Author

Ronn Blitzer

Browsing

President Trump targeted Hunter Biden Sunday morning, implying that the son of former Vice President Joe Biden has disappeared — hours after Hunter Biden’s attorney announced his client is stepping down from the board of a Chinese company and vowed that he will not work with foreign companies if his father becomes president.

Trump and his own attorney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, have accused Hunter Biden of improperly benefiting from business dealings in China and Ukraine while Joe Biden was vice president.

“Where’s Hunter? He has totally disappeared!” Trump tweeted. “Now looks like he has raided and scammed even more countries! Media is AWOL.” Trump did not elaborate on which countries, or what the alleged scams were.

Earlier Sunday morning, Hunter Biden’s attorney George Mesires published an online statement on his client’s behalf, providing detailed explanations for Biden’s ties to Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings and the Chinese firm BHR (Shanghai) Equity Investment Fund Management Company.

“Despite extensive scrutiny, at no time has any law enforcement agency, either domestic or foreign, alleged that Hunter engaged in wrongdoing at any point during his five-year term,” Mesires said about Hunter Biden’s work with Burisma, where Biden was a board member until April 2019.

Mesires said that Biden was “a non-executive director” of Burisma, for which he was compensated, but was not part of the management team.

Burisma was the subject of an investigation by Ukrainian authorities, but the case was dropped. The prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, was fired after then-Vice President Joe Biden threatened to withhold money from Ukraine unless Shokin was removed. Joe Biden denies that this had anything to do with his son, as Shokin was accused of corruption.

As for BHR, Mesires claimed that Hunter Biden “has not received any compensation” for serving on the board, and “has not received any return on his investment.”

Still, Mesires stated that Hunter Biden plans to resign from BHR’s board by Oct. 31, and that if Joe Biden becomes the Democratic presidential nominee and goes on to defeat President Trump in the 2020 election, Hunter “will agree not to serve on boards of, or work on behalf of, foreign-owned companies.”

Democrats are presently investigating Trump for possible impeachment based on his July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, where he asked Zelensky to assist Giuliani with an investigation of Hunter and Joe Biden’s Ukrainian connections.

Trump’s critics, including House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., have accused Trump of pressuring Zelensky to get involved by threatening to withhold military aid. Trump denied wrongdoing and insisted the call was “perfect.” Zelensky has also stated that he was not pressured.

Democrats have subpoenaed several Trump administration officials and diplomats for documents as lawmakers probe issues surrounding the phone call.

In a Saturday conversation on “Fox News’ “Justice with Judge Jeanine,” Trump referred to the impeachment inquiry as a “hoax” and “so bad for our country.” He called out House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for not having a formal House vote on an impeachment inquiry, saying, it was because she “can’t get the votes because we’re [the GOP] doing so well right now.”

Fox News’ Melissa Leon contributed to this report.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: ‘Where’s Hunter?’ Trump asks, as Biden’s son promises not to work with foreign companies if father wins presidency in 2020

Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib told Detroit’s chief of police that he should hire only black people as analysts to run their facial recognition software because, she claimed, non-black people think they all look alike.

The suggestion came Monday as Chief James Craig gave Tlaib a tour of the Real Time Crime Center, where the department uses facial recognition technology to find suspects. Craig was showing Tlaib how the software works, and how analysts use it to identify and locate individuals. But the tour quickly turned contentious as the freshman Michigan congresswoman made repeated requests that were shot down by the chief.

“Analysts need to be African-Americans, not people that are not,” Tlaib said. “It’s true, I think non-African-Americans think African-Americans all look the same!” She said she has witnessed people confuse Reps. John Lewis, D-Ga., and Elijah Cummings, D-Md., who both are black and bald.

Craig, who is black, did not go for Tlaib’s suggestion.

“I trust people who are trained, regardless of race, regardless of gender,” he responded.

This came after Tlaib claimed that “the error rate among African-Americans, especially women,” was 60 percent.

“I understand the technology real well,” Craig said. He showed Tlaib how his analysts examine the software’s results before making determinations.

“See if you can get some of our money back until they fix it,” Tlaib said, to which Craig simply replied, “No.”

When asked if defendants were prosecuted solely based on facial recognition results, Craig said they were not.

The tour, which was recorded and then posted by a reporter with The Detroit News, got off to a rocky start when Tlaib asked the reporter, “Are you facial recognizing me right now? I’m sorry who are you and why are you videotaping me?”

WATCH THE VIDEO:

Afterward, the Detroit News reporter followed up on Tlaib’s assertion that only black people should be hired to use the facial recognition software.

“Are you saying white people are not qualified to –,” he said, before Tlaib cut him off.

“No, I think there’s actually been studies out that it’s hard for, you know, like African-Americans would identify African-Americans, similar, Latino same thing,” she said.

When asked if that would mean African-Americans should not be allowed to identify white people, Tlaib said, “Look it up,” and walked away.

The Detroit Police Department extended the invitation to Tlaib in August, after she described facial recognition technology as “bulls—.”

Craig made headlines in 2015 after he said more citizens should be armed. While in the past he supported increased restrictions on weapons and ammunition, his position changed after visiting Maine and Los Angeles, where permits for carrying concealed weapons are easier to acquire.

“I changed my orientation real quick,” Craig said. “Maine is one of the safest places in America. Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.”

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Rashida Tlaib, in contentious tour, tells Detroit police chief to hire only black analysts for facial recognition program

A former police officer made a bold proclamation during a congressional hearing Wednesday regarding a proposed assault-weapons ban: she would not comply.

Dianna Muller, who served in the Tulsa Police Department for 22 years and is the founder of gun advocacy group The DC Project, was among the witnesses at the House Judiciary Committee hearing. The session on an otherwise contentious issue flew largely under the radar amid the Trump-Ukraine controversy and Democrats’ impeachment push. But reflecting the gun control divide in the country — amid a spate of deadly mass shootings that prompted renewed calls for strict laws — Muller said that such a ban would force lawful gun owners to either give up their arms or become criminals.

“Please don’t legislate the 150 million people just like me into being criminals. It has happened. You’ve already done it,” Muller said, referring to the Trump administration’s ban on bump stocks, the devices that use a semi-automatic weapon’s recoil to make it rapidly fire like an automatic. “I was a bump stock owner, and I had to make a decision: do I become a felon, or do I comply?”

Should the government pass an assault-weapons ban, Muller declared, “I will not comply.”

Muller and others at the hearing focused on the practicality of a ban, pointing out what they claimed were mainly “cosmetic” differences between weapons such as the AR-15 and standard semi-automatic hunting rifles. This issue was also raised by Heritage Foundation senior legal policy analyst Amy Swearer when Rep.Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., went down the line of witnesses asking if they believed hunting rifles should be banned if they are semi-automatic.

Swearer said no, stating that there was no difference in the mechanics or function of an “assault weapon” or a semi-automatic hunting rifle. Dayton, Ohio Mayor Nan Whaley, who recalled the recent mass shooting in her city, did not give a definitive answer to Sensenbrenner’s question, nor did Dr. Alejandro Rios Tovar, a trauma surgeon who treated victims of the attack in El Paso, Texas. Charlottesville, Va., Chief of Police RaShall Brackney indicated she was in favor of a ban on “any weapon that could be used to hunt individuals.”

Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., countered the idea of a hunting rifle ban by referring to his assault-weapon ban bill. Cicilline said that more than 200 weapons are exempt from the bill, so there is really no issue of eliminating hunting rifles.

Swearer also testified against the idea that law-abiding citizens have no need for weapons like AR-15s, recalling how her mother, a gun novice, had difficulty accurately firing a handgun at a shooting range, but was much more effective when she used an AR-15.

“As I read the Second Amendment, it doesn’t say the right to bear arms shall not be infringed unless the gun has scary features,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said.

Swearer also noted that some features like barrel shrouds enhance the safety of a weapon for its user. But David Chipman, senior policy adviser at the Giffords Law Center, raised a counterpoint noting that a barrel shroud could allow a shooter to get a better grip on a weapon “in a way that would increase your ability to spray fire and kill more people” without burning their hand.

One feature that was a concern for House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., is the ability for some weapons to be used with high-capacity magazines that allow users to fire dozens of rounds without reloading.

Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, testified in agreement with Nadler that a ban on such magazines, along with a clear definition of “assault weapon” that would eliminate loopholes under the 1994 crime law, would be effective.

Congress and the Trump administration have been in talks for weeks regarding possible gun legislation, but discussion of taking away guns that are currently legal has led to criticism from both parties. After 2020 Democratic hopeful Beto O’Rourke declared during a debate, “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15, AK-47,” Cicilline said, “That message doesn’t help.” President Trump said that O’Rourke was making it “much harder” to reach a deal on gun legislation with that sort of rhetoric.

Trump’s focus when it comes to gun control has mainly been on background checks. The White House was also circulating a one-page document on Capitol Hill detailing a possible gun background-check proposal that would require private sellers – not just licensed vendors – to conduct background checks for all advertised sales, though Attorney General Bill Barr said Trump has not yet made a “firm decision” on what he ultimately will support.

An August USA Today poll showed that most American voters support increased background checks, with 85 percent of Republican voters supporting background checks for all gun sales. Presently, only federally licensed vendors are required to conduct background checks, allowing private individuals to sell without them under what has been referred to as the “gun show loophole.”

White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley told Fox News last week that he expected an announcement on new gun legislation “very soon.” Gidley said Trump wanted to make sure that any new laws would address actual problems and not just be “feel-good legislation.”

But the Democrats’ impeachment push could complicate matters. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had resisted impeachment, announced Tuesday that an impeachment inquiry would be launched. Reflecting how policy debates could take a back seat, Pelosi said in private meetings with lawmakers that Trump called her to discuss gun legislation, but she soon changed the subject to his phone call with the Ukrainian president in which they discussed investigating Joe Biden, which stoked the latest calls for impeachment.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Sparks fly at assault-weapons ban hearing on Capitol Hill, ex-cop vows she would ‘not comply’

The single-payer health care plan known as “Medicare-for-all” now enjoys support from more than half of Democrats in the House of Representatives, with top-ranking Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., adding his name to the list of co-sponsors.

The bill, introduced in February by Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., calls for the replacement of private health insurance with a government plan covering everyone. Jeffries became the 118th co-sponsor.

“Given the enduring nature of our health care access and affordability crisis, more must be done,” Jeffries, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said in a statement to The Washington Post.

Jayapal celebrated Jeffries’ support the day before his name officially was added to the sponsor list, tweeting that it is “a huge step in the fight for #MedicareForAll!”

The widespread support in the caucus underscores how quickly the party has embraced the costly policy, popular with the progressive base, since the last presidential election.

When she introduced the bill in February, Jayapal described it as “a complete transformation of our health care system where there are no private insurance companies that provide these core benefits,” saying it would be “universal care, everybody in, nobody out.” At the time, the bill immediately drew support from 106 Democrats.

Since then, another 12 have added their names, with Jeffries being the latest.

The bill would virtually do away with private insurance by making it illegal for private companies to provide the same coverage as the public plan. Jayapal predicted that by doing away with private insurance plans, approximately 1 million people who work for insurance companies would lose their jobs.

“We have thought carefully about how we’d take care of those folks because we think those people are very important,” Jayapal said during a May town hall at American University.

“We have set aside one percent a year of the total cost of the bill for five years to take care of a transition for employees in the private insurance sector,” she explained. “If they are able to retire, that might be one, pension guarantees, job training so they can move into a different system.”

A Senate version of “Medicare-for-all” has been pushed by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

Candidates have split over just how far they are willing to go when it comes to socialized health care. Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., favor a public system that abolishes private insurance, while others such as Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg have called for keeping private options for those who prefer to keep their existing plans.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Majority of House Dems now support ‘Medicare-for-all’

Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford announced Sunday that he is running for president as a Republican, becoming the latest to challenge President Trump in the GOP primaries.

Sanford said the Republican Party is facing an identity crisis, and he wants the GOP to take a look at itself and do some soul searching.

“I think we have to have a conversation about what it means to be a Republican,” Sanford told “Fox News Sunday,” claiming the party “has lost our way.”

Sanford specifically made reference to the debt, deficit and government spending. Other conservatives expressed concern about these issues when Trump helped Congress pass a spending bill that increases spending caps and suspends the debt ceiling, allowing for more government borrowing until July 31, 2021. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., blasted his colleagues at the time, saying it “marks the death of the Tea Party movement in America.”

Sanford also challenged Trump’s tactics when it comes to trade, saying that engaging the world when it comes to trade is “one of the hallmarks of the Republican Party.”

He also brought up political culture, which he said has been “damaged” by Trump.

“We need to have a conversation about humility,” Sanford said, blasting Trump’s social media habits by claiming that a tweet “is not leadership.”

Earlier this summer, when Sanford was still deciding whether to run, he admitted, “I don’t think anybody’s going to beat Donald Trump.”

When pressed on why he is running a race that he knows he will likely lose, Sanford said, “this is the beginning of a long walk, but it begins with a first step.”

Host Chris Wallace grilled Sanford on his own controversies, which include a stretch of nearly a week in 2009 during his term as governor, when he disappeared only to eventually admit that he was in Argentina having an extramarital affair. At the time, his spokesperson said Sanford was hiking the Appalachian Trail.

Sanford said he “profoundly apologized for that,” contrasting his remorse with Trump, who he said does not apologize for anything. Trump poked fun at Sanford after his scandal was brought to light, but Sanford insisted that his campaign against the president was not personal.

Sanford is now the third Republican to announce a run against Trump in the primaries, with former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld and former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh previously announcing their campaigns.

After Weld and Walsh stated they were running against Trump, Politico reported that the Republican parties of Arizona, Kansas, Nevada and South Carolina were looking to scrap their primaries and caucuses.

“Trump and his allies and the Republican National Committee are doing whatever they can do to eliminate primaries in certain states and make it very difficult for primary challengers to get on the ballot in a number of states,” Walsh told Politico. Weld reacted by tweeting, “Donald Trump, by turns arrogant and paranoid, has made no secret of the fact that he wishes to be crowned as president rather than elected. That might be fine in a monarchy, but we overthrew ours two centuries ago.”

Kansas Republican Party Executive Director Shannon Golden, meanwhile, defended the decision, telling Fox News that the state never has Republican primaries when there is a GOP incumbent.

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser and Adam Shaw contributed to this report.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Mark Sanford announces Trump primary challenge: GOP ‘has lost our way’

Presidential hopeful Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., on Tuesday revealed a sweeping $3 trillion plan to combat climate change, calling to “accelerate the end” of fossil fuels and achieve “100% carbon-free electricity” by 2030.

Like the costly and controversial Green New Deal, which Booker co-sponsored in the form of a Senate resolution, Booker’s plan aims to address both climate change and economic inequality.

“To end the real and growing threat of climate change and to create a more just country for everyone, we must heal these past mistakes and act boldly to create a green and equitable future. That’s exactly what I’ll do as president,” Booker said in a statement.

The plan includes an array of executive actions, such as taking on companies that pollute with increased EPA enforcement, requiring all new passenger vehicles to have zero emissions by 2030, and imposing a ban on all new fossil fuel leases. Booker also intends to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement and revoke orders from President Trump to approve the Keystone and Dakota Access Pipelines.

Additionally, Booker wants to push Congress to create a United States Environmental Justice Fund, which would commit $50 billion a year “to advance environmental justice and invest in communities long left behind.” Goals include replacing lead drinking water service lines in residences, schools, and daycares; cleaning abandoned uranium, coal, and hard rock mines; and planting 100 million trees in urban areas that Booker’s plan says suffer disproportionately from air pollution.

The plan sets a goal of 2045 for achieving a completely “carbon-neutral” economy through investments in clean energy such as wind and solar, and “a next-generation smart grid.”

Booker’s plan joins other costly proposals put forth by fellow Democratic candidates.

Former Vice President Joe Biden has proposed a Clean Energy Revolution that would involve $1.7 trillion in federal investments and “additional private sector and state and local investments of more than $5 trillion. Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke has a $5 trillion climate plan and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has a plan for a Green New Deal that would cost $16.3 trillion in public funds.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Cory Booker unveils $3 trillion climate change plan, creating ‘Environmental Justice Fund’

Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee suggested in a court filing Monday that they have been carrying out an impeachment investigation of President Trump since before Robert Mueller’s report was even submitted, which appears to contradict previous statements by committee chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Nadler first claimed earlier this month that “formal impeachment proceedings” were underway when he filed a petition to get secret grand jury information from the Mueller report. But Monday’s filing in a separate case looking to compel testimony from former White House counsel Don McGahn suggested that it had already started on March 4 — weeks before Mueller sent his report to Attorney General Bill Barr on March 22.

“On March 4, 2019, the Judiciary Committee opened an investigation into ‘threats to the rule of law,’ encompassing alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption and other abuses of power by President Trump, his associates, and members of his Administration,” the filing says, adding that “one critical purpose of the Committee’s investigation is to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President.”

Monday’s motion called for a preliminary injunction or summary judgment so that McGahn would have to testify. McGahn has refused to comply with a committee subpoena, asserting that he has immunity.

The March 4 date is in line with an Aug. 1 op-ed for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel by Rep. Ted Deutsche, D-Fla., but it is in stark contrast with previous claims from the Democratic leadership.

In a Washington Post interview published March 11, Pelosi said, “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.”

According to Monday’s court filing, Democrats were already going down that path a week before that interview went to print.

It was early August when Nadler first told CNN that “formal impeachment proceedings” were taking place, at the same time that he was initiating the case for the secret grand jury material. In May he said during a WNYC radio appearance that “there certainly is” justification for Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against Trump, but that it was critical for the American public to agree before launching the process.

“We’re going to have to have the investigation,” Nadler said in response to a question from a caller, adding that he was going to talk to colleagues about the possibility of a formal impeachment inquiry.

Nadler specifically noted in the May appearance that there is a difference between a “formal impeachment inquiry” and holding hearings outside the context of a formal inquiry. He said that there are “functional differences” between holding hearings in an official impeachment investigation and doing so without one, including “legal powers that we wouldn’t have without it.”

Those legal powers include being able to access secret grand jury information, as impeachment investigations have been deemed to fall under an exception that allows disclosure of grand jury material in the context of judicial proceedings.

Nadler’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News questions about when formal proceedings began, or if they are taking place at all.

House Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., wrote Monday in a letter to Nadler obtained by Fox News that no such formal proceedings could be taking place, and that Nadler is running afoul of the Rules of the House. According to the letter, Nadler is already preparing for gaining access to the grand jury material by saying that only members of his committee and the House Intelligence Committee could view it. Collins insists that this goes against protocol.

“It is beyond the scope of your authority, absent a vote of the full House, to prohibit other Members of the House from reviewing any materials in possession of the Committee,” Collins wrote, also pointing out that Nadler never received House authorization to conduct a “formal impeachment inquiry.”

“Without these formal steps, the Committee cannot possibly be conducting a ‘formal impeachment inquiry,’ as you claim it is,” Collins said.

In their Monday court filing, the Democrats claimed that their authority for conducting their investigation is derived from their constitutional powers.

“Pursuant to its Article I powers, the Judiciary Committee is investigating Presidential misconduct,” the motion says. “Its investigation is critical to its determination whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President, and will also inform its legislative and oversight functions.”

Democrats argue that McGahn, in particular, must testify because he is “the most important fact witness in the Judiciary Committee’s investigation into whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President.” Their motion states that McGahn’s statements to the Special Counsel’s Office are referenced more than 160 times in Mueller’s report, and that “he is uniquely situated to answer factual questions critical to the Judiciary Committee’s investigation[.]”

This was in reference to the report’s discussion of how Trump allegedly asked McGahn to have Mueller fired – a request viewed by Democrats as an obstruction of justice.

The White House told the committee that the president directed McGahn not to testify, relying on the Office of Legal Counsel’s determination that McGahn could not be compelled to testify regarding his time working for the administration.

The committee argued that “President Trump’s directive that McGahn not testify has no valid basis in law.”

Democrats had attempted to have this case assigned to D.C. District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell, who is handling Nadler’s petition for the secret grand jury material in the Mueller report. Their argument was that because both cases are related to their impeachment investigation, they should be heard by the same judge.

Howell disagreed, stating that while the two cases may have stemmed from the same investigation, the facts and legal issues involved are totally unrelated.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Dem court filing suggests Trump impeachment probe began before Mueller even submitted report

Former Illinois Congressman Joe Walsh announced Sunday morning that he is running for president as a Republican, challenging President Trump in the GOP primary race, while delivering a blistering attack on the president’s character and qualifications.

Walsh blasted the president for his social media habits and general behavior.

“I’m running because he’s unfit; somebody needs to step up and there needs to be an alternative,” Walsh said. “The country is sick of this guy’s tantrum — he’s a child.”

At the same time, Walsh recognized that he himself is guilty of the same behavior as the president, and even played a part in the division in Washington that led to Trump’s election.

“I helped create Trump,” the Tea Party favorite told ABC News‘ George Stephanopoulos in an interview that aired Sunday morning. “I feel responsible for that.”

Walsh claimed that Trump was “tweeting us into a recession” and warned that “he’ll tweet us into war.”

Stephanopoulos called out Walsh for making outlandish statements of his own, including calling former President Barack Obama a Muslim and an enemy. Walsh said Trump “made me reflect on some of the things I’ve said in the past,” acknowledging that at times he “went beyond the policies and idea” and “said some ugly things about President Obama that I regret.”

When asked if he truly believes what he said about Obama, Walsh responded, “God no, and I have apologized for that.”

During the same interview, however, Walsh made a series of personal attacks against President Trump.

“He’s nuts, he’s erratic, he’s cruel, he stokes bigotry,” Walsh said. He accused Trump of not caring about America, saying, “the only thing he cares about is Trump.”

Walsh also cited Trump’s 2016 campaign promise to build a wall along the southern border and to have Mexico pay for it, which has not happened.

“He’s incompetent. He has no freakin’ clue what he’s doing,” Walsh said.

The Trump campaign had far fewer words in response to Walsh’s announcement.

“Whatever,” campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh said to ABC.

Walsh, who served one term in Congress, acknowledged that he has very little chance of defeating the president in the primaries, but said he wants to promote a different direction for the Republican Party. Earlier in August, Walsh published a New York Times op-ed about the need for Trump to face a primary challenge. He said the positive response to the piece inspired his decision to run.

Former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld has previously announced that he is running against Trump in the primaries.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Joe Walsh laments past controversial statements while blasting Trump: ‘He’s a child’

President Trump is defending himself against accusations of racism, claiming he’s just the latest target of a party that plays the “race card,” as he leveled criticism against Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md.

Trump called out Cummings on Saturday, slamming him as a “brutal bully” for how he spoke to border patrol officials, and said that the congressman’s Baltimore district is in “FAR WORSE” shape than the situation at the southern border. That rebuke resulted in claims of racism from Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but Trump pointed out that he’s hardly the first to get accused of racism, with the speaker herself recently in the middle of a similar controversy.

“Someone please explain to Nancy Pelosi, who was recently called racist by those in her own party, that there is nothing wrong with bringing out the very obvious fact that Congressman Elijah Cummings has done a very poor job for his district and the City of Baltimore. Just take a look, the facts speak far louder than words!” Trump tweeted Sunday morning. “The Democrats always play the Race Card, when in fact they have done so little for our Nation’s great African American people,” he added.

The president appeared to be referring to how House Speaker Pelosi was the target of a thinly veiled accusation of racism when Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., accused her of “singling out” women of color. That was after Pelosi dismissed Ocasio-Cortez and her “Squad” — that includes Reps. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley — as being more influential on social media than in Congress. Trump defended Pelosi at the time.

On Saturday, Pelosi stood by Cummings and the city of Baltimore, where she was born, and rebuked Trump, calling his remarks “racist.”

“Rep. Cummings is a champion in the Congress and the country for civil rights and economic justice, a beloved leader in Baltimore, and deeply valued colleague,” she tweeted. “We all reject racist attacks against him and support his steadfast leadership.”

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., also called Trump’s comments “ugly and racist” during a campaign stop on Saturday.

Trump doubled down on his comments against Cummings Saturday afternoon, tweeting, “Elijah Cummings spends all of his time trying to hurt innocent people through ‘Oversight.’ He does NOTHING for his very poor, very dangerous and very badly run district!” The tweet included a video purporting to show a rundown area of West Baltimore.

The video included a female voice lamenting that “they’re worried about the kids at the border, but this is how actual American citizens got to live and deal with,” she added.

Trump tweeted a similar-appearing video late Saturday, asking: “.@RepCummings, why don’t you focus on your district!?”

“Mr. President, I go home to my district daily,” Cummings tweeted in response to Trump’s initial criticism. “Each morning, I wake up, and I go and fight for my neighbors. It is my constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the Executive Branch. But, it is my moral duty to fight for my constituents.”

Trump took another shot at Pelosi Sunday morning, saying her San Francisco district was unrecognizable, and that “Something must be done before it’s too late.”

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Trump throws ‘Squad’ feud back at Pelosi after ‘racist’ accusation: ‘Democrats always play the race card’

Rudy Giuliani pointed the finger squarely at New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio after videos surfaced Monday of people attacking NYPD officers by dousing them with water, saying this “would never happen in a million years when I was mayor of New York City.”

Footage shows separate incidents of people in Harlem and Brooklyn using buckets to splash and dump water over uniformed officers, as the cops calmly walk away. De Blasio condemned the acts as “Completely unacceptable,” and said, “We won’t tolerate this kind of disrespect.” Still, former mayor Giuliani believes the 2020 presidential candidate is part of the problem.

“This is what happens with knee-jerk disrespect for police. It will only get worse until these Left wing idiots are defeated,” Giuliani tweeted Tuesday morning, saying the current “disrespect for the uniform” is the “result of a Democrat-Progressive (Retrogressive)-Socialist Mayor.”

The former mayor had even stronger words Monday night on “The Ingraham Angle,” saying de Blasio was “absolutely destroying the quality of life in this city.”

Giuliani has criticized the mayor in the past over the increase in homelessness in New York City under de Blasio’s administration. Giuliani was known for reducing the number of people living on the streets.

“He’s a disgrace, and even Democrats don’t support him and are embarrassed of him,” Giuliani added, perhaps a reference to de Blasio’s low poll numbers as he campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Mayor de Blasio responded Tuesday afternoon, claiming that Giuliani is at least partly responsible for the tension between police and community members.

“The truth is crime’s NEVER been lower in New York City and that’s because we’re bridging the divide between police and communities — a divide @RudyGiuliani helped create,” de Blasio tweeted.

New York City Police Benevolent Association President Patrick J. Lynch also called out the city’s leadership after the videos went viral.

“Our anti-cop lawmakers have gotten their wish: the NYPD is now frozen. It’s not the fault of these police officers. It’s the end result of the torrent of bad policies and anti-police rhetoric that has been streaming out of City Hall and Albany for years now,” Lynch said in a statement, adding, “Disorder controls the streets, and our elected leaders refuse to allow us to take them back.”

In one of the videos, someone could be seen throwing a bucket at an officer, hitting him in the head as he appeared to be in the middle of an arrest.

Giuliani warned that crime would not decrease as long as officers are in this environment.

“The way you reduce crime is to have police officers with high morale,” he said. “That uniform should be respected.”

NYPD Chief of Department Terence Monahan called the acts “reprehensible” and said officers do “remarkable” work and that the department has their back.

“Use your discretion — make arrests when necessary — and know that you have our support and full confidence,” he said.

Chief of Patrol Rodney Harrison also expressed support for the officers, saying they “have the difficult job of protecting their communities and will not be disrespected while doing so.”

“Although the police department is working on building relationships with the community, there is a line that cannot be crossed,” he said.

Author: Ronn Blitzer

Source: Fox News: Giuliani shreds de Blasio over videos of NYPD officers doused with water: ‘He’s a disgrace’

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!