Politics

Trump’s State of the Union speech

On Tuesday President Donald Trump addressed the nation with his annual State of the Union speech. Even though the event was scheduled during an impeachment trial, Trump made no mention of it. He started with celebrating a booming economy, unemployment rate, and new job numbers, highlighting the fact that minorities and women were primary beneficiaries of economic growth.  The House Chamber was filled with roaring applause as Trump continued delivering his record on “great American comeback” confirming that indeed “the union is stronger than ever before.”

The President surprised many attendees with honoring 100-years Tuskegee airman, awarding Rush Limbaugh, a conservative talk-radio host who was recently diagnosed with lung cancer, with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and reuniting an Army spouse with a husband who just returned from deployment. Trump also invited Juan Guaido, an opposition leader from Venezuela, and pledged the support of the United States to his nation: “Please take this message back that all Americans are united with the Venezuelan people in their righteous struggle for freedom.” Trump also made remarks on healthcare, immigration, and military accomplishments of his administration.

The State of the Union speech drew different responses. While Republicans cheered on President’s address, Democrats mostly remain seated during the event and seldom applauded. CBS polls confirmed that 97% Republicans, 82% Independents and 30% Democrats approved the State of the Union. However, a controversy unfolded at the conclusion of the speech – with Nancy Pelosi theatrically ripping up the speech she was given in advance by Trump.

Pelosi ripped up SOTU speech

            At the very end of the event, mere seconds after Trump uttered the last words, Nancy Pelosi stood up and tore the pages containing Trump’s speech in half. This opened a fiery discussion on both sides, with some praising it as something courageous and others condemning the Speaker for a classless response. Pelosi told the reporters that “it was the courteous thing to do considering the alternatives,” though she didn’t explain what those alternatives are.

A day later a video appeared showing that Pelosi preemptively ripping up the speech while Trump was delivering the State of the Union address. There were several pictures shared on social media with small tears on pages that Pelosi ripped at the very end.

The White House immediately condemned the Speaker on Twitter, stating that “Pelosi just ripped up: One of our last surviving Tuskegee Airmen. The survival of a child born at 21 weeks. The mourning families of Rocky Jones and Kayla Mueller. A service member’s reunion with his family. That’s her legacy.” In turn, Pelosi responded that she “tore up a manifesto of mistruth.”

The end of the impeachment trial

            The final vote on the articles of impeachment fell on the day after the State of the Union. After five months of inquiries, witnesses’ testimonies, oral arguments, and subpoenas, the impeachment saga came to an end. The Senate acquitted the President, mostly along party lines. Democrats were united and voted “guilty” on both articles. Republicans showed unity only on voting on one article, obstruction of Congress, voting “not guilty.” Sen Mitt Romney (R-UT) broke with the party and joined Democrats on the vote on the second article, abuse of power. The final vote fell short of a needed two-thirds majority of the Senate.

US forces killed a terrorist in Yemen

Last week had an intense news cycle, and the information that a leader of al-Qaida leader was killed mostly went unnoticed. Qassim al-Rimi, a leader of al-Qaida in Arabian Peninsula, according to the Times, “was successfully eliminated” by American forces. He was involved in plotting attacks against the United States. Trump didn’t provide any details of the operation, stating that al-Rimi was killed during an air-strike. “We will continue to protect the American people by tracking down and eliminating terrorists who seek to do us harm,” said Trump during his statement.

Trump fires two key witnesses

            On Friday the news broke that the Trump administration ordered Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a key witness in the impeachment trial, to be escorted from the White House. Vindman was fired from his position at the National Security Council, according to the Hill.  His attorney confirmed the news in a statement, accusing Trump of revenge for Vindman’s testimony and lamenting that his client “was asked to leave for telling the truth. His honor, his commitment to right, frightened the powerful.”

Yevgeny Vindman, his twin brother who also worked at NSC, was also removed from his position with no explanation. Vindman brothers were reassigned to the Department of the Army.

Gordon Sondland, another key witness and EU ambassador, was also recalled by Trump “effective immediately.” Several Republican lawmakers tried to persuade Trump not to fire Sondland, but the President made the decision to remove him from the ambassador’s position. “I am grateful to President Trump for having given me the opportunity to serve, to Secretary Pompeo for his consistent support, and to the exceptional and dedicated professionals at the U.S. Mission to the European Union. I am proud of our accomplishments. Our work here has been the highlight of my career,” Sondland said in a statement.

Democratic Presidential hopeful Andrew Yang has laid off part of his staff. Business Insider is reporting the layoffs happened late Wednesday.

Yang was only able to secure 1% of the Iowa delegates. A bulk of the Yang layoffs were in their digital/communication departments.

According to the Yang team, the layoffs were planned. Campaign manager Zach Graumann confirmed the layoffs saying “this was the plan all along”.

Graumann told Business Insider that the layoffs were  “part of our original plans following the Iowa caucuses, we are winding down our Iowa operations and restructuring to compete as the New Hampshire primary approaches.”

The first caucuses are just around the corner and you might find it surprising, but Andrew Yang is still in the 2020 race. An entrepreneur and philanthropist, he never jumped to double digits in the polling, steadily tailing top Democratic candidates throughout this election cycle. He didn’t qualify for the last Democratic debate and the media rarely spoiled him with their favorable attention.

And yet, Yang’s campaign proved to be very durable, outliving campaigns of other seasoned politicians who dropped out of the race after financial struggles. Andrew Yang drew nearly 1200 people in his last rally in Iowa; the ballroom couldn’t fit all of his supporters, some gathered in the hallways just to listen to a man who claims to have effective solutions to the same problems Donald Trump campaigned on. And the only question is on anyone’s mind: what is his plan to win the prize every presidential hopeful has the eyes on?

If you never heard about Andrew Yang until he started making headlines with his ambitious proposal to give every citizen $1000 a month, don’t worry, you’re not alone. He was not a politician that can run on name recognition alone. Yang was a businessman with just a few successful projects that made him a millionaire. He sold his Manhattan Prep company that focused on test preparations before founding Venture for America, a nonprofit organization that helps growing small start-ups into mature sustainable businesses. “My goal was to enlist hundreds of talented young builders to become entrepreneurs and leaders in growth companies to create new jobs and opportunities around the country,” said Yang in his letter when he stepped down from CEO position in 2017.

He continues to apply this vision in his campaign, highlighting the fact that automation eating up more jobs that America creates. “My organization was helping to create jobs, but automation was displacing tens of thousands of workers…We were pouring water into a bathtub with a giant hole ripped in the bottom,” Yang opined on the pages of the New York Times. He didn’t shy away from mentioning the fact that swing states that lost many manufacturing jobs voted for Trump in 2016. And that’s where he proposes a different from other politicians approach: to invest $1000 in every adult in America “instead of blaming the current occupant of the Oval Office.”

It’s a very bold proposal that can attract a lot of supporters, but it will not win the Presidency, let alone the Democratic nomination. The idea behind Yang’s “Freedom Dividend” program is to incentivize people to look for better jobs without fear of losing income, invest in their own businesses, reduce financial insecurity by covering basic needs, and subsequently grow the economy. In short, Andrew Yang proposes implementing Universal Basic Income funded by a 10% value-added tax.

However, some skeptics raised doubts about whether this value-added tax can fully fund the “Freedom Dividend.” An economist Kyle Pomerleau concluded that numbers simply don’t add up and would require either higher taxes, or smaller dividends, or both. Some voters also find this program too good to be true, and they leave to back a traditional candidate that spent some time in politics. This usually entails talks about the expansion of immigration, universal healthcare, cancellation of student debt, climate change, and, most importantly, heavy criticism of Donald Trump in every speech.

The latter is rarely heard from Yang. Just two days ago in Des Moines, he asked his supporters to applaud those, who voted for Trump in 2016, something that is hard to imagine at Biden’s or Bernie’s rally. He already peeled off some conservative voters and continues to lure away Democrats who are interested in new ideas. Yang positions himself on “Not Left, not Right, Forward,” which sounds appealing to a large group of people that is weary from Republican and Democratic establishment’s everlasting fight that shifts the blame from one to another. And perhaps, this is a strategy in and of itself. Yang Gang, as he calls his supporters, share his confidence that he has a shot at winning. “I’m the man to beat Donald Trump, and the last people that are going to realize it are going to be the Democrats who’ve been looking for the best candidate to take him on. But I think more and more are realizing that they’re looking at him right now,” he said Yang.

Andrew Yang, founder of Venture for America and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, high fives a supporter during a campaign rally in New York, U.S., on Tuesday, May 14, 2019. Yang, dubbed the ‘internet candidate’ by some, has developed a relatively niche following because of his platform that touts the merits of universal basic income. Photographer: Mark Abramson/Bloomberg via Getty Images

It’s too early to say if his gamble will secure Yang the nomination. As a Democrat, he promises to tackle major issues Americans face, such as costly health care, immigration, mass incarceration, education among others. And some solutions and promises are indistinguishable from those espoused by career politicians.  However, his focus on an unorthodox approach and vocal acknowledgment that Trump’s victory in 2016 was a symptom rather than a problem, can bring dividends very soon. So far it allowed him to steadily maintain his place in the polls for longer than others.

And what is more interesting, it created a large group of supporters that won’t support anyone else: Emerson College poll conducted in January showed that 42% of Yang’s voters will not support another candidate if he is not the nominee. “We think we’re going to surprise a lot of people,” said Yang in an interview with George Stephanopoulos. And Monday night will show if he’s right.

In a surprising move on Friday, the Senate voted 51-49 to block new witnesses in the Trump’s impeachment trial, narrowly avoiding an unprecedented tie. As was reported earlier, Republicans didn’t have enough votes to proceed with no additional witnesses when a few Senators had weighed in on the importance of hearing testimony from John Bolton and others. However, as impeachment saga unfolded, two Senators, Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN), announced that they wouldn’t defect from the party, turning the trial to an ending phase. Senators Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) joined the Democrats, voting in favor of the motion to call new witnesses.

“A majority of the U.S. Senate has determined that the numerous witnesses and 28,000-plus pages of documents already in evidence are sufficient to judge the House Managers’ accusations and end this impeachment trial,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) at the conclusion of the vote.

Democrats decried this decision after their final attempt to secure witnesses and extend the trial failed. “America will remember this day, unfortunately, where the Senate did not live up to the responsibilities, where the Senate turned away from truth and went along with a sham trial,” responded Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). He lamented over the decision to vote against calling additional witnesses, calling it a “grand tragedy.” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) echoed Minority Leader and said that Republicans engaged in a cover-up for the President. The vote also prompted a fiery response from protestors who gathered outside of the Capitol Friday night, as the Hill reported. They were chanting “Shame! Shame!” and demanding Trump’s removal from office.

Shortly after, the Senate voted on the resolution that sets a timeline of the trial. The resolution was passed strictly along party lines, 53-47. The Senate will reconvene on Monday for closing arguments from impeachment managers and Trump’s legal team. The final vote on the impeachment articles will take place on Wednesday, giving Senators enough time to explain their vote.

Donald Trump attended the annual March for Life, becoming the first President in history of the US to deliver a speech at the anti-abortion rally. Thousands gathered on Friday just days after the anniversary of Roe v. Wade to support a growing movement that opposes abortion.  “Every life brings love into this world. Every child brings joy to a family. Every person is worth protecting,” said Trump addressing the crowd.

Trump cited the achievements of his administration in restricting abortion, such as appointing conservative judges and expanding the policy that blocks the US funding of non-government foreign organizations if they provide abortion services. Just hours before he gave the speech, his administration issued a warning to California to comply with the Weldon amendment that mandates that the state cannot force insurance plans to cover elective abortions, according to NBC news. Should they refuse, the state can lose federal health care funding.

Trump also condemned Democrats for their support on loosening access to abortions. He mentioned Gov. Ralph Northam’s comments on the abortion issue he had made during a radio interview in January 2019. He criticized the Governor’s endorsement of the late-term abortion bill as radical and extreme. “Unborn children have never had a stronger defender in the White House,” said Trump.

Vice President Pence and his spouse, who are currently in Rome meeting Pope Francis, also addressed the marchers via video recording. “I couldn’t be more proud to be the vice president to the most pro-life president in United States history,” he said.

Jeanne Mancini, a president of the March for Life, welcomed President’s appearance at the rally, according to Fox News. She was pleased with his speech that got an enthusiastic response from the crowd. “He will be the first president in history to attend and we are so excited for him to experience in person how passionate our marchers are about life and protecting the unborn,” said Mancini.

Follow this blogger: http://twitter.com/Julia_kanin

Last week, Project Veritas presented an interesting video that immediately caught my attention.  A weird-looking guy confidently speaking on camera about the re-education of Nazis, burning American cities, shooting people, or sending them to Gulags. All of it – in the name of saving human civilization. Wait, what? You read that right. You just didn’t hear about it on TV. One could argue that people around the country say insane things all the time. What makes this case special is that the hero of the video, Kyle Jurek, is a field organizer in Iowa for Bernie Sanders, a leading Democratic candidate for the President of the United States.

Who am I to talk about these things, anyway? I’m a Russian immigrant, born the year the Soviet Union drew its last breath. Gulags, repressions, the free flow of propaganda, imprisonment of dissidents, and other “perks” of a communist revolution are all a part of the history of my native country. It’s a shameful period that cannot be erased and should serve as a reminder to the rest of the world about what follows empty promises for economic justice once the bourgeoisie class, the last obstacle to a fair future (in the eyes of socialists) is eliminated. Even if these socialists call themselves Democratic. The outcome doesn’t care about names. It doesn’t care about people, dreams, hopes, or freedoms. It doesn’t care about trying to build a new, just world. All it cares about is making everyone equal and satiating an everlasting hunger of envy that cannot be satisfied. You see, the majority are equal in their misery, and this beast stays hungry anyway.

I’m not trying to start another discussion on how blissfully ignorant the American youth is about the true realities of communist countries. This topic has been beaten to death by conservative pundits and those lucky to escape oppressive regimes, as flirtation of the left with socialism becomes more open. And, if their warnings about the danger of communism didn’t do the job, my take on it would sound like a cliché to those who choose to willingly close their eyes and ears. However, hear me out. I want to say something else today.

I want to talk about why liberal media has decided to largely ignore this video. As a journalist, I know their preference to ignore certain themes that can hurt the team they play for. I know about the sudden disappearance of the major topics that contradict the narrative. I also understand their hostility toward President Trump, given their mutual enmity. I don’t support it, because it often exposes biases that professional reporters cannot allow themselves to have, but I understand. It still doesn’t excuse the media’s silence on these types of stories. And no, it doesn’t fall under the explanation that the media has its own agenda. There is a difference between one-sided reporting, ignoring the true motives of those seeking power in this country and keeping it from American people in the midst of a fight for the Democratic nomination. This indifference might turn out ugly if ignored. Primarily – for the media itself.

“Walk into that MSNBC studios, drag those motherf**kers out by their hair and light them on fire in the streets,” says Kyle Jurek nonchalantly. He lays out the whole plan while munching on fries and drinking beer. This is a direct call for violence against the media that people like Jurek contemplate materializing should Sanders succeed in his presidential bid. Granted, it’s just one guy in Iowa that nobody even heard about before this video surfaced. But it’s naive to think he is alone out there. There are many more. These people are simply waiting in the wings. And if pundits from liberal media think that conservatives, or Trump, want to silence them, all they have to do is wait until people like Jurek take over to see real censorship. “Gulags. Liberals get the f**king wall first,” that’s the verdict for the dissenting voices. In the end, it will not matter that the ideas of Sanders weren’t scrutinized and criticized the way Trump’s every move was. A post-revolutionary world cannot exist without heavy censorship of the media. A brave new world doesn’t need these watchdogs anyway.

It’s eerily puzzling that major media outlets, especially those on the left side of the political spectrum, have not mentioned the Project Veritas video even once. There is no answer from MSNBC (who Jurek threatened in his speech). Journalists from these media organizations have been talking non-stop about Trump’s signature phrase about fake news media being “the enemy of the people.” They took great offense at this outrageous insult of those who speak truth to power. They feel they are attacked simply for doing an objective reporting job. And yet, they pass over this story as if there is nothing wrong with a campaign organizer of one of the Democratic frontrunners openly boasting about his plans to eliminate journalists – starting with those supporting Democrats. Jurek didn’t call them the enemy of the people. He explained, in no uncertain terms, what he and his ilk will do. And the media, except for a few conservative websites and Fox News, didn’t care.

Perhaps they didn’t feel it was important. Maybe it didn’t meet their journalistic standard. And certainly – they are not fully aware of the role the media plays in the regimes praised by Sanders. The communist regimes have little tolerance for those questioning their efficiency. They have even less patience for the ones openly criticizing authority than Trump has for Jim Acosta. Liberal media can’t grasp the idea that people like Jurek are radicals, and radicals have other means to deal with disagreement. Things like “freedom of the press” or “freedom of speech” mean nothing to them. You either support their ideas – sometimes with a gun to your head – or you hide your opinions in hopes that the government will never find out. Coincidentally, dissidents were called “the enemy of the people” by Joseph Stalin.

Several foreign reporters were expelled from the Soviet Union for the crimes of reporting the truth. You don’t come to Soviet Russia to write the truth. You come to write government-approved propaganda, or you get out.  Less fortunate Russian writers were accused of thoughtcrimes, took a bullet for opposing the regime, or were sent to Gulags. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a great Russian writer, spent some time in a forced-labor camp and recorded it in his book “The Gulag Archipelago,” where he described horrific conditions of Gulags incompatible with human decency. Jurek appeared to be very enthusiastic about these camps, watering the term down to a mere re-education camp: “Gulags are a lot better than what the CIA has told us they were.”

Jurek is absolutely clueless about the history of the Soviet Union. It is a separate question altogether what is to blame for his ignorance: education system, social media, or other radicals. The fact is that Sanders espouses ideas that are, to some degree, in line with what Jurek believes in. American people deserve to know about these things. The media does a great disservice not only to the voters, but to themselves, by not challenging ideas that led to the destruction of several countries and millions of deaths.  Because a free press will not exist in a socialist paradise Jurek talked about.

At the end of the 2020 Democratic debate, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders had a confrontation. The internet exploded with speculation as to what was said. Tonight, CNN has released the audio.