defeat Grayson and Sestak in the primaries is short-sighted, to say the least. People like Grayson and Sestak can bring out the vote in two highly competitive states, two of the states where the most money will be spent in the Presidential race. Having strong, passionate candidates near the top of the ticket will compliment and buoy Clinton and Kaine. In victory, having Grayson and Sestak in the Senate would help ensure Clinton has a Congress she can work with.

And lest it be forgotten -- only be electing more progressives, do we as a Nation have a chance at reforming gun laws, fighting for education, putting qualified Justices on the Supreme Court, and passing meaningful campaign finance reform.

The damage has now been done in Pennsylvania. Sestak lost his primary. But the story isn't over for Grayson, in Florida. Despite being vastly outspent by his opponent, he's still clinging to a thin lead. The people haven't given up on him. And they shouldn't. His primary is August 30th.

Democrats who care about democracy should be paying attention.

At the very least, take a look at Grayson, look at his positions, listen to his views, and see if they align with yours. Ignore the rumors, ignore the ads, ignore attack pieces - see what he's accomplished and what his record suggests he could accomplish in the Senate. And if you like what you see, support him. Because, in fact, supporting him over objections of the Party, is the very best thing you can do for your Party.

Perhaps the only thing that might stop the Party from interfering in primaries is if it starts to become clear that interfering doesn't work.

And the opposite - allowing a diversity of opinions within the Party - does work. I've served on the staff of some of the most active liberal, moderate, and conservative Democrats in the Senate. Just as a wide diversity of opinions makes America stronger, a wide diversity of opinions makes our political parties stronger. Our Nation isn't served when either Party marches in lock-step. Only with a healthy debate in each Party, can a two-party system even function.

Please join me in calling for the Democratic Party to let voters decide who is best to represent their Party. It's time to pay attention to real scandals, even if they are already out in the open.

The writer has served on the staffs of Senators Paul Wellstone, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Joe Lieberman

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Court Says Orange County DA's Tactic To Disqualify Judge Who Exposed Misconduct Was 'Abusive'

Huffington Post News - 4 hours 25 min ago

LOS ANGELES ― Judges for a California appellate court said in an opinion Monday that a tactic used repeatedly by the beleaguered Orange County District Attorney’s Office to disqualify a judge who exposed their misconduct from hearing additional murder cases, while technically legal, was “abusive.”

The judges also suggested the state Supreme Court and legislature should re-examine the decades-old state code surrounding judge disqualification.

In its majority opinion, the 4th District Court of Appeals’ three-judge panel ultimately upheld the right of the OCDA’s office to disqualify Superior Court Judge Thomas Goethals from hearing murder cases because the controversial tactic allegedly used by the DA’s office, so-called “blanket papering” ― wherein a prosector or defense attorney requests the removal of a judge over and over again due to concerns of bias ― is allowed in state code. 

Goethals has presided over scores of murder cases in the county for years, but when he began exposing illegal use of jailhouse informants by county prosecutors, critics say, DAs began to steer cases away from him.

Last year, Superior Court Judge Richard King, in a ruling that denied a request by prosecutors to yet again disqualify Goethals, did some number-crunching to illustrate what has been going on in the county. From 2010 to 2014 ― before the most egregious misconduct began bubbling up around the county’s tainted informant program, which has allegedly violated the rights of countless defendants ― Goethals was assigned 35 murder cases and was disqualified only once by OCDA prosecutors, King found. However, from February 2014 through September 2015, Goethals was assigned 49 murder cases and disqualified by county prosecutors in all but three. During that same period, Goethals’ rulings had found that county prosecutors and police had committed misconduct and ultimately had led him to eject the entire OCDA office from a high-profile murder case

“As courts work to keep doors open and to provide timely and meaningful access to justice to the public, the extraordinary abuse of [judicial disqualification] is a barrier to justice and its cost to a court should be reconsidered,” Judge Kathleen O’Leary wrote Monday in the majority opinion.

Judge Richard Aronson in a concurring opinion said he agreed that “substantial evidence” supports King’s conclusion that “the district attorney engaged in blanket papering of Judge Goethals and did so to retaliate and punish a widely respected and experienced jurist the district attorney previously accepted on a routine basis.”

Aronson went on to say that “blanket papering” could be brought in good faith against a judge if a DA or public defender reasonably believes the judge is, in fact, prejudiced against an entire office. 

But, Aronson writes, “that is not the case here.” Before Goethals’ bombshell rulings about misconduct by police and prosecutors in the county, “the district attorney routinely accepted Judge Goethals without question,” Aronson wrote.

In the dissenting opinion in the 2-1 vote, Judge David Thompson strongly agreed with King’s findings, writing that the DA’s motions were “based on the fact that [Goethals] called them out on their misconduct.”

Appellate courts are intermediaries and therefore are bound, not just guided, by decisions by the Supreme Court. In 1977, in Solberg v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court ruled that “papering” is allowedJustices then viewed the tactic as one that could allow for fairness and balance in the justice system. On Monday, the appellate justices openly questioned the wisdom of continuing to use the decades-old ruling in the modern era, but ultimately they remain bound to the higher court’s ruling.

Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas’ office said Monday in a press statement that there has never been a “blanket papering” effort by county prosecutors against any judge in the county. 

“Any exercise of preemptory challenge made by any member of the OCDA has been the individual prosecutor’s decision to do what is in the best interest of the People, public safety, and crime victims,” the office said. 

Daniel Medwed, a law professor at Northeastern University who has written at length about prosecutorial misconduct, told The Huffington Post that “beneath the patina of collegiality,” Monday’s opinion struck him as “a cry for the higher court to look anew at Solberg and for the legislature to revisit that section of the code.”

The current state code, and legal precedent, “seems like a license for DAs to use this practice selectively and with impunity,” Medwed added. 

The OCDA’s office has been under fire for almost three years for its involvement in mishandling evidence produced from a secret jailhouse informant program that has allegedly violated the rights of countless defendants. 

Assistant Public Defender Scott Sanders, who first unearthed the informant network, has been arguing since 2013 that a tainted snitch network in county jails has existed in secret for decades. Sanders argues that county prosecutors and police have violated multiple defendants’ rights by illegally obtaining, and sometimes withholding, evidence gleaned from jail informants. His discoveries have led to multiple murder cases in the county unravelling, even resulting in some accused murderers having their sentences vacated

It remains unclear exactly how many cases may have been affected by tainted informant evidence, but Sanders has argued that every case involving a jailhouse informant in Orange County over the last 30 years deserves to be re-examined.

The OCDA’s office denied that an informant program existed in the county for years, but last month they finally acknowledged that an informant program does indeed exist and that sheriff’s deputies actively “cultivated,” “recruited” and “utilized” informants and rewarded them in exchange for their information. Additionally, a new trove of secret notes kept by sheriff’s deputies about jail inmates and informants surfaced in recent months, shining new light on the informant program.

Legal experts have called for the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct a full investigation of the DA’s office and the sheriff’s department over the informant program.

Rackauckas maintains that no one in his office intentionally behaved inappropriately in relation to the jailhouse informant program. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Royal Oak poised for a downtown building boom - Detroit Metro Times

Berkley Information from Google News - 4 hours 37 min ago

Detroit Metro Times

Royal Oak poised for a downtown building boom
Detroit Metro Times
When Jason Gittinger opened the Detroit School of Rock and Pop Music on Washington Avenue eight years ago, the economy was at low tide. The school — which has about 125 students at any given time — has only grown since then, Gittinger says, and the ...

Categories: Berkley Area News

Democrats Are Still Uncomfortable With Bill Clinton's Crime Bill

Huffington Post News - 4 hours 51 min ago

PHILADELPHIA ― Former President Bill Clinton had a chance to grapple with the controversial legacy of his 1994 crime bill during his Tuesday night speech to the Democratic National Convention. He chose not to discuss it.

Political conventions are typically celebrations of their participants, not moral investigations or examinations of a party’s past failures. And Clinton skipped over plenty of other uncomfortable facts during his nearly hour-long speech, which presented an inspirational romantic history of his relationship with Hillary Clinton and their life in politics together.

But given the major themes of the evening, the former president’s avoidance of the crime bill seemed a particularly bold oversight. The DNC on Tuesday night highlighted eight mothers who had lost children to racially charged violence ― some at the hands of police, others at the hands of civilians.

Sybrina Fulton, Geneva Reed-Veal, Lucy McBath, Gwen Carr, Cleopatra Pendelton, Maria Hamilton, Lezley McSpadden and Wanda Johnson all endorsed Hillary Clinton from the convention stage for their own reasons. Their presentation was powerful, touching on both criminal justice reform and efforts to curb gun violence.

Bill Clinton’s history with these issues is messy. The 1994 crime bill that he signed into law significantly toughened sentencing for both violent and nonviolent crimes, helping to fuel a mass incarceration system that just happened to hit black communities particularly hard. Dozens of crimes became newly punishable by the death penalty.

The bill also expanded federal funding for police, without meaningful standards to improve law enforcement methods. Critics of the bill say that it placed an emphasis on more policing rather than better policing, and that this, again, harmed black communities.

The crime bill also included a ban on assault weapons ― a then-new legal term for a variety of semi-automatic guns. That ban expired during George W. Bush’s presidency and has never been renewed.

Mothers who lost children to civilian guns called for new, tougher gun laws on the stage Tuesday night, and declared their faith in Hillary Clinton to fight for them.

Their presentation offered the Democratic Party an opportunity to come to terms with its recent history and offer a different path forward during a major party event. Instead, Bill Clinton dodged the issue, calling for young black people to do their part to help build a stronger and safer nation.

“If you’re a young African-American, disillusioned and afraid … Help us build a future where no one is afraid, including our people who wear blue,” Clinton said.

The crime law was Bill Clinton’s legislation, but then-first lady Hillary Clinton advocated for it in public, in terms she has said she now regrets. When Black Lives Matter protesters disrupted a Bill Clinton speech in April, however, he defended his wife’s use of the term “super-predator” two decades earlier.

There are dozens of other issues that Democrats and the general public now view differently than they did in the 1990s. Not every issue gets airtime. But the DNC didn’t bring out foreclosure victims to talk about how Hillary Clinton would crack down on financial fraud, or refugees to praise her foreign policy.

Tuesday night revealed that while the Democratic Party is eager to look forward on criminal justice reform, it is still uncomfortable looking back.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Bill O'Reilly Wants You To Know That The Slaves Who Built The White House Were Well-Fed

Huffington Post News - 5 hours 8 min ago

One of the most poignant moments in Monday night’s speech by first lady Michelle Obama was when she mentioned that her family lives in a White House that was built by slaves.

Fox News host Bill O’Reilly called it a “positive comment,” but had to add a clarification: The White House wasn’t built entirely by slaves.

“In addition, free blacks, whites and immigrants also worked on the massive building,” he said on “The O’Reilly Factor” on Tuesday night. “There were no illegal immigrants at that time. If you could make it here, you could stay here.”

In a clip posted online by Media Matters, O’Reilly also noted that the slaves involved in the construction of the White House got room and board in the deal:

Slaves that worked there were well-fed and had decent lodgings provided by the government, which stopped hiring slave labor in 1802. However, the feds did not forbid subcontractors from using slave labor. So, Michelle Obama is essentially correct in citing slaves as builders of the White House, but there were others working as well.

Check it out in the clip above. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

The '70s meet 2016 in Maple double feature - Detroit Free Press

Berkley Information from Google News - 5 hours 29 min ago

Detroit Free Press

The '70s meet 2016 in Maple double feature
Detroit Free Press
The pace and downbeat tone of new Western “Hell or High Water,” a heist film featuring Jeff Bridges, recall the films of the 1970s, including John Huston's “Fat City,” also featuring Bridges. The two will screen together in a one-night-only double ...

Categories: Berkley Area News

Best of the best: 5 fun things to do July 28-Aug. 3 - Detroit Free Press

Berkley Information from Google News - 5 hours 29 min ago

Detroit Free Press

Best of the best: 5 fun things to do July 28-Aug. 3
Detroit Free Press
England's murderous, conniving and power-mad King Richard III would be right at home on HBO's “Game of Thrones,” and starting Thursday at Starr Jaycee Park, he will be — sort of. SHAKESPEARE ROYAL OAK, which comes up with clever tweaks every ...

Categories: Berkley Area News

Watch Hillary Clinton Break The Glass Ceiling

Huffington Post News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:47pm

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible);

The Democratic National Convention began Tuesday night with Hillary Clinton becoming the first female presidential nominee of a major political party, and ended with Clinton breaking the glass ceiling. Sort of.

After showing a montage of the 43 men who have served as president, Clinton addressed the convention via live video, with her face emerging through shards of shattered glass on the video display.

Clinton acknowledged the historical significance of the occasion.

“What an incredible honor that you have given me,” she said in the video. “I can’t believe we just put the biggest crack in that glass ceiling yet. Thanks to you and to everyone who has fought so hard to make this possible. This is really your victory, this is really your night.

“And if there are any little girls out there who stayed up late to watch, let me just say I may become the first woman president, but one of you is next.”

Watch the full video above.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Democrats Hope Bernie Sanders Will Help Them Recapture The Senate

Huffington Post News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:41pm

PHILADELPHIA ― The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said Tuesday that it has been talking to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) about how he can assist their candidates in recapturing the Senate in 2016. 

“We’re working with him to see how he can help, where he can be helpful,” DSCC Political Director Christie Roberts told reporters.

Sanders has already jumped into the Wisconsin Senate race on behalf of Russ Feingold, another populist progressive hero. Former DSCC Political Director Martha McKenna said she’d like to see him help not only with fundraising ― since Sanders has been a powerhouse with small-dollar donors during the primary ― but also with getting out a progressive economic message that will help Senate candidates. 

“Anywhere where we’re going to be talking about standing up for middle-class economic values and sort of fighting back against big money in politics and Republicans who are part of that problem, who take a lot of corporate money ... I think Bernie is really good about bringing those issues to light,” McKenna said. 

Roberts also said President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden will be a frequent presence on the campaign trail ― a contrast to the 2014 cycle, when Democratic candidates were often trying to show voters how they were different from the administration. This time, however, will be different. Obama’s approval rating has been steadily rising, and during the primaries, Sanders and Hillary Clinton were often trying to show how much they supported the president. 

“Month after month, his numbers continue to go up,” former DSCC Deputy Executive Director Matt Canter said. “He is just potentially at the most popular point in his presidency, and I think he’s going to be an incredible asset to Democrats in these big battleground races.”

Roberts said the map is looking up for Democrats as well ― particularly in Indiana, Wisconsin and Colorado.  

In Indiana, former Blue Dog Sen. Evan Bayh jumped into the race for his former seat, significantly boosting Democrats’ chances at winning there. In Wisconsin last week, the Koch-backed Freedom Partners Action Fund, which had previously reserved $2.2 million in airtime for Sen. Ron Johnson (R), pulled its ad buy completely. Johnson has been trailing Feingold, his Democratic opponent, throughout the race.

And in Colorado, conservative candidate Darryl Glenn ― a grassroots favorite ― defeated the establishment-backed candidate in the primary, worrying Republicans who believed Sen. Michael Bennet (D) could be defeated. The National Republican Senatorial Committee said officials have met with Glenn, but it has not yet indicated whether it will invest resources in the race. NRSC Executive Director Ward Baker recently told reporters he believes Republicans still have “a great opportunity to beat” Bennet. 

Republicans had their own bit of good news recently, when Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) announced he would be running for re-election ― after previously talking about how much he disliked the Senate and wanted to leave. 

“Republicans will keep the Senate majority,” NRSC spokeswoman Alleigh Marre said, pointing to polling in Ohio and Pennsylvania showing Democratic candidates struggling. 

And then, of course, there is the Donald Trump factor. GOP Senate candidates have already had to answer for every controversial utterance that comes out of the mouth of their party’s presidential nominee. 

Trump has also failed to build a national campaign of the size and scale that most presidential candidates possess, leaving the party to pick up the slack. And Democrats believe that could be a huge advantage for them.

“Campaign organization and mechanics matter, especially in an election where there might be lower enthusiasm with Republican voters who don’t want to come out and vote,” Roberts said. “It’s a huge expensive robust undertaking for a Republican Senate candidate to have to set up his own field operation to turn out the vote himself. On the Democratic side ... it will be a true coordinated campaign.”

Want more updates from Amanda? Sign up for her newsletter, Piping Hot Truth.

Enter your email address:

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Germany's Munich Moment

Huffington Post News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:33pm

I find it interesting when German friends lambaste me as a fear monger for having the audacity to point out that their wonderful nation - an exemplar of excellence in areas ranging from philosophy to music to manufacturing - has a radical Islamic terror problem on its hands. Because the Munich shopping mall terrorist is said to not be directly inspired by ISIS or its ilk is the exception that proves the rule. Gruesome Islamic terror attacks in Nice, Brussels, and Paris, and increasingly now in Germany, show that radical Islamic terrorists are tightening their noose around the Bundesrepublik Deutschland, which has taken in over one million migrants from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan in the last year alone.

On March 2, 2011, Arid Uka, a Muslim Albanian born in Kosovo, shot dead two U.S. airmen with a handgun at Frankfurt Airport.

As you remember, the U.S. led a reluctant European coalition to protect Albanian Muslims living in Kosovo from genocide during the Kosovo War of 1998-1999. We are still waiting for the thank you note.

On September 18, 2015, Rafik Mohamad Yousef - linked to al-Qaeda by German police - stabbed a German policewoman in the neck in West Berlin.

On May 10, 2016, a knife-wielding man shouting "Allahu Akbar" killed a passenger and injured several others during a train station attack in the Bavarian town of Grafing near Munich. As is often the case in Germany, the killer was deemed "mentally ill" because he had no documented connections to radical Islamic terror groups.

On July 18, 2016, a teenage Afghan refugee hacked German train passengers with an axe while shouting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is Great!"). Police later found a handmade ISIS flag in his room. He came to Germany as an unaccompanied minor in 2014.

On July 22, 2016, Ali Sonboly, an 18-year-old of ostensible German-Iranian descent, who was obsessed by mass shootings, killed nine people, including himself, and injured several others at a Munich shopping mall. The murderer was described as "mentally ill" because he had seen a psychiatrist, taken psychiatric meds, and had no apparent connections to radical Islamic groups like ISIS, even though, according to eyewitnesses, he shouted "Allahu Akbar" during the attacks.

On July 24, 2016, a still unnamed 27-year-old Syrian refugee exploded a bomb outside a music festival in the city of Ansbach, injuring 15 people and killing the suicide bomber. A mobile video pledging allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghadi was found among his effects. German open-border apologists and radical Islamic appease-niks should be (but won't be) taken aback by the bomber's stated motive that this was "an act of revenge against Germans because they obstruct Islam."

Beyond these attacks, there have been several planned attacks on New Year's Eve celebrations and at soccer matches that were thwarted before they occurred, including a match between Germany and Holland in Hanover in which German Chancellor Angela Merkel - she of open borders and open hearts - was expected to attend.

I point out these Islamic-inspired attacks to give lie to the oft-repeated nostrum that all Islamic refugees inside Germany are "already victims" and should be treated with compassion instead of suspicion. The insane heights of this delusional POV were reached in pro-asylum claims around the 1200 German women who were sexually assaulted by refugees, asylum seekers, and illegal immigrants over New Year's Eve and into New Year's Day 2016.

The party line view was that two obviously connected facts - the vast majority of the New Year's attackers were Arab or North African Muslims as well as migrants - must be kept separate, even though there is a name, taharrush gamea (trans: "group sexual harassment in a crowd"), for these deliberate rapes in Arabic. Germany's laughable answer to the New Year's debacle is - straight out of the Netflix series Lilyhammer, the Nordic satire of European post-War PC insanity - a sexual assault law with the slogan "No Means No," but no fundamental change in the country's asylum, border, or deportation policies. Those poor, pitiful Muslim migrants, they just did not know it was verboten to gang rape women.

Nevertheless, even with the growing threat posed by radical Islam, and the anti-progressive ideas embedded within the culture of Islam itself, you can perversely understand German denial. Given its history of bellicosity and mass annihilation, Germans want to avoid war at all - and I mean all - costs. They want to continue with their post-Wall Love Parade, which means putting out the sajada (prayer rug) for millions of Muslim migrants, while stamping out any vestiges of overt or subliminal Islamophobia. Anything less than this welcoming spirit is viewed, in the current diktat out of Berlin, as decidedly "un-German."

While I acknowledge the beautiful sense of atonement behind this compassionate German attitude, I think it is misplaced in size and kind.

Indeed, rather than aggressively taking the fight to ISIS in Syria and Iraq, or at least creating safe zones for refugees there, here is the Angela "We Can Do This" Merkel plan to deal with the growing Islamic terror and crime threat on German soil: 1. Deny the problem, or at least deny it is large and growing; 2. Explain attacks away as examples of "mental illness," even when they are not due to mental illness or even when mental illness is coexistent with stated jihadist motives; 3. Admit millions of un-vetted refugees from Muslim countries without vigorous questioning - especially no questioning of the hundreds of thousands of young, healthy, military-capable men under the age of 30 - on why they are not back in their home country fighting for its survival; 4. Be extra nice to Muslim refugees, give them food, housing and succor; 5. Claim that "immigrants" are no more likely to commit acts of terror than legal citizens (a clever straw man used in the U.S. to deny the existence and severity of illegal immigrant crime); 6. Condemn any attempt to question this policy as Islamophobic; 7. When in doubt, blame Israel and the U.S.

If we just welcome Muslims, if we try hard to understand their "plight," and make resettlement of them easy and comfortable, goes the Merkel POV, they will be nice to us. And 99% of the time that is likely correct. Not because of any kindness from Germany, but because 99% of Muslims are law-abiding people who want to get on with their lives in safety and peace.

But then there's this knotty little problem of the 1%. This 1% trope has been used to denigrate wealth and job creators on both sides of the Atlantic. However, it is also useful in describing the tiny majority of people who cause the majority of crime, terror and mayhem on the planet.

On some sick level, it seems at times that the 1% who are radical jihadists are weirdly protected by the 1% who are uber wealthy, since the latter are most able to buy off the jihadists should they pose an imminent threat to their interests. I am talking to you Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait and Yemen.

I hesitate to make any comparisons here to Germany's Nazi past, because, as I noted in a previous piece in this space, such comparisons are usually wrong, insensitive, and insulting on face.

However, I beg your indulgence in this one case. During the rise of Hitler and his henchmen, evil was spotted early on. And, as in our current moment, those in positions of power jockeyed around that palpable evil for their own advantage, some of them throwing their own people under the bus to save their necks and fortunes.

We do not need to retell all the details of that sordid tale. However, we do need to grasp how the tale applies to our present encounter with radical Islamic terrorism.

The problem with seeing the current moment clearly is that the resident evil comes shrouded under the burka of discrimination and victimhood. Muslims are the primary victims of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram and their twisted ilk. Germans were also the primary victims of Hitler's reign of terror.

Thus, many reason, just as surely as you cannot blame the German people for the rise of Hitler, surely you cannot blame Islam or Muslims for the actions of a tiny majority of barbarous nihilists grossly manipulating Islam for vile and grandiose ends.

Or can you?

I believe you can and you must. It is my belief, as I noted in this space after the San Bernardino shootings, that unless moderate Muslims become proactive state's witnesses in fulsomely and quickly outing jihadists in their midst, we will never get a handle on radical Islamic terror, even with all the drones, advanced surveillance, and special forces at our disposal. And those well-meaning, but misguided, leaders who are laying down the welcome mat to a massive influx of unvetted Muslim immigrants must proactively help us in this effort or be forced to answer for the violent consequences of their enabling and inaction.

Alas, today's Germany has another - and typically stalwart, tone deaf and extreme - opinion. Still suffering PTSD from not only the reign of the Gestapo, but the more recent state surveillance by the Stasi, most Germans are not only viscerally opposed to an increase in state surveillance powers - the German intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, is handcuffed in ways that UK and US intelligence services are not - but they genuinely believe that a welcome wagon is the one true antidote to Islamic terror.

Any sensible American, and certainly anyone working in American intelligence, has to smile. Regardless of whether moderate Muslims warm to this generous outpouring of German Wohlwollen, unrepentant and irredeemable jihadists are not reachable by it. They will continue to use uber tolerant Germany as a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the West, as did Mohammad Atta, who used his Hamburger Terrozelle to help plot 9/11. Moreover, jihadists will use whatever tolerance they are given as a gullible concession, and will exploit it for maximum terror effect.

Nevertheless, one has to feel compassion towards German altruism. After all, Germany has been spared the large-scale terror that has inflicted its EU neighbors Belgium and France.

Of course, this is a matter of statistics. Germany has not yet built up a critical mass of Arab and North African Muslims, and, thus, radical jihadists (statistically, as German intelligence has confirmed, for every 1000 Arab or North African Muslim refugees one can guarantee at least a few jihadists), but they are on their way. After awhile, the numbers will start to move against the German people. And as knifings and rapes turn into gun and bomb attacks, or worse, the Germans will finally learn again what those of us who woke up after 9/11 know all too well: you can't appease evil.

On September 29, 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain tried to appease Adolph Hitler via the Munich Pact, which vainly hoped to stop German advancement at the newly created "Sudetenland" (the German-speaking part of then Czechoslovakia). However, Hitler merely took our weakness as a green light to continue his annexation of neighboring countries, and to launch a Jewish resettlement policy that culminated in the Holocaust. That was Britain's and America's Munich Moment.

Germany now faces its Munich Moment.

Contrary to what Germany's dime store peaceniks believe, there is black and white in this world. As a Zen Buddhist and student of Nietzsche, I know all about living "beyond good and evil." However, as an enlightened Japanese Zen Master lectured me back in 1983, America needs to accurately perceive the threats it faces and strike back.

Meditation without fear is enabled by an environment free from terror. However, you cannot conquer terror by indulging in magical new age affirmations or sitting in the zendo adopting a pose of non-attachment. As I learned from stalkers and criminals all my life, evil men will gladly steal what you love if you fail to defend it. Likewise, radical jihadists do not give a rat's ass about your pseudo-enlightenment.

Lead astray by false prophets touting delusional schemes of unbridled tolerance, we have still failed to fully fight back against radical Islam almost 15 years after 9/11. However, as recent surveys suggest, and the surging popularity of Donald J. Trump confirms, a majority Americans are willing to admit that we are, in fact, at war with radical Islamists and are at long last ready to do whatever it takes to win.

Germany is not yet at this inflection point. But it is getting there.

German friends, you are no less a people of peace and goodwill if you choose to acknowledge that there are visitors in your country, growing by the day, who mean to do you harm, regardless of how nicely you treat them. You need to proactively stamp out this threat before it metastasizes into something that threatens your democracy, your values, and your carefully cultivated way of life.

-- James Marshall Crotty

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Bill Clinton Tells Democrats How He Met Their Nominee

Huffington Post News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:23pm

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible);

PHILADELPHIA ― A quarter-century after winning his party’s nomination for the presidency, Bill Clinton took the Democratic National Convention stage to tell a story on the night his wife officially won it herself: 

“In the spring of 1971, I met a girl.”

And so began the 42nd president’s push to make Hillary Clinton the 45th president, with an attempt to humanize a woman whom American voters don’t like or trust. While most voters likely associate Hillary Clinton with “email server” or “Whitewater” or the other controversies Republicans like to talk about, Bill Clinton spent 43 minutes ― a short speech, by his standards ― explaining the small details of their courtship, of becoming parents, of dropping their daughter off at college where Hillary busied herself with laying liner paper in Chelsea’s dorm-room dresser drawers.

“We’ve built up a lifetime of memories,” he said.

He interspersed the personal stories with praise for his wife’s work ethic and attention to detail, and tried to turn her difficulty in delivering an entertaining speech into a virtue.

“Speeches like this are fun. Actually doing the work is hard,” he said, as he explained how Hillary had put together a package of reforms to improve the public schools as first lady of Arkansas and later pushed through the federal Children’s Health Insurance Program that remains today.

And it was that effectiveness, someone who can make government work, the former president said, that so terrified her political opponents who ultimately want to cut government. “If you win elections on the theory that government is always bad and will mess up a two-car parade, a real change maker represents a real threat,” he said.

Clinton said that is why the real Hillary Clinton is so different from what was described by Republicans in their convention last week.

“What’s the difference from what I told you and what they said? How do you square it? You can’t. One is real. One is made up,” he said, explaining that Republicans had no choice. “Your only option is to create a cartoon, a cartoon alternative. They’re running against a cartoon.”

Clinton’s testimonial continues the role reversal the two began in the final year of his presidency, when Hillary Clinton started her own political career after some 25 years of standing by Bill’s side during his rise from Arkansas attorney general to governor to president.

The party and nation Bill Clinton addresses on behalf of his wife, of course, is a world apart from the one he spoke to during his nominating convention in 1992. Democrats had won only three of the previous 10 presidential elections, and one of those was Jimmy Carter’s post-Watergate victory in 1976.

Democrats like Bill Clinton thought that only by appealing to more conservative voters could they break the Republicans’ lock on the Electoral College. And, with the third-party run of Ross Perot peeling away Republican votes, that’s what he managed to do, winning Louisiana, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia, as well as his home state of Arkansas. 

Six elections later, Hillary Clinton will probably not win any of those states. She doesn’t need to, thanks to the increase in black and Latino voters in California, Florida, Virginia and elsewhere.

“Bill Clinton was a Blue Dog. He was more conservative ― he had to be to win, but the party is being much more liberal,” Michigan delegate Rebecca Bahar-Cook said. “It’s becoming much, much more progressive and I think that’s a really cool thing.”

“I don’t think it’s so much the party,” New York delegate Maxine Outerbridge said. “I think the question should be put in context as in what’s gone on in the world.”

Hillary Clinton’s historic Tuesday brought with it two associated firsts: Bill Clinton becomes the first potential “first gentleman” based on a nomination of a major party, and the couple would become, should she win in November, the first husband and wife to each serve as president.

Such an eventuality was hinted at, if not held out as a promise, right from the start. During his 1992 run, Bill Clinton advertised his wife’s policy chops as a “buy one, get one free” deal. Voters weren’t universally thrilled with the notion, and, after the failure of the health care reform effort that she led in 1994, Hillary Clinton’s West Wing role was not emphasized much anymore.

Hillary Clinton’s political ambitions were kept on ice until the end of Bill Clinton’s second term, when she announced she would run for an open Senate seat in New York. Her run for president came after her re-election to a second term, but was thwarted by Barack Obama’s improbable campaign.

If Hillary Clinton lands the top job, putting Bill Clinton in an undefined advisory role, Democrats gathered for the convention did not seem worried about potential turf battles.

“Listen, any spouse, my wife, has an awful lot of influence on me. Anyone, whether man or woman, who says the spouse doesn’t have influence is crazy,” Georgia delegate John Olsen said. “At the end of the day, it’s always the president’s decision. But there’s nothing like having someone to give you a pat on the back or a kick in the butt. And only a wife or a husband could do that.”

Clinton now has been an ex-president for nearly twice as long as he was in the Oval Office. For those 16 years, Clinton has remained the most popular Democrat on the campaign trail, surpassed only in recent years by President Obama.

Even Obama relied on him four years ago, assigning him the role of “explainer in chief” to talk up the performance of the economy under Obama against Republican attacks. His well-received performance helped Obama open a measurable polling lead over Republican nominee Mitt Romney that remained stable through Election Day.

Clinton’s role now reprises his work in 2008, when he was his wife’s top surrogate in her first try at the presidency, at times effectively reaching the working-class white supporters who helped him win two terms, but at times creating damaging distractions for the campaign with off-script attacks on her opponent, Barack Obama.

Igor Bobic and Julia Craven contributed reporting. This post has been updated throughout with more details from Bill Clinton's speech and reaction to it.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

State AGs Shut Down 'GOP Extremist' Attempt To Block Big Oil Fraud Probe

Huffington Post News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:18pm

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) will have to do more than issue subpoenas if he wants state attorneys general and environmental groups to turn over documents related to ongoing investigations into whether companies like Exxon Mobil committed fraud by covering up the risks of climate change.

In separate letters sent Tuesday to the longtime Republican climate change denier, the offices of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healy said they have no intention of complying with Smith’s demand, calling it “unconstitutional,” “unprecedented” and “dangerous.”

We won’t allow @LamarSmithTX21 or any GOP extremists to stand in our way of investigating #Exxon for fraud.

— Eric Schneiderman (@AGSchneiderman) July 26, 2016

On July 13, Smith, who chairs the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, subpoenaed not only the two state AGs, but also eight environmental nonprofit groups. He said at the time that the AG investigations “amount to a form of extortion,” “threaten legitimate scientific debate about climate change,” and that his own actions were necessary to “protect the American people from further infringement of their free speech rights.”

As of Tuesday evening ― the day before Smith’s deadline for compliance ― it appeared not a single subpoenaed party was planning to hand over the requested communications.

“The committee’s rationale for why they need this information is just nonsense,” Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists, one of the eight nonprofit groups, told The Huffington Post. “And what this really is ... it’s a committee of Congress coming to the defense of a private company that’s under investigation.”

In its 10-page letter, Schneiderman’s office called the subpoena an “unprecedented effort to target ongoing state law enforcement” investigations and potential prosecutions ― one that “brings us one step closer to a protracted, unnecessary legal confrontation.” The New York AG “objects to the subpoena and cannot, and will not, comply with it,” it wrote.

Healy’s office took things a step further in its lengthy 20-page letter, calling Smith’s actions an “affront to states’ rights.” 

“Attorney General Healey will not yield to this blatant attempt to chill her investigation into Exxon’s conduct,” her office wrote.

Both offices argued the First Amendment does not shield or protect fraud.

Last November, Schneiderman subpoenaed Exxon seeking documents related to allegations that the company lied to the public and its investors. In March, Healey announced that her office would join the Exxon Mobil probes in New York and California. In June, Exxon filed a lawsuit against Healy in an effort to bar a so-called civil investigative demand from her office.

Also this spring, a larger coalition called AGs United for Clean Power formed after reports by InsideClimate News and the Los Angeles Times found that Exxon executives were aware of the climate risks associated with carbon dioxide emissions, but funded research to cover up those risks and block solutions.

Despite a mountain of evidence against big oil, Smith and other Republicans maintain that the probes threaten free speech rights ― an argument that has been a go-to defense for the industry. Environmental groups, however, say the subpoenas are just the latest example of Exxon and its allies in government working to intimidate and silence industry critics.

Smith issued a statement Tuesday saying his committee was “disappointed” in the attorney generals’ refusal to comply with “lawfully issued subpoenas,” the Boston Globe reports.

“These actions only raise additional questions about why the AGs refuse to be open and honest about their coordination with environmental extremist groups,” he reportedly said. “The Committee will use all tools at its disposal to further its investigation.”

It’s somewhat unclear what will happen next, as Smith’s attempt to obtain information related to state attorney generals’ ongoing investigations appears to be a first. Both attorneys general, however, requested in their letters Tuesday that if Smith further pursues compliance of the subpoenas, they be given an opportunity to be heard by the full committee.

Anything less, Schneiderman’s office wrote, “would show a profound disrespect for the important constitutional interests at stake.” 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

A Bunch Of Celebrities Made A Star-Studded Music Video For Hillary Clinton

Huffington Post News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:16pm

Actress Elizabeth Banks, singer Mandy Moore, Broadway star Idina Menzel and director Rob Reiner were among the celebrities featured in a music video for an a cappella version of Rachel Platten’s “Fight Song” that aired during the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

“Fight Song” has become an unofficial anthem for Clinton’s campaign. The video that aired during the DNC took inspiration from the movie “Pitch Perfect,” which stars Banks.

Watch the star-studded video above.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Categories: Political News and Opinion

Critical Detroit Zoo millage up for vote next week - Detroit Free Press - Detroit Free Press

Berkley Information from Google News - Tue, 07/26/2016 - 11:16pm

Detroit Free Press

Critical Detroit Zoo millage up for vote next week - Detroit Free Press
Detroit Free Press
Since residents in three counties approved a 10-year, 0.1-mill property tax in 2008 for the Detroit Zoo, a lot has changed under the colorful water tower at ...
Detroit Zoo asks voters to renew 10-year regional millageThe Detroit News

all 4 news articles »

Categories: Berkley Area News