September 9, 2018, 9:51 AM
Bob Woodward: "People better wake up to what's going on" in the Oval Office
Watergate journalist Bob Woodward made headlines once again this past week, with his new book about the Trump White House, entitled "Fear." This morning, in his first TV interview, Woodward paints a picture for our David Martin of an administration in disarray:
"You look at the operation of this White House and you have to say, 'Let's hope to God we don't have a crisis,'" said Bob Woodward.
For the Washington Post reporter, that is the bottom line to all the jaw-dropping chaos and discord described in his new book, "Fear: Trump in the White House" (published by Simon & Schuster, a division of CBS).
"People who work for him are worried ... that he will sign things or give orders that threaten the national security or the financial security of the country, or of the world," Woodward said.
Aides like then-Chief Economic Adviser Gary Cohn and White House Staff Secretary Rob Porter literally stole documents off the president's desk in the Oval Office, such as a letter terminating a trade agreement with South Korea, so that, Woodward explained, Mr. Trump could not sign them: "Because they realized that this would endanger the country."
Martin asked, "How'd they get away with that?"
"[Trump] doesn't remember. If it's not on his desk, if it's not immediately available for action, it goes away."
Unelected officials like Cohn and Porter intentionally thwarting the actions of the elected president – the exact reverse of what a White House staff is supposed to do.
Going back to Richard Nixon and Watergate, this is the ninth White House Woodward has covered. "In the eight others," he said, "I never heard of people on the staff in the White House engaging in that kind of extreme action."
In Woodward's telling, President Trump does not see America as the indispensable nation; he sees it as an international sucker taken advantage of by allies and trading partners. He complained his advisors "don't know anything about business. All they want to is protect everybody … that we pay for."
According to Woodward, the president is obsessed by the fact that the U.S. pays $3.5 billion a year to station troops in South Korea as a first line of defense against the North. "I don't know why they're there," he said at one meeting. "Let's bring them all home." At another meeting, Secretary of Defense James Mattis starkly why the U.S. has 28,000 troops in Korea: "We're doing this in order to prevent World War III."
"The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea." - President Trump at the United Nation, Sept. 19, 2017
The standoff with North Korea has been eased, for the moment, by the Singapore Summit, which brought together two leaders who had been trading nuclear threats and schoolyard insults.
Trump: "'Rocket Man' is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime."
The president later made that "Little Rocket Man" on Twitter, which he told Rob Porter "may be my best ever." When Porter asked if it might provoke Kim, according to Woodward, the president replied, "It's leader versus leader, man versus man, me versus Kim."
The most dangerous moment of the standoff, Woodward says, came when the president went to work on another tweet: "He drafts a tweet saying 'We are going to pull out dependents from South Korea ... Family members of the 28,000 people there.'"
That tweet was never sent, because of a back channel message from North Korea that it would regard a pullout of dependents as a sign the U.S. was preparing to attack. "At that moment there was a sense of profound alarm in the Pentagon leadership that, 'My God, one tweet and we have reliable information that the North Koreans are going to read this as an attack is imminent,'" Woodward said.
The president surrounded himself with generals – active duty and retired – all of whom had served in Afghanistan. But before he decided on a new Afghan strategy, he insisted on meeting with enlisted men who had served there as well. In a meeting the next day, he lashed out at the generals: "I don't care about you guys," he said to Mattis, Joint Chiefs Chairman General Joseph Dunford, and then-National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. "'The soldiers on the ground could run things much better than you,' he says to Mattis and Dunford, and there is a 25-minute dressing down of the generals and senior officials," said Woodward.
In a recent tweet, the president acknowledged: "I'm tough as hell on people and if I weren't nothing would get done."
When he didn't like a trade deal Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had negotiated with China, the president lit into him at a White House meeting: "It's a terrible deal. We got screwed. ... You're past your prime. You're not a good negotiator anymore. ... you've lost it. I don't trust you."
When Economic Adviser Gary Cohn was upset over the president's reluctance to condemn white supremacists for the violence in Charlottesville he went into the Oval Office to resign. According to Woodward, "Trump said, 'You can't resign. I need you to do tax reform. If you leave, this is treason.' And Trump talked him out of resigning."
Afterwards, Chief of Staff John Kelly, who had been in the room, pulled Cohn aside: "Cohn wrote this down, quote from General Kelly: 'If that was me I would have taken that resignation letter and shoved it up his *** six different times.'"
bob-woodward-interviewed-by-david-martin-620.jpg
Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward, interviewed by CBS News' David Martin. CBS NEWS
The president has been bracing for Woodward's book since last month when the two lamented – or at least pretended to lament – that they had not talked.
Woodward recorded the phone conversation, with the president's permission:
Trump: "It's really too bad because nobody told me about it, and I would've loved to have spoken to you. You know I'm very open to you. I think you've always been fair."
Woodward: "It's a tough look at the world and your administration and you."
Trump: "Right. Well, I assume that means it's going to be a negative book. ... That's all right. Some are good and some are bad. Sounds like this is going to be a bad one."
Last week, when the contents of "Fear" began to leak ahead of its scheduled publication, the president said it was worse than bad. "The book is a work of fiction," Mr. Trump argued. "If you look back at Woodward's past, he had the same problem with other presidents. He likes to get publicity, sell some books."
Martin said, "He's added 'fake books' to his complaints about 'fake news.' Are you ready for a tweetstorm directed at you?"
"I've been there before," Woodward replied.
In the 1970s Woodward's stories (written with Carl Bernstein) on Richard Nixon and Watergate were repeatedly denounced (Press Secretary Ron Ziegler said, "We respect the free press, I respect the free press; I don't respect the type of journalism, the shabby journalism that is being practiced by the Washington Post"), until the White House was forced to apologize.
Working on this book, Woodward says he went back to the days of his youth when he and Bernstein made late-night visits to the homes of potential sources.
Woodward recalled, "In one case I called somebody at 11 o'clock at night and said I'd like to talk. 'Yeah, yeah, yeah. We'll get to it.' And I said, 'Well, how about now?' And he said, 'Now? It's 11 at night!' And I said, 'I'm four minutes away.' 'Okay, come on over for a while.'"
He doesn't identify his sources, but most readers will conclude he talked to both Gary Cohn and Rob Porter, along with several other White House officials who quit or were fired.
Martin said, "The criticism would be, 'You've talked to the people who have an axe to grind against the president.'"
"Well, that's just not true," he replied. "Look, I talked to dozens and dozens of people, and have notes and documentation on lots of things."
Woodward quotes harsh criticism of the president from some of his closest advisers. Chief of Staff Kelly called his boss an "idiot." Secretary of Defense Mattis said the commander-in-chief acted like, and had the understanding of, "a fifth- or sixth-grader." Both men have denied saying such things.
And the president continues to denounce the book at every turn. At a rally Friday night Mr. Trump said, "These guys that write books and they put phony quotes out all over the – totally phony quotes. I mean, totally, like, fraudulent books. They're, like, fraudulent books!"
Martin asked, "He says the quotes are just not the way he speaks and the quotes are fabricated. What do you say to that?"
Woodward said, "He's wrong, and my reporting is meticulous and careful."
In a second interview with CBS' "Sunday Morning," Woodward said he had multiple sources for every claim in the book: "Multiple interviews with key witnesses. One person I interviewed nine times, and the transcripts of those conversations are 700 or 800 pages."
"700-800 pages for one person?"
"Yes, sir."
"How many people did you interview?"
"Over a hundred. I would say that maybe half of those are key people."
The theme of Woodward's book – that aides fear what the president might do if allowed to follow his impulses – received an unusual confirmation last week, when The New York Times published an anonymous article written by a person described as "a senior official in the Trump administration." "I work for the president, but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations," he or she wrote.
When asked if he knows the author's identity, Woodward said, "I have no idea who it is. It's very important, who it is. It's very important whether this is somebody who witnessed and participated. And quite frankly, if there was a person in the White House or the administration who wanted to tell me what's in that op-ed piece, I would say, 'Okay, name me who was there. What is the specific incident?' As you know, from having read my book, the dates and times and participants [are documented]."
He said that without that detail on the op-ed author's story, "I wouldn't have used it."
"Too vague?" asked Martin.
"Well, too vague, and does not meet the standards of trying to describe specific incidents. Specific incidents are the building blocks of journalism, as you well know."
"Fear: Trump in the White House" is Woodward's 19th book, and he says reporting it took him deeper inside a working White House than he's ever been before.
"This one was in the belly of the beast," he said.
Martin asked, "And what did you conclude about the beast?"
"That people better wake up to what's going on."
Sunday, September 9, 2018
Trump cuts $25 million in aid for Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals - Reuters
SEPTEMBER 9, 2018 / 2:39 AM / UPDATED 19 HOURS AGO
Trump cuts $25 million in aid for Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump has ordered that $25 million earmarked for the care of Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals be directed elsewhere as part of a review of aid, a State Department official said on Saturday.
Trump called for a review of U.S. assistance to the Palestinians earlier this year to ensure that the funds were being spent in accordance with national interests and were providing value to taxpayers.
“As a result of that review, at the direction of the President, we will be redirecting approximately $25 million originally planned for the East Jerusalem Hospital Network,” the State Department official said. “Those funds will go to high-priority projects elsewhere.”
The aid cut is the latest in a number of actions by the Trump administration that have alienated the Palestinians, including the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv.
That move reversed longtime U.S. policy and led Palestinian leadership to boycott Washington peace efforts led by Jared Kushner, Trump’s senior adviser and son-in-law.
Last month, the Trump administration said it would redirect $200 million in Palestinian economic support funds for programs in the West Bank and Gaza.
And at the end of August, the Trump administration halted all funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), a decision that further heightened tensions with the Palestinian leadership.
Palestinian refugees have reacted with dismay to the funding cuts, warning they would lead to more poverty, anger and instability in the Middle East.
A statement from the Palestinian Foreign Ministry said the latest aid cut was part of a U.S. attempt “to liquidate the Palestinian cause” and said it would threaten the lives of thousands of Palestinians and the livelihoods of thousands of hospital employees.
“This dangerous and unjustified American escalation has crossed all red lines and is considered a direct aggression against the Palestinian people,” it said.
At the gates of two of the East Jerusalem hospitals affected, medical staff were aware of the decision but refused to comment.
One of the centers, Al Makassed Islamic Charitable Society Hospital, said in statement the U.S. aid cuts come as the “hospital is going through a suffocating crisis as a result of the lack of flow of financial aid, and the piling up of debts and funds held back by the Palestinian government”.
It said it had received 45 million shekels ($12.5 million) of the U.S. money to treat patients from the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. In the statement hospital CEO Dr. Bassam Abu Libdeh “questioned the justification behind mixing political issues with medical and humanitarian issues.”
The last round of U.S.-brokered Palestinian-Israeli peace talks collapsed in 2014.
Reporting by David Brunnstrom in Washington; Additional reporting by Ali Sawafta in Ramallah and Maayan Lubell and Stephen Farrell in Jerusalem; editing by Paul Simao and Jason Neely
Trump cuts $25 million in aid for Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump has ordered that $25 million earmarked for the care of Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals be directed elsewhere as part of a review of aid, a State Department official said on Saturday.
Trump called for a review of U.S. assistance to the Palestinians earlier this year to ensure that the funds were being spent in accordance with national interests and were providing value to taxpayers.
“As a result of that review, at the direction of the President, we will be redirecting approximately $25 million originally planned for the East Jerusalem Hospital Network,” the State Department official said. “Those funds will go to high-priority projects elsewhere.”
The aid cut is the latest in a number of actions by the Trump administration that have alienated the Palestinians, including the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv.
That move reversed longtime U.S. policy and led Palestinian leadership to boycott Washington peace efforts led by Jared Kushner, Trump’s senior adviser and son-in-law.
Last month, the Trump administration said it would redirect $200 million in Palestinian economic support funds for programs in the West Bank and Gaza.
And at the end of August, the Trump administration halted all funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), a decision that further heightened tensions with the Palestinian leadership.
Palestinian refugees have reacted with dismay to the funding cuts, warning they would lead to more poverty, anger and instability in the Middle East.
A statement from the Palestinian Foreign Ministry said the latest aid cut was part of a U.S. attempt “to liquidate the Palestinian cause” and said it would threaten the lives of thousands of Palestinians and the livelihoods of thousands of hospital employees.
“This dangerous and unjustified American escalation has crossed all red lines and is considered a direct aggression against the Palestinian people,” it said.
At the gates of two of the East Jerusalem hospitals affected, medical staff were aware of the decision but refused to comment.
One of the centers, Al Makassed Islamic Charitable Society Hospital, said in statement the U.S. aid cuts come as the “hospital is going through a suffocating crisis as a result of the lack of flow of financial aid, and the piling up of debts and funds held back by the Palestinian government”.
It said it had received 45 million shekels ($12.5 million) of the U.S. money to treat patients from the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. In the statement hospital CEO Dr. Bassam Abu Libdeh “questioned the justification behind mixing political issues with medical and humanitarian issues.”
The last round of U.S.-brokered Palestinian-Israeli peace talks collapsed in 2014.
Reporting by David Brunnstrom in Washington; Additional reporting by Ali Sawafta in Ramallah and Maayan Lubell and Stephen Farrell in Jerusalem; editing by Paul Simao and Jason Neely
Trump Falsely Claims He’s Saving Medicare and Social Security, Which He Says Democrats Are ‘Killing’ - New York Times
Trump Falsely Claims He’s Saving Medicare and Social Security, Which He Says Democrats Are ‘Killing’
President Trump has accused Democrats of trying to “raid,” “rob” or “hurt” Medicare and Social Security, while suggesting he has made both programs “stronger.” Neither claim is true.
Linda Qiu
By Linda Qiu
Sept. 7, 2018
WHAT WAS SAID
“They're going to hurt your Social Security so badly, and they're killing you on Medicare. Just remember that. I'm going to protect your Social Security. We're going to take care of your Social Security. We’re going to take care of your Social Security. Matt Rosendale is going to make sure we’re not touching your Social Security and your Medicare is only going one way. That’s stronger. They’re going to end up taking it away from you, and you won’t even know what happened.”
— President Trump, at a campaign rally on Thursday in Montana for Mr. Rosendale, the Republican state auditor who is running for Senate.
“The Democrats will destroy Social Security. We’re saving Medicare. The Democrats want to destroy Medicare. If you look at what they’re doing, they’re going to destroy Medicare. And we will save it. We will keep it going. We’re making it stronger. We’re making Social Security stronger.”
— Mr. Trump, in remarks on Wednesday with the emir of Kuwait
THE FACTS
False.
The president is wrong on both claims: that Democrats plan to deplete Medicare and Social Security and that the two society safety nets are “stronger” under his administration.
First, not only has Mr. Trump failed to strengthen Medicare and Social Security, the financial outlook for both trusts has largely worsened. That’s at least partly the result of Mr. Trump’s tax law that is collecting fewer taxes from Americans and, in turn, investing less money into each program.
In June, the government projected that Medicare funds would be depleted by 2026, three years earlier than estimated in 2017. The report noted that less money will flow into the fund because of low wages and lower taxes.
The 2017 tax law also repealed the individual mandate that was required under the Affordable Care Act. That has led to Medicare needing to pay hospitals more money to reimburse costs of health care for a growing number of uninsured people.
Another government report, also released in June, projected that the Social Security’s fund for old-age benefits will run out in 2034. That is one year earlier than estimated in 2017, though the fund has enough money to pay for reduced Social Security benefits for 75 years.
You have 1 free article remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
According to that report, the fund for retirees will suffer reduced income because of both the tax law and the Trump administration’s move to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. (The Social Security’s disability fund, however, gained three years of solvency.)
Second, there is no evidence that Democrats are proposing to cut Social Security, and Mr. Trump is distorting their positions on Medicare.
In its 2016 platform, the Democratic Party vowed to protect and expand Social Security. Legislation introduced by Democrats in the House and Senate has proposed to increase benefits — not “raid,” “destroy” or “hurt” the fund, as Mr. Trump claimed.
The conservative American Enterprise Institute criticized the Democratic proposal for imposing higher taxes, but also noted that it would “make a big dent” in the fund’s deficit.
Mr. Trump — echoed by other Republicans — has also argued that “Medicare for all” proposals, championed by left-leaning Democrats, would “rob seniors of their Medicare benefits.”
That would happen if the expansion would be funded solely by existing funds. However, the Democratic proposals call for new taxes to pay for expanded Medicare coverage and benefits.
Nothing in “Medicare for all” bills in the Senate or the House would reduce benefits or cut dollars from the program; in fact, current beneficiaries would receive more coverage for lower costs. For example, under legislation from Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, “Medicare for all” would also cover dental and vision care and hearing aids.
To be sure, it is reasonable to argue that “Medicare for all” would be too costly, or would reduce payments to doctors and hospitals.
“But the claim that it would damage Medicare is nonsense,” said Jonathan Oberlander, a professor of health policy and expert on Medicare at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
“Ironically, Republicans are using this line of attack against ‘Medicare for all’ for the same reason that Democrats are framing their health reform vision as building on Medicare — Medicare is popular,” Mr. Oberlander said.
A spokesman for the Democratic National Committee called Mr. Trump’s statements “absurd” and accused the president of trying to cut Social Security and Medicare. The White House did not respond to requests for evidence for Mr. Trump’s claims.
Source: 2018 Annual Report from Social Security Trustees, 2018 Annual Report from Medicare Trustees, American Enterprise Institute, Daniel Wessel of the Democratic National Committee, Andrew Briggs of the American Enterprise Institute, Jonathan Oberlander, Gerald Friedman
Sign Up for the Morning Briefing
Get what you need to know to start your day in the United States, Canada and the Americas, delivered to your inbox.
Linda Qiu is a fact-check reporter, based in Washington. She came to the Times in 2017 from the fact-checking service PolitiFact. @ylindaqiu
President Trump has accused Democrats of trying to “raid,” “rob” or “hurt” Medicare and Social Security, while suggesting he has made both programs “stronger.” Neither claim is true.
Linda Qiu
By Linda Qiu
Sept. 7, 2018
WHAT WAS SAID
“They're going to hurt your Social Security so badly, and they're killing you on Medicare. Just remember that. I'm going to protect your Social Security. We're going to take care of your Social Security. We’re going to take care of your Social Security. Matt Rosendale is going to make sure we’re not touching your Social Security and your Medicare is only going one way. That’s stronger. They’re going to end up taking it away from you, and you won’t even know what happened.”
— President Trump, at a campaign rally on Thursday in Montana for Mr. Rosendale, the Republican state auditor who is running for Senate.
“The Democrats will destroy Social Security. We’re saving Medicare. The Democrats want to destroy Medicare. If you look at what they’re doing, they’re going to destroy Medicare. And we will save it. We will keep it going. We’re making it stronger. We’re making Social Security stronger.”
— Mr. Trump, in remarks on Wednesday with the emir of Kuwait
THE FACTS
False.
The president is wrong on both claims: that Democrats plan to deplete Medicare and Social Security and that the two society safety nets are “stronger” under his administration.
First, not only has Mr. Trump failed to strengthen Medicare and Social Security, the financial outlook for both trusts has largely worsened. That’s at least partly the result of Mr. Trump’s tax law that is collecting fewer taxes from Americans and, in turn, investing less money into each program.
In June, the government projected that Medicare funds would be depleted by 2026, three years earlier than estimated in 2017. The report noted that less money will flow into the fund because of low wages and lower taxes.
The 2017 tax law also repealed the individual mandate that was required under the Affordable Care Act. That has led to Medicare needing to pay hospitals more money to reimburse costs of health care for a growing number of uninsured people.
Another government report, also released in June, projected that the Social Security’s fund for old-age benefits will run out in 2034. That is one year earlier than estimated in 2017, though the fund has enough money to pay for reduced Social Security benefits for 75 years.
You have 1 free article remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
According to that report, the fund for retirees will suffer reduced income because of both the tax law and the Trump administration’s move to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. (The Social Security’s disability fund, however, gained three years of solvency.)
Second, there is no evidence that Democrats are proposing to cut Social Security, and Mr. Trump is distorting their positions on Medicare.
In its 2016 platform, the Democratic Party vowed to protect and expand Social Security. Legislation introduced by Democrats in the House and Senate has proposed to increase benefits — not “raid,” “destroy” or “hurt” the fund, as Mr. Trump claimed.
The conservative American Enterprise Institute criticized the Democratic proposal for imposing higher taxes, but also noted that it would “make a big dent” in the fund’s deficit.
Mr. Trump — echoed by other Republicans — has also argued that “Medicare for all” proposals, championed by left-leaning Democrats, would “rob seniors of their Medicare benefits.”
That would happen if the expansion would be funded solely by existing funds. However, the Democratic proposals call for new taxes to pay for expanded Medicare coverage and benefits.
Nothing in “Medicare for all” bills in the Senate or the House would reduce benefits or cut dollars from the program; in fact, current beneficiaries would receive more coverage for lower costs. For example, under legislation from Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, “Medicare for all” would also cover dental and vision care and hearing aids.
To be sure, it is reasonable to argue that “Medicare for all” would be too costly, or would reduce payments to doctors and hospitals.
“But the claim that it would damage Medicare is nonsense,” said Jonathan Oberlander, a professor of health policy and expert on Medicare at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
“Ironically, Republicans are using this line of attack against ‘Medicare for all’ for the same reason that Democrats are framing their health reform vision as building on Medicare — Medicare is popular,” Mr. Oberlander said.
A spokesman for the Democratic National Committee called Mr. Trump’s statements “absurd” and accused the president of trying to cut Social Security and Medicare. The White House did not respond to requests for evidence for Mr. Trump’s claims.
Source: 2018 Annual Report from Social Security Trustees, 2018 Annual Report from Medicare Trustees, American Enterprise Institute, Daniel Wessel of the Democratic National Committee, Andrew Briggs of the American Enterprise Institute, Jonathan Oberlander, Gerald Friedman
Sign Up for the Morning Briefing
Get what you need to know to start your day in the United States, Canada and the Americas, delivered to your inbox.
Linda Qiu is a fact-check reporter, based in Washington. She came to the Times in 2017 from the fact-checking service PolitiFact. @ylindaqiu
President Trump Says Apple Can Avoid Tariff Consequences by Opening U.S. Plants - TIME
President Trump Says Apple Can Avoid Tariff Consequences by Opening U.S. Plants
Posted: 08 Sep 2018 12:34 PM PDT
President Donald Trump concedes that some Apple Inc. products may become more expensive if his administration imposes “massive” additional tariffs on Chinese-made goods, but he says the tech company can fix the problem by moving production to the U.S.
“Start building new plants now. Exciting!” Trump said Saturday in a tweet aimed at the Cupertino, California-based company.
This week, Apple said that a proposed new round of $200 billion in additional tariffs on Chinese imports would raise prices on some of its products, including the Apple Watch and the Mac mini.
The company is highly exposed to a trade war between the U.S. and China. It makes many of its products for the U.S. market in China, and it also sells gadgets including the iPhone in China, making them a potential target for Chinese retaliation against the Trump tariffs.
Trump tweeted Saturday that “Apple prices may increase because of the massive Tariffs we may be imposing on China — but there is an easy solution where there would be ZERO tax, and indeed a tax incentive,” if the company made its products in the U.S. instead of China.
Apple prices may increase because of the massive Tariffs we may be imposing on China – but there is an easy solution where there would be ZERO tax, and indeed a tax incentive. Make your products in the United States instead of China. Start building new plants now. Exciting! #MAGA
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 8, 2018
Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The company has not announced plans to move manufacturing from China to the U.S.
In its letter this week to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Apple said that “because all tariffs ultimately show up as a tax on US consumers, they will increase the cost of Apple products that our customers have come to rely on in their daily lives.”
The company said tariffs would hit “a wide range of Apple products,” including computers, watches, adapters, chargers and tools used in its U.S. manufacturing, repair and data centers. Apple said the tariffs would raise the cost of its U.S. operations and put it at a disadvantage to foreign rivals.
The White House has accused China of stealing U.S. intellectual property and forcing American companies to share their technology with Chinese companies. The tariffs would pressure China to stop that behavior, the administration has said. Apple said “it is difficult to see” how tariffs would advance the government’s goal.
The presidential tweet is the latest salvo in a dispute between the Trump administration and companies that fear tariffs will hurt their business.
The Trump administration has imposed tariffs of $50 billion on imports from China, mostly equipment and material used by manufacturers. CEO Tim Cook said in July that those measures had no effect on Apple. The company is concerned, however, about the Trump administration’s proposal to add 25 percent duties on another $200 billion in Chinese goods, including a wider assortment of consumer-related items.
Javid warning to Russian spy poisoning suspects - BBC News
Sept. 9, 2018.
Javid warning to Russian spy poisoning suspects
Sajid Javid says the suspects will "probably never" leave Russia
The two suspects in the Salisbury nerve agent attack will be caught and prosecuted if they ever step out of Russia, the home secretary has warned.
Sajid Javid, however, did acknowledge "the reality is we will probably never see them in the UK".
He told the BBC the pair, thought to be from Russia's military intelligence service, the GRU, were acting on orders from the "highest level" in Moscow.
Ex-Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned in March.
The suspects are understood to have travelled to the UK from Moscow on 2 March on Russian passports, under the aliases Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov.
Two days later, police say they sprayed the nerve agent, Novichok, on the front door of Mr Skripal's home in the Wiltshire city of Salisbury, before travelling home to Russia later that day.
The attack left Mr Skripal, 66, and his 33-year-old daughter hospitalised for weeks.
Speaking on BBC One's Andrew Marr show, Mr Javid called it a "sickening and despicable" attack.
It was "unequivocally, crystal clear this was the act of the Russian state - two Russian nationals sent to Britain with the sole purpose of carrying out a reckless assassination attempt," he said.
"f they ever step out of the Russian Federation, Britain and its allies will get them and we will bring them to prosecution," Mr Javid added.
Last week, the UK secured the support of the US, France, Germany and Canada at a UN Security Council meeting, at which they agreed with the UK's assessment that Russia's government "almost certainly" approved the poisoning.
Russia dismissed the UK's evidence as "lies" and accused it of "disgusting anti-Russian hysteria".
Prosecutors cannot apply to Russia for the men to be extradited because Russia does not have extradition agreements with the UK.
However, a European Arrest Warrant has been obtained, should they travel to the EU.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) believes there is enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction".
The home secretary says the suspects will "probably" never return to the UK
Russian spy poisoning: What we know so far
Could suspects be returned to the UK?
Mr Javid said the GRU operated on a "very short leash from the Kremlin".
He described it as a "very well-disciplined organisation" which would "only act with orders from the highest level of the Russian government".
Mr Javid stopped short of naming President Vladimir Putin as being behind the orders but said "we all know what's at the top of the Russian government".
He went on to say that the UK had "considerable powers" to respond to Russia.
"We will bring all those powers, both overt and covert, to bear on Russia and what it represents today."
Javid warning to Russian spy poisoning suspects
Sajid Javid says the suspects will "probably never" leave Russia
The two suspects in the Salisbury nerve agent attack will be caught and prosecuted if they ever step out of Russia, the home secretary has warned.
Sajid Javid, however, did acknowledge "the reality is we will probably never see them in the UK".
He told the BBC the pair, thought to be from Russia's military intelligence service, the GRU, were acting on orders from the "highest level" in Moscow.
Ex-Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned in March.
The suspects are understood to have travelled to the UK from Moscow on 2 March on Russian passports, under the aliases Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov.
Two days later, police say they sprayed the nerve agent, Novichok, on the front door of Mr Skripal's home in the Wiltshire city of Salisbury, before travelling home to Russia later that day.
The attack left Mr Skripal, 66, and his 33-year-old daughter hospitalised for weeks.
Speaking on BBC One's Andrew Marr show, Mr Javid called it a "sickening and despicable" attack.
It was "unequivocally, crystal clear this was the act of the Russian state - two Russian nationals sent to Britain with the sole purpose of carrying out a reckless assassination attempt," he said.
"f they ever step out of the Russian Federation, Britain and its allies will get them and we will bring them to prosecution," Mr Javid added.
Last week, the UK secured the support of the US, France, Germany and Canada at a UN Security Council meeting, at which they agreed with the UK's assessment that Russia's government "almost certainly" approved the poisoning.
Russia dismissed the UK's evidence as "lies" and accused it of "disgusting anti-Russian hysteria".
Prosecutors cannot apply to Russia for the men to be extradited because Russia does not have extradition agreements with the UK.
However, a European Arrest Warrant has been obtained, should they travel to the EU.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) believes there is enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction".
The home secretary says the suspects will "probably" never return to the UK
Russian spy poisoning: What we know so far
Could suspects be returned to the UK?
Mr Javid said the GRU operated on a "very short leash from the Kremlin".
He described it as a "very well-disciplined organisation" which would "only act with orders from the highest level of the Russian government".
Mr Javid stopped short of naming President Vladimir Putin as being behind the orders but said "we all know what's at the top of the Russian government".
He went on to say that the UK had "considerable powers" to respond to Russia.
"We will bring all those powers, both overt and covert, to bear on Russia and what it represents today."
North Korea holds parade without ballistic missiles, reports say - BBC News
Sept. 9, 2018.
North Korea holds parade without ballistic missiles, reports say
The anniversary parade showed off North Korea's military strength
North Korea did not display any intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) at a military parade to mark its 70th anniversary, reports say.
It is also unclear whether leader Kim Jong-un made a speech at the event.
The parade is being scrutinised for clues about North Korea's weapons arsenal and professed commitment to denuclearisation.
Some analysts had predicted that Mr Kim would tone down the display after his summit with US President Donald Trump.
A large display of ICBMs - which can reach the US mainland, potentially carrying a nuclear warhead - would have been seen as provocative.
Kim Jong-un's faith in Trump 'unchanged'
Korean reunions: Families divided by war meet in North
Why North Korea is in no hurry to please the US
N Korea 'making missiles' despite US thaw
In June Mr Kim and Mr Trump signed a vague agreement to work towards denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula but it did not include a timeline, details or mechanisms to verify the process.
Kim Jong-un (c) appeared alongside visiting Chinese politican Li Zhanshu
High-level talks and visits have continued but the most recent scheduled trip by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was called off last minute and both sides have blamed each other for the stalling negotiations while insisting they're committed to the progress.
The BBC's Seoul Correspondent Laura Bicker said any show of ICBMs could have put future discussions and any deal to declare an end to the Korean war at risk.
Participants waved flowers as they passed Mr Kim
North Korea was also due to hold its first mass games in five years. The Arirang Mass Games are an elaborate propaganda spectacle with enormous co-ordinated displays.
This year's games, which tell a symbolic story of North Korea's history, are titled The Glorious Country.
Analysis of satellite images from the past two weeks suggest this year's games, which will continue throughout September, are going to be very big.
Jets drew out the number 70 in the sky, to mark the country's 70th anniversary
Past games have featured gigantic stadiums filled with performers, synchronised gymnasts and co-ordinated dance displays.
The colourful displays are likely to be striking but the UN has in the past said that children are forced to take part, or to help in the build-up.
North Korea holds parade without ballistic missiles, reports say
The anniversary parade showed off North Korea's military strength
North Korea did not display any intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) at a military parade to mark its 70th anniversary, reports say.
It is also unclear whether leader Kim Jong-un made a speech at the event.
The parade is being scrutinised for clues about North Korea's weapons arsenal and professed commitment to denuclearisation.
Some analysts had predicted that Mr Kim would tone down the display after his summit with US President Donald Trump.
A large display of ICBMs - which can reach the US mainland, potentially carrying a nuclear warhead - would have been seen as provocative.
Kim Jong-un's faith in Trump 'unchanged'
Korean reunions: Families divided by war meet in North
Why North Korea is in no hurry to please the US
N Korea 'making missiles' despite US thaw
In June Mr Kim and Mr Trump signed a vague agreement to work towards denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula but it did not include a timeline, details or mechanisms to verify the process.
Kim Jong-un (c) appeared alongside visiting Chinese politican Li Zhanshu
High-level talks and visits have continued but the most recent scheduled trip by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was called off last minute and both sides have blamed each other for the stalling negotiations while insisting they're committed to the progress.
The BBC's Seoul Correspondent Laura Bicker said any show of ICBMs could have put future discussions and any deal to declare an end to the Korean war at risk.
Participants waved flowers as they passed Mr Kim
North Korea was also due to hold its first mass games in five years. The Arirang Mass Games are an elaborate propaganda spectacle with enormous co-ordinated displays.
This year's games, which tell a symbolic story of North Korea's history, are titled The Glorious Country.
Analysis of satellite images from the past two weeks suggest this year's games, which will continue throughout September, are going to be very big.
Jets drew out the number 70 in the sky, to mark the country's 70th anniversary
Past games have featured gigantic stadiums filled with performers, synchronised gymnasts and co-ordinated dance displays.
The colourful displays are likely to be striking but the UN has in the past said that children are forced to take part, or to help in the build-up.
Swedish election: Vote begins amid anti-immigration surge - BBC News
Sept. 9, 2018.
Swedish election: Vote begins amid anti-immigration surge
"Either we stay with a decent democracy or we choose another path," the PM said.
The people of Sweden are voting in a general election - where an anti-immigration party is vying to make large gains.
The nationalist Sweden Democrats (SD), which polls suggest have 20% support, are tipped for second place.
Prime Minister Stefan Lofven called the SD a "racist" party as he cast his ballot in Stockholm.
The SD - which has its roots in neo-Nazism - has rebranded itself and says it is inclusive.
Neither the governing Social Democrats nor the main centre-right party, the Moderates, is likely to win a majority.
Immigration has been a central issue of the campaign. The SD doubled its seats in the 2014 election and it is predicted to double them again in this election.
Sweden Democrats tap into immigration fears
Have online bots affected the campaign?
More than a quarter of Sweden's voters were still undecided in the final week of campaigning, according to national polling company Sifo.
"I'm still hesitating between the Moderates and SD. SD is quite close to the Moderates but they're a little more clear in what they want. They're more direct," Elias, an 18-year-old voting in his first election, told AFP news agency.
Immigration and asylum have been major issues in the campaign
On Saturday, SD leader Jimmie Akesson countered that Sweden had been "an extreme country in many ways, not least when it comes to immigration" and that his plan to take in fewer migrants would be regarded as "normal politics in the rest of Europe".
Other European countries have also seen a surge in support for anti-immigration parties in recent years. The Danish People's Party won 21% in 2015, and the far-right Alternative for Germany won 12.6% in 2017.
Who are the Sweden Democrats?
The SD was linked for years to neo-Nazis and other far-right groups, only entering parliament in 2010.
It has been working to rebrand itself, changing its logo from a flaming torch (similar to the one used by the UK far-right National Front) to a blue-and-yellow daisy, the colours of the Swedish flag.
Jimmie Akesson of the Sweden Democrats after Friday's heated party-leader debate
Traditionally appealing to working-class men, it wants to attract more women and higher-income voters.
Mr Akesson, who became leader in 2005, says there is zero tolerance towards racism in the party and several members have been expelled.
However, the party has still been embroiled in various racism scandals.
One municipal candidate shared a song on Facebook with the lyrics "Swedes are white and the country is ours", according to a report in tabloid Aftonbladet.
Last year, some of its ex-members went on to found the far-right Alternative for Sweden (AfS).
What are the key issues?
Sweden's economy is booming but many voters are concerned that housing, healthcare and welfare services have come under pressure from a wave of immigration during the 2015 migrant crisis.
That year Sweden took in a record 163,000 asylum seekers - the highest such intake in the EU, per head of population.
Sweden's traditional parties have since hardened their tone to reflect concerns about integration.
Many voters are also concerned about violence. The SD links a rise in shootings to increased immigration, although official figures show no correlation.
Is Malmo the 'rape capital' of Europe?
The SD also wants to leave the European Union and has proposed a "Swexit" referendum. However, the powerful centrist parties all oppose such a vote, so it is unlikely to go ahead.
Aside from immigration, climate change is an issue many Swedes care about - particularly after a long, hot summer and severe forest fires.
During the heatwave, around 25,000 hectares of forest burned in wildfires and many farmers were forced to destroy livestock after their pasture land dried up.
Swedish teen's sit-in climate protest
Support for the Green party, which had been struggling after various internal scandals, has crept up across the country.
The Left party is making gains too, from the environmentally concerned and from centre-left voters dissatisfied with the mainstream parties' approach to migration.
Who could be in charge?
Prime Minister Lofven currently heads a minority, centre-left coalition government made up of his Social Democrats and the Green Party.
In recent years there has been a fall in support for the Social Democrats and the largest traditional opposition party, the Moderates.
However, polls suggest that the Social Democrats are narrowly ahead of other parties and may be in a position to lead another minority government.
Both the Social Democrats and the Moderates have said they will not enter a coalition with the SD, however well they perform.
Swedish election: Vote begins amid anti-immigration surge
"Either we stay with a decent democracy or we choose another path," the PM said.
The people of Sweden are voting in a general election - where an anti-immigration party is vying to make large gains.
The nationalist Sweden Democrats (SD), which polls suggest have 20% support, are tipped for second place.
Prime Minister Stefan Lofven called the SD a "racist" party as he cast his ballot in Stockholm.
The SD - which has its roots in neo-Nazism - has rebranded itself and says it is inclusive.
Neither the governing Social Democrats nor the main centre-right party, the Moderates, is likely to win a majority.
Immigration has been a central issue of the campaign. The SD doubled its seats in the 2014 election and it is predicted to double them again in this election.
Sweden Democrats tap into immigration fears
Have online bots affected the campaign?
More than a quarter of Sweden's voters were still undecided in the final week of campaigning, according to national polling company Sifo.
"I'm still hesitating between the Moderates and SD. SD is quite close to the Moderates but they're a little more clear in what they want. They're more direct," Elias, an 18-year-old voting in his first election, told AFP news agency.
Immigration and asylum have been major issues in the campaign
On Saturday, SD leader Jimmie Akesson countered that Sweden had been "an extreme country in many ways, not least when it comes to immigration" and that his plan to take in fewer migrants would be regarded as "normal politics in the rest of Europe".
Other European countries have also seen a surge in support for anti-immigration parties in recent years. The Danish People's Party won 21% in 2015, and the far-right Alternative for Germany won 12.6% in 2017.
Who are the Sweden Democrats?
The SD was linked for years to neo-Nazis and other far-right groups, only entering parliament in 2010.
It has been working to rebrand itself, changing its logo from a flaming torch (similar to the one used by the UK far-right National Front) to a blue-and-yellow daisy, the colours of the Swedish flag.
Jimmie Akesson of the Sweden Democrats after Friday's heated party-leader debate
Traditionally appealing to working-class men, it wants to attract more women and higher-income voters.
Mr Akesson, who became leader in 2005, says there is zero tolerance towards racism in the party and several members have been expelled.
However, the party has still been embroiled in various racism scandals.
One municipal candidate shared a song on Facebook with the lyrics "Swedes are white and the country is ours", according to a report in tabloid Aftonbladet.
Last year, some of its ex-members went on to found the far-right Alternative for Sweden (AfS).
What are the key issues?
Sweden's economy is booming but many voters are concerned that housing, healthcare and welfare services have come under pressure from a wave of immigration during the 2015 migrant crisis.
That year Sweden took in a record 163,000 asylum seekers - the highest such intake in the EU, per head of population.
Sweden's traditional parties have since hardened their tone to reflect concerns about integration.
Many voters are also concerned about violence. The SD links a rise in shootings to increased immigration, although official figures show no correlation.
Is Malmo the 'rape capital' of Europe?
The SD also wants to leave the European Union and has proposed a "Swexit" referendum. However, the powerful centrist parties all oppose such a vote, so it is unlikely to go ahead.
Aside from immigration, climate change is an issue many Swedes care about - particularly after a long, hot summer and severe forest fires.
During the heatwave, around 25,000 hectares of forest burned in wildfires and many farmers were forced to destroy livestock after their pasture land dried up.
Swedish teen's sit-in climate protest
Support for the Green party, which had been struggling after various internal scandals, has crept up across the country.
The Left party is making gains too, from the environmentally concerned and from centre-left voters dissatisfied with the mainstream parties' approach to migration.
Who could be in charge?
Prime Minister Lofven currently heads a minority, centre-left coalition government made up of his Social Democrats and the Green Party.
In recent years there has been a fall in support for the Social Democrats and the largest traditional opposition party, the Moderates.
However, polls suggest that the Social Democrats are narrowly ahead of other parties and may be in a position to lead another minority government.
Both the Social Democrats and the Moderates have said they will not enter a coalition with the SD, however well they perform.
Saturday, September 8, 2018
New York Is No Longer the Top City for the Ultra-Rich - Fortune ( source : Bloomberg )
New York Is No Longer the Top City for the Ultra-Rich
This Is Where the Ultra-Rich Live
Ultra-rich means you have $30 million.
By BLOOMBERG September 6, 2018
New York has lost its crown as home to the most ultra-rich people, beaten out by the rising tide of extreme wealth in Asia.
Hong Kong surpassed the Big Apple as the city with the highest population of people worth at least $30 million, according to a new report. The former British colony saw its number of ultra-wealthy increase 31% last year, to about 10,000, research firm Wealth-X found, higher than the nearly 9,000-strong population of the U.S.’s largest city. Tokyo came third, while Paris beat out London to take the European crown as Brexit weighed down the U.K. capital.
The number of ultra-rich worldwide rose 13% last year, according to Wealth-X, totaling about 256,000 people with combined assets of $31.5 trillion. Asia saw the fastest growth, driven by mainland China and Hong Kong, the study’s authors wrote. Reflecting the region’s rise, its share of the global population of people with at least $30 million rose to just over one-fourth, up from around 18% a decade ago.
“Asia-Pacific is forecast to close the ultra-wealth gap with other regions over the next five years, but is expected to remain behind Europe, the Middle East and Africa in absolute terms,” the report’s authors wrote. The number of ultra-wealthy in Asia-Pacific is expected to rise at a compound rate of 8.3% a year, they said.
Women accounted for about 35,000 of the ultra-rich last year, a record-high share of nearly 14%, the study found.
While Hong Kong topped the city rankings, nowhere in mainland China made the top 10, despite the country being third in the list of nations. That’s because China’s wealthy are widely dispersed, illustrated by the fact it was home to 26 of the 30 fastest-growing cities for the ultra-rich.
“The dynamism of wealth creation across China’s vast landscape is nevertheless staggering,” the authors wrote.
Hong Kong’s rise was also a reflection of China’s improving fortunes, with its position at the top of the global list “supported by enhanced trade and investment links with mainland China,” according to the authors.
The relative struggles of commodity markets was a factor in the Middle East posting the weakest global growth in both assets and individuals, rising 4.8% and 4.4%, respectively.
Every region saw gains, however, thanks to last year’s benign markets, the report’s authors wrote.
“Having experienced a roller-coaster ride the previous year, economic and financial markets almost without exception surprised on the upside in 2017,” they said. “On an annual basis, world real GDP expanded at its fastest pace since 2011.”
Still, the ultra-rich held more of their wealth — 35% — in liquid assets such as cash than anything else, the study found. Private holdings accounted for about 32%, while public holdings were 26%. Alternative investments such as real estate, art and yachts made up 6.6% of total assets.
The U.K.’s looming departure from the EU factored into last year’s trends, the study found. Paris’s rise over London — the City of Lights saw a 17% increase in its ultra-wealthy numbers to more than 3,900 individuals — was because London was “hampered in part by Brexit-related uncertainty in U.K. financial markets and across the wider economy,” the authors wrote.
This Is Where the Ultra-Rich Live
Ultra-rich means you have $30 million.
By BLOOMBERG September 6, 2018
New York has lost its crown as home to the most ultra-rich people, beaten out by the rising tide of extreme wealth in Asia.
Hong Kong surpassed the Big Apple as the city with the highest population of people worth at least $30 million, according to a new report. The former British colony saw its number of ultra-wealthy increase 31% last year, to about 10,000, research firm Wealth-X found, higher than the nearly 9,000-strong population of the U.S.’s largest city. Tokyo came third, while Paris beat out London to take the European crown as Brexit weighed down the U.K. capital.
The number of ultra-rich worldwide rose 13% last year, according to Wealth-X, totaling about 256,000 people with combined assets of $31.5 trillion. Asia saw the fastest growth, driven by mainland China and Hong Kong, the study’s authors wrote. Reflecting the region’s rise, its share of the global population of people with at least $30 million rose to just over one-fourth, up from around 18% a decade ago.
“Asia-Pacific is forecast to close the ultra-wealth gap with other regions over the next five years, but is expected to remain behind Europe, the Middle East and Africa in absolute terms,” the report’s authors wrote. The number of ultra-wealthy in Asia-Pacific is expected to rise at a compound rate of 8.3% a year, they said.
Women accounted for about 35,000 of the ultra-rich last year, a record-high share of nearly 14%, the study found.
While Hong Kong topped the city rankings, nowhere in mainland China made the top 10, despite the country being third in the list of nations. That’s because China’s wealthy are widely dispersed, illustrated by the fact it was home to 26 of the 30 fastest-growing cities for the ultra-rich.
“The dynamism of wealth creation across China’s vast landscape is nevertheless staggering,” the authors wrote.
Hong Kong’s rise was also a reflection of China’s improving fortunes, with its position at the top of the global list “supported by enhanced trade and investment links with mainland China,” according to the authors.
The relative struggles of commodity markets was a factor in the Middle East posting the weakest global growth in both assets and individuals, rising 4.8% and 4.4%, respectively.
Every region saw gains, however, thanks to last year’s benign markets, the report’s authors wrote.
“Having experienced a roller-coaster ride the previous year, economic and financial markets almost without exception surprised on the upside in 2017,” they said. “On an annual basis, world real GDP expanded at its fastest pace since 2011.”
Still, the ultra-rich held more of their wealth — 35% — in liquid assets such as cash than anything else, the study found. Private holdings accounted for about 32%, while public holdings were 26%. Alternative investments such as real estate, art and yachts made up 6.6% of total assets.
The U.K.’s looming departure from the EU factored into last year’s trends, the study found. Paris’s rise over London — the City of Lights saw a 17% increase in its ultra-wealthy numbers to more than 3,900 individuals — was because London was “hampered in part by Brexit-related uncertainty in U.K. financial markets and across the wider economy,” the authors wrote.
Former Border Force chief to face Senate grilling over Dutton au pair claims - The Age
Former Border Force chief to face Senate grilling over Dutton au pair claims
David Wroe
By David Wroe
7 September 2018 — 5:36pm
Sacked border security chief Roman Quaedvlieg will be asked to appear before a Senate inquiry to expand on his hotly disputed claim that he was asked to help resolve an au pair visa problem on behalf of a "mate" of Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton.
Mr Quaedvlieg on Friday doubled down on his evidence against Mr Dutton by providing a further written statement to the inquiry to address doubts cast on his original testimony.
The Australian Border Force commissioner - who was sacked in March for helping to get his girlfriend a job on the force - refused to say what additional information he had provided "other than to state unequivocally that the effective substance of my original submission stands".
Mr Quaedvlieg said in written evidence this week that Mr Dutton’s chief of staff Craig Maclachlan phoned him in mid-June 2015 asking for help in freeing from immigration detention a young woman who was going to work as an au pair for "the boss's mate in Brisbane".
But Mr Dutton excoriated this claim as "a fabrication" and "impossible" because Mr Maclachlan did not start working for him until October 7 of that year and therefore could not have made the phone call.
Mr Quaedvlieg has since acknowledged "an anomaly … with the date of the events".
Fairfax Media understands that the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee - which is due to report by Tuesday - will ask the Senate for an extension and will hold an additional public hearing to which Mr Quaedvlieg will be invited.
The controversy centres on Mr Dutton’s use of ministerial discretion powers that allow him to overturn decisions by his department if he believes it is in the national interest.
He has acknowledged using those powers to let two women into the country after they were detained at airports on suspicion of planning to work as au pairs in breach of their visa conditions but maintained he was not motivated by any personal connection to the women or the families with whom they would be staying.
In the June 2015 case, the young Italian woman detained at the airport, Michela Marchisio, was going to stay with the family of Queensland policeman Russell Keag, with whom Mr Dutton worked in the 1990s but says he has not spoken to for about 20 years.
Mr Quaedvlieg’s claim that Mr Maclachlan described the intervention as being on behalf of "the boss's mate" appeared to contradict this.
But Mr Quaedvlieg’s position is now complicated by the fact that his original evidence stated that the case he was asked to help with was definitely Ms Marchisio’s. She arrived and was detained on June 17, 2015, making it difficult to explain how the anomaly can be resolved by a simple correction of dates.
Mr Dutton has said Mr Quaedvlieg has motivated by "bitterness" over his sacking and even suggested the former border chief may need mental health treatment.
Mr Quaedvlieg remains under investigation by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity.
Labor senator Murray Watt, who sits on the committee, acknowledged on ABC radio that Mr Quaedvlieg may have given false evidence but that could only be resolved by further investigation.
"I guess that’s possible but that’s the point of this Senate inquiry and we would really appreciate greater participation by both Mr Quaedvlieg and Mr Dutton in that inquiry," he said. "We have found it impossible to get answers from Mr Dutton’s department to very basic questions about the chain of events that led to these au pairs being released and many other matters."
The other au pair case involved a young French woman who was going to stay with the family of a relative of AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan’s. Mr McLachlan, who is unrelated to Craig Maclachlan, passed on a request for help to Mr Dutton, who intervened and allowed the woman to enter Australia.
David Wroe
By David Wroe
7 September 2018 — 5:36pm
Sacked border security chief Roman Quaedvlieg will be asked to appear before a Senate inquiry to expand on his hotly disputed claim that he was asked to help resolve an au pair visa problem on behalf of a "mate" of Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton.
Mr Quaedvlieg on Friday doubled down on his evidence against Mr Dutton by providing a further written statement to the inquiry to address doubts cast on his original testimony.
The Australian Border Force commissioner - who was sacked in March for helping to get his girlfriend a job on the force - refused to say what additional information he had provided "other than to state unequivocally that the effective substance of my original submission stands".
Mr Quaedvlieg said in written evidence this week that Mr Dutton’s chief of staff Craig Maclachlan phoned him in mid-June 2015 asking for help in freeing from immigration detention a young woman who was going to work as an au pair for "the boss's mate in Brisbane".
But Mr Dutton excoriated this claim as "a fabrication" and "impossible" because Mr Maclachlan did not start working for him until October 7 of that year and therefore could not have made the phone call.
Mr Quaedvlieg has since acknowledged "an anomaly … with the date of the events".
Fairfax Media understands that the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee - which is due to report by Tuesday - will ask the Senate for an extension and will hold an additional public hearing to which Mr Quaedvlieg will be invited.
The controversy centres on Mr Dutton’s use of ministerial discretion powers that allow him to overturn decisions by his department if he believes it is in the national interest.
He has acknowledged using those powers to let two women into the country after they were detained at airports on suspicion of planning to work as au pairs in breach of their visa conditions but maintained he was not motivated by any personal connection to the women or the families with whom they would be staying.
In the June 2015 case, the young Italian woman detained at the airport, Michela Marchisio, was going to stay with the family of Queensland policeman Russell Keag, with whom Mr Dutton worked in the 1990s but says he has not spoken to for about 20 years.
Mr Quaedvlieg’s claim that Mr Maclachlan described the intervention as being on behalf of "the boss's mate" appeared to contradict this.
But Mr Quaedvlieg’s position is now complicated by the fact that his original evidence stated that the case he was asked to help with was definitely Ms Marchisio’s. She arrived and was detained on June 17, 2015, making it difficult to explain how the anomaly can be resolved by a simple correction of dates.
Mr Dutton has said Mr Quaedvlieg has motivated by "bitterness" over his sacking and even suggested the former border chief may need mental health treatment.
Mr Quaedvlieg remains under investigation by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity.
Labor senator Murray Watt, who sits on the committee, acknowledged on ABC radio that Mr Quaedvlieg may have given false evidence but that could only be resolved by further investigation.
"I guess that’s possible but that’s the point of this Senate inquiry and we would really appreciate greater participation by both Mr Quaedvlieg and Mr Dutton in that inquiry," he said. "We have found it impossible to get answers from Mr Dutton’s department to very basic questions about the chain of events that led to these au pairs being released and many other matters."
The other au pair case involved a young French woman who was going to stay with the family of a relative of AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan’s. Mr McLachlan, who is unrelated to Craig Maclachlan, passed on a request for help to Mr Dutton, who intervened and allowed the woman to enter Australia.
Elon Musk Smokes Marijuana in His First Appearance Since Tweet About Taking Tesla Public - TIME
Elon Musk Smokes Marijuana in His First Appearance Since Tweet About Taking Tesla Public
Posted: 07 Sep 2018 04:12 AM PDT
Elon Musk sipped whiskey and smoked marijuana during a 2 1/2-hour podcast with California comedian Joe Rogan that touched upon everything from flame throwers and artificial intelligence to the end of the universe.
“I’m not a regular smoker of weed,” the Tesla Inc. chief executive officer said late Thursday on the podcast, which was shown live on the internet. Musk, 47, took one drag from what Rogan described as a joint containing tobacco mixed with marijuana, which is legal in California.
A Tesla spokesperson in Germany wasn’t immediately available to comment. Shares of the carmaker fell 1.4 percent in trading before U.S. exchanges opened.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk smoked weed during a live interview with comedian Joe Rogan https://t.co/Dim9ecYctj pic.twitter.com/PhnvRK9cru
— TicToc by Bloomberg (@tictoc) September 7, 2018
The spot on one of the most popular podcasts in the U.S. marks Musk’s first appearance in a public forum since he stunned the financial world last month with his short-lived effort to take Tesla private. Just 17 days after tweeting that he had the funding and investor support secured to buy out some stockholders at $420 a share, the billionaire scrapped the idea without having made a formal proposal to the board.
Along the way, Musk drew a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission, which already had been scrutinizing the public pronouncements he’s made regarding manufacturing goals and sales targets. Tesla and its CEO are now also facing a litany of lawsuits claiming market manipulation, including one filed Thursday by Andrew Left, the founder of Citron Research and prominent short seller.
The episode also raised concern about Musk’s health. The chairman and CEO of both Tesla and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., among other companies, gave an emotional interview to the New York Times in which he said friends were worried about exhaustion. The newspaper said two people familiar with the electric-car maker’s board expressed concern about his workload and use of the prescription sleeping drug Ambien.
Good times with @JoeRogan …https://t.co/8uZUsEJoq1
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2018
The bewildering incidents have played out during a critical period for Tesla. The Palo Alto, California-based company faces concerns about its limited cash balance, maturing debt and struggle to steadily build high volumes of the Model 3 sedan, the first electric vehicle that Musk has attempted to mass-manufacture.
Musk told Rogan that running Tesla is the hardest of his several endeavors. “It’s very difficult to keep a car company alive,” Musk said.
Musk is also the founder of the tunneling startup Boring Co., plus Neuralink, which is developing brain-machine interfaces to connect humans and computers. Neuralink may have something interesting to announce in a few months, Musk told Rogan.
Trump says has tariffs ready for further $267 billion worth of Chinese imports - Reuters
SEPTEMBER 8, 2018 / 2:31 AM / UPDATED 17 HOURS AGO
Trump says has tariffs ready for further $267 billion worth of Chinese imports
ABORAD AIR FORCE ONE (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that he has tariffs ready to go on a further $267 billion worth of Chinese imports, as the world awaits his decision on imposing levies on $200 billion worth of the Asian nation’s goods.
“The $200 billion we are talking about could take place very soon depending on what happens with them. To a certain extent its going to be up to China, Trump said. “And I hate to say this, but behind that is another $267 billion ready to go on short notice if I want. That changes the equation.”
Earlier on Friday White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Trump will not make any decisions on his threatened tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods before officials evaluate public comments on them. The U.S. Trade Representative’s office received nearly 6,000 comments during the public comment period on the proposed levies, which ended Thursday night.
Trump threatens tariffs on nearly all China imports
Reporting by Steve Holland; Writing by Lisa Lambert; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama
Trump says has tariffs ready for further $267 billion worth of Chinese imports
ABORAD AIR FORCE ONE (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that he has tariffs ready to go on a further $267 billion worth of Chinese imports, as the world awaits his decision on imposing levies on $200 billion worth of the Asian nation’s goods.
“The $200 billion we are talking about could take place very soon depending on what happens with them. To a certain extent its going to be up to China, Trump said. “And I hate to say this, but behind that is another $267 billion ready to go on short notice if I want. That changes the equation.”
Earlier on Friday White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Trump will not make any decisions on his threatened tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods before officials evaluate public comments on them. The U.S. Trade Representative’s office received nearly 6,000 comments during the public comment period on the proposed levies, which ended Thursday night.
Trump threatens tariffs on nearly all China imports
Reporting by Steve Holland; Writing by Lisa Lambert; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama
China's August trade surplus with U.S. widens to record $31 billion - Reuters
SEPTEMBER 8, 2018 / 3:17 PM / UPDATED 5 HOURS AGO
China's August trade surplus with U.S. widens to record $31 billion
BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s politically charged trade surplus with the United States widened to a record $31.05 billion in August, compared with $28.09 billion in July, customs data showed on Saturday.
The August surplus with the U.S. was larger than China’s overall surplus of $27.91 billion for the month.
For January-August, China’s trade surplus with the United States was $192.64 billion, compared with about $167.94 billion in the same period last year.
China’s large trade surplus with the United States has long been a sore point in relations and is at the center of an increasing bitter dispute between the world’s two biggest economies.
Beijing and Washington have slapped each other with tit-for-tat tariffs in recent months and threatened more duties on each other’s goods. Talks aimed at easing tensions have yielded no major breakthroughs and both sides look to be digging in for a long fight that could weigh on global growth.
Reporting by Elias Glenn and Xu Jing
China's August trade surplus with U.S. widens to record $31 billion
BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s politically charged trade surplus with the United States widened to a record $31.05 billion in August, compared with $28.09 billion in July, customs data showed on Saturday.
The August surplus with the U.S. was larger than China’s overall surplus of $27.91 billion for the month.
For January-August, China’s trade surplus with the United States was $192.64 billion, compared with about $167.94 billion in the same period last year.
China’s large trade surplus with the United States has long been a sore point in relations and is at the center of an increasing bitter dispute between the world’s two biggest economies.
Beijing and Washington have slapped each other with tit-for-tat tariffs in recent months and threatened more duties on each other’s goods. Talks aimed at easing tensions have yielded no major breakthroughs and both sides look to be digging in for a long fight that could weigh on global growth.
Reporting by Elias Glenn and Xu Jing
Trump Administration Discussed Coup Plans With Rebel Venezuelan Officers - New York Times
Trump Administration Discussed Coup Plans With Rebel Venezuelan Officers
President Nicolás Maduro at a ceremony in Caracas. The White House declined to answer detailed questions about talks with rebellious officers.CreditCreditJuan Barreto/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
By Ernesto Londoño and Nicholas Casey
Sept. 8, 2018
The Trump administration held secret meetings with rebellious military officers from Venezuela over the last year to discuss their plans to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro, according to American officials and a former Venezuelan military commander who participated in the talks.
Establishing a clandestine channel with coup plotters in Venezuela was a big gamble for Washington, given its long history of covert intervention across Latin America. Many in the region still deeply resent the United States for backing previous rebellions, coups and plots in countries like Cuba, Nicaragua, Brazil and Chile, and for turning a blind eye to the abuses military regimes committed during the Cold War.
The White House, which declined to answer detailed questions about the talks, said in a statement that it was important to engage in “dialogue with all Venezuelans who demonstrate a desire for democracy” in order to “bring positive change to a country that has suffered so much under Maduro.”
But one of the Venezuelan military commanders involved in the secret talks was hardly an ideal figure to help restore democracy: He is on the American government’s own sanctions list of corrupt officials in Venezuela.
He and other members of the Venezuelan security apparatus have been accused by Washington of a wide range of serious crimes, including torturing critics, jailing hundreds of political prisoners, wounding thousands of civilians, trafficking drugs and collaborating with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, which is considered a terrorist organization by the United States.
American officials eventually decided not to help the plotters, and the coup plans stalled. But the Trump administration’s willingness to meet several times with mutinous officers intent on toppling a president in the hemisphere could backfire politically.
You have 2 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
Most Latin American leaders agree that Venezuela’s president, Mr. Maduro, is an increasingly authoritarian ruler who has effectively ruined his country’s economy, leading to extreme shortages of food and medicine. The collapse has set off an exodus of desperate Venezuelans who are spilling over borders, overwhelming their neighbors.
Even so, Mr. Maduro has long justified his grip on Venezuela by claiming that Washington imperialists are actively trying to depose him, and the secret talks could provide him with ammunition to chip away at the region’s nearly united stance against him.
“This is going to land like a bomb” in the region, said Mari Carmen Aponte, who served as the top diplomat overseeing Latin American affairs in the final months of the Obama administration.
Image
Mr. Maduro at a meeting with ministers in Caracas this month. Most Latin American leaders agree that he is an increasingly authoritarian ruler who has effectively ruined his country’s economy.CreditMiraflores Palace
Beyond the coup plot, Mr. Maduro’s government has already fended off several small-scale attacks, including salvos from a helicopter last year and exploding drones as he gave a speech in August. The attacks have added to the sense that the president is vulnerable.
Venezuelan military officials sought direct access to the American government during Barack Obama’s presidency, only to be rebuffed, officials said.
Then in August of last year, President Trump declared that the United States had a “military option” for Venezuela — a declaration that drew condemnation from American allies in the region but encouraged rebellious Venezuelan military officers to reach out to Washington once again.
“It was the commander in chief saying this now,” the former Venezuelan commander on the sanctions list said in an interview, speaking on condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisals by the Venezuelan government. “I’m not going to doubt it when this was the messenger.”
In a series of covert meetings abroad, which began last fall and continued this year, the military officers told the American government that they represented a few hundred members of the armed forces who had soured on Mr. Maduro’s authoritarianism.
The officers asked the United States to supply them with encrypted radios, citing the need to communicate securely, as they developed a plan to install a transitional government to run the country until elections could be held.
American officials did not provide material support, and the plans unraveled after a recent crackdown that led to the arrest of dozens of the plotters.
Relations between the United States and Venezuela have been strained for years. The two have not exchanged ambassadors since 2010. After Mr. Trump took office, his administration increased sanctions against top Venezuelan officials, including Mr. Maduro himself, his vice president and other top officials in the government.
The account of the clandestine meetings and the policy debates preceding them is drawn from interviews with 11 current and former American officials, as well as the former Venezuelan commander. He said at least three distinct groups within the Venezuelan military had been plotting against the Maduro government.
One established contact with the American government by approaching the United States Embassy in a European capital. When this was reported back to Washington, officials at the White House were intrigued but apprehensive. They worried that the meeting request could be a ploy to surreptitiously record an American official appearing to conspire against the Venezuelan government, officials said.
Venezuelans waiting to buy government-subsidized food in Caracas in May. The country is experiencing extreme shortages of food and medicine.CreditMeridith Kohut for The New York Times
But as the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela worsened last year, American officials felt that having a clearer picture of the plans and the men who aspired to oust Mr. Maduro was worth the risk.
“After a lot of discussion, we agreed we should listen to what they had to say,” said a senior administration official who was not authorized to speak about the secret talks.
The administration initially considered dispatching Juan Cruz, a veteran Central Intelligence Agency official who recently stepped down as the White House’s top Latin America policymaker. But White House lawyers said it would be more prudent to send a career diplomat instead.
The American envoy was instructed to attend the meetings “purely on listening mode,” and was not authorized to negotiate anything of substance on the spot, according to the senior administration official.
After the first meeting, which took place in the fall of 2017, the diplomat reported that the Venezuelans didn’t appear to have a detailed plan and had showed up at the encounter hoping the Americans would offer guidance or ideas, officials said.
The former Venezuelan commander said that the rebellious officers never asked for an American military intervention. “I never agreed, nor did they propose, to do a joint operation,” he said.
He claimed that he and his comrades considered striking last summer, when the government suspended the powers of the legislature and installed a new national assembly loyal to Mr. Maduro. But he said they aborted the plan, fearing it would lead to bloodshed.
They later planned to take power in March, the former officer said, but that plan leaked. Finally, the dissidents looked to the May 20 election, during which Mr. Maduro was re-elected, as a new target date. But again, word got out and the plotters held their fire.
It is unclear how many of these details the coup planners shared with the Americans. But there is no indication that Mr. Maduro knew the mutinous officers were talking to the Americans at all.
For any of the plots to have worked, the former commander said, he and his comrades believed they needed to detain Mr. Maduro and other top government figures simultaneously. To do that, he added, the rebel officers needed a way to communicate securely. They made their request during their second meeting with the American diplomat, which took place last year.
Lawmakers in Caracas last month. The plotters considered striking last summer, when the government suspended the powers of the legislature and installed a new assembly loyal to Mr. Maduro.CreditCristian Hernandez/EPA, via Shutterstock
The American diplomat relayed the request to Washington, where senior officials turned it down, American officials said.
“We were frustrated,” said the former Venezuelan commander. “There was a lack of follow-through. They left me waiting.”
The American diplomat then met the coup plotters a third time early this year, but the discussions did not result in a promise of material aid or even a clear signal that Washington endorsed the rebels’ plans, according to the Venezuelan commander and several American officials.
Still, the Venezuelan plotters could view the meetings as tacit approval of their plans, argued Peter Kornbluh, a historian at the National Security Archive at George Washington University.
“The United States always has an interest in gathering intelligence on potential changes of leadership in governments,” Mr. Kornbluh said. “But the mere presence of a U.S. official at such a meeting would likely be perceived as encouragement.”
In its statement, the White House called the situation in Venezuela “a threat to regional security and democracy” and said that the Trump administration would continue to strengthen a coalition of “like-minded, and right-minded, partners from Europe to Asia to the Americas to pressure the Maduro regime to restore democracy in Venezuela.”
American officials have openly discussed the possibility that Venezuela’s military could take action.
On Feb. 1, Rex W. Tillerson, who was secretary of state at the time, delivered a speech in which he said the United States had not “advocated for regime change or removal of President Maduro.” Yet, responding to a question afterward, Mr. Tillerson raised the potential for a military coup.
“When things are so bad that the military leadership realizes that it just can’t serve the citizens anymore, they will manage a peaceful transition,” he said.
Days later, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who has sought to shape the Trump administration’s approach toward Latin America, wrote a series of Twitter posts that encouraged dissident members of the Venezuelan armed forces to topple their commander in chief.
Venezuelans waiting to register with the Brazilian immigration authorities in April. The economic collapse has set off an exodus of desperate Venezuelans.CreditMeridith Kohut for The New York Times
“Soldiers eat out of garbage cans & their families go hungry in Venezuela while Maduro & friends live like kings & block humanitarian aid,” Mr. Rubio wrote. He then added: “The world would support the Armed Forces in #Venezuela if they decide to protect the people & restore democracy by removing a dictator.”
In a speech in April, when he was still White House policy chief for Latin America, Mr. Cruz issued a message to the Venezuelan military. Referring to Mr. Maduro as a “madman,” Mr. Cruz said all Venezuelans should “urge the military to respect the oath they took to perform their functions. Honor your oath.”
As the crisis in Venezuela worsened in recent years, American officials debated the pros and cons of opening lines of dialogue with rebellious factions of the military.
“There were differences of opinion,” said Ms. Aponte, the former top Latin America diplomat under Mr. Obama. “There were people who had a lot of faith in the idea that they could bring about stability, help distribute food, work on practical stuff.”
But others — including Ms. Aponte — saw considerable risk in building bridges with leaders of a military that, in Washington’s assessment, has become a pillar of the cocaine trade and human rights abuses.
Roberta Jacobson, a former ambassador to Mexico who preceded Ms. Aponte as the top State Department official for Latin America policy, said that while Washington has long regarded the Venezuelan military as “widely corrupt, deeply involved in narcotics trafficking and very unsavory,” she saw merit in establishing a back channel with some of them.
“Given the broader breakdown in institutions in Venezuela, there was a feeling that — while they were not necessarily the answer — any kind of democratic resolution would have had to have the military on board,” said Ms. Jacobson, who retired from the State Department this year. “The idea of hearing from actors in those places, no matter how unsavory they may be, is integral to diplomacy.”
But whatever the rationale, holding discussions with coup plotters could set off alarms in a region with a list of infamous interventions: the Central Intelligence Agency’s failed Bay of Pigs invasion to overthrow Fidel Castro as leader of Cuba in 1961; the American-supported coup in Chile in 1973, which led to the long military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet; and the Reagan administration’s covert support of right-wing rebels known as the contras in Nicaragua in the 1980s.
In Venezuela, a coup in 2002 briefly deposed Mr. Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez. The United States knew a plot was being hatched but warned against it, according to a classified document that was later made public. The coup took place anyway and the George W. Bush administration opened a channel to the new leader. Officials then backed away from the new government after popular anger rose against the coup and countries in the region loudly denounced it. Mr. Chávez was reinstated as president.
In the latest coup plot, the number of military figures connected to the plan dwindled from a high of about 300 to 400 last year to about half that after a crackdown this year by Mr. Maduro’s government.
The former Venezuelan military officer worries that the 150 or so comrades who have been detained are probably being tortured. He lamented that the United States did not supply the mutineers with radios, which he believes could have changed the country’s history.
“I’m disappointed,” he said. “But I’m the least affected. I’m not a prisoner.”
President Nicolás Maduro at a ceremony in Caracas. The White House declined to answer detailed questions about talks with rebellious officers.CreditCreditJuan Barreto/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
By Ernesto Londoño and Nicholas Casey
Sept. 8, 2018
The Trump administration held secret meetings with rebellious military officers from Venezuela over the last year to discuss their plans to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro, according to American officials and a former Venezuelan military commander who participated in the talks.
Establishing a clandestine channel with coup plotters in Venezuela was a big gamble for Washington, given its long history of covert intervention across Latin America. Many in the region still deeply resent the United States for backing previous rebellions, coups and plots in countries like Cuba, Nicaragua, Brazil and Chile, and for turning a blind eye to the abuses military regimes committed during the Cold War.
The White House, which declined to answer detailed questions about the talks, said in a statement that it was important to engage in “dialogue with all Venezuelans who demonstrate a desire for democracy” in order to “bring positive change to a country that has suffered so much under Maduro.”
But one of the Venezuelan military commanders involved in the secret talks was hardly an ideal figure to help restore democracy: He is on the American government’s own sanctions list of corrupt officials in Venezuela.
He and other members of the Venezuelan security apparatus have been accused by Washington of a wide range of serious crimes, including torturing critics, jailing hundreds of political prisoners, wounding thousands of civilians, trafficking drugs and collaborating with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, which is considered a terrorist organization by the United States.
American officials eventually decided not to help the plotters, and the coup plans stalled. But the Trump administration’s willingness to meet several times with mutinous officers intent on toppling a president in the hemisphere could backfire politically.
You have 2 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
Most Latin American leaders agree that Venezuela’s president, Mr. Maduro, is an increasingly authoritarian ruler who has effectively ruined his country’s economy, leading to extreme shortages of food and medicine. The collapse has set off an exodus of desperate Venezuelans who are spilling over borders, overwhelming their neighbors.
Even so, Mr. Maduro has long justified his grip on Venezuela by claiming that Washington imperialists are actively trying to depose him, and the secret talks could provide him with ammunition to chip away at the region’s nearly united stance against him.
“This is going to land like a bomb” in the region, said Mari Carmen Aponte, who served as the top diplomat overseeing Latin American affairs in the final months of the Obama administration.
Image
Mr. Maduro at a meeting with ministers in Caracas this month. Most Latin American leaders agree that he is an increasingly authoritarian ruler who has effectively ruined his country’s economy.CreditMiraflores Palace
Beyond the coup plot, Mr. Maduro’s government has already fended off several small-scale attacks, including salvos from a helicopter last year and exploding drones as he gave a speech in August. The attacks have added to the sense that the president is vulnerable.
Venezuelan military officials sought direct access to the American government during Barack Obama’s presidency, only to be rebuffed, officials said.
Then in August of last year, President Trump declared that the United States had a “military option” for Venezuela — a declaration that drew condemnation from American allies in the region but encouraged rebellious Venezuelan military officers to reach out to Washington once again.
“It was the commander in chief saying this now,” the former Venezuelan commander on the sanctions list said in an interview, speaking on condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisals by the Venezuelan government. “I’m not going to doubt it when this was the messenger.”
In a series of covert meetings abroad, which began last fall and continued this year, the military officers told the American government that they represented a few hundred members of the armed forces who had soured on Mr. Maduro’s authoritarianism.
The officers asked the United States to supply them with encrypted radios, citing the need to communicate securely, as they developed a plan to install a transitional government to run the country until elections could be held.
American officials did not provide material support, and the plans unraveled after a recent crackdown that led to the arrest of dozens of the plotters.
Relations between the United States and Venezuela have been strained for years. The two have not exchanged ambassadors since 2010. After Mr. Trump took office, his administration increased sanctions against top Venezuelan officials, including Mr. Maduro himself, his vice president and other top officials in the government.
The account of the clandestine meetings and the policy debates preceding them is drawn from interviews with 11 current and former American officials, as well as the former Venezuelan commander. He said at least three distinct groups within the Venezuelan military had been plotting against the Maduro government.
One established contact with the American government by approaching the United States Embassy in a European capital. When this was reported back to Washington, officials at the White House were intrigued but apprehensive. They worried that the meeting request could be a ploy to surreptitiously record an American official appearing to conspire against the Venezuelan government, officials said.
Venezuelans waiting to buy government-subsidized food in Caracas in May. The country is experiencing extreme shortages of food and medicine.CreditMeridith Kohut for The New York Times
But as the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela worsened last year, American officials felt that having a clearer picture of the plans and the men who aspired to oust Mr. Maduro was worth the risk.
“After a lot of discussion, we agreed we should listen to what they had to say,” said a senior administration official who was not authorized to speak about the secret talks.
The administration initially considered dispatching Juan Cruz, a veteran Central Intelligence Agency official who recently stepped down as the White House’s top Latin America policymaker. But White House lawyers said it would be more prudent to send a career diplomat instead.
The American envoy was instructed to attend the meetings “purely on listening mode,” and was not authorized to negotiate anything of substance on the spot, according to the senior administration official.
After the first meeting, which took place in the fall of 2017, the diplomat reported that the Venezuelans didn’t appear to have a detailed plan and had showed up at the encounter hoping the Americans would offer guidance or ideas, officials said.
The former Venezuelan commander said that the rebellious officers never asked for an American military intervention. “I never agreed, nor did they propose, to do a joint operation,” he said.
He claimed that he and his comrades considered striking last summer, when the government suspended the powers of the legislature and installed a new national assembly loyal to Mr. Maduro. But he said they aborted the plan, fearing it would lead to bloodshed.
They later planned to take power in March, the former officer said, but that plan leaked. Finally, the dissidents looked to the May 20 election, during which Mr. Maduro was re-elected, as a new target date. But again, word got out and the plotters held their fire.
It is unclear how many of these details the coup planners shared with the Americans. But there is no indication that Mr. Maduro knew the mutinous officers were talking to the Americans at all.
For any of the plots to have worked, the former commander said, he and his comrades believed they needed to detain Mr. Maduro and other top government figures simultaneously. To do that, he added, the rebel officers needed a way to communicate securely. They made their request during their second meeting with the American diplomat, which took place last year.
Lawmakers in Caracas last month. The plotters considered striking last summer, when the government suspended the powers of the legislature and installed a new assembly loyal to Mr. Maduro.CreditCristian Hernandez/EPA, via Shutterstock
The American diplomat relayed the request to Washington, where senior officials turned it down, American officials said.
“We were frustrated,” said the former Venezuelan commander. “There was a lack of follow-through. They left me waiting.”
The American diplomat then met the coup plotters a third time early this year, but the discussions did not result in a promise of material aid or even a clear signal that Washington endorsed the rebels’ plans, according to the Venezuelan commander and several American officials.
Still, the Venezuelan plotters could view the meetings as tacit approval of their plans, argued Peter Kornbluh, a historian at the National Security Archive at George Washington University.
“The United States always has an interest in gathering intelligence on potential changes of leadership in governments,” Mr. Kornbluh said. “But the mere presence of a U.S. official at such a meeting would likely be perceived as encouragement.”
In its statement, the White House called the situation in Venezuela “a threat to regional security and democracy” and said that the Trump administration would continue to strengthen a coalition of “like-minded, and right-minded, partners from Europe to Asia to the Americas to pressure the Maduro regime to restore democracy in Venezuela.”
American officials have openly discussed the possibility that Venezuela’s military could take action.
On Feb. 1, Rex W. Tillerson, who was secretary of state at the time, delivered a speech in which he said the United States had not “advocated for regime change or removal of President Maduro.” Yet, responding to a question afterward, Mr. Tillerson raised the potential for a military coup.
“When things are so bad that the military leadership realizes that it just can’t serve the citizens anymore, they will manage a peaceful transition,” he said.
Days later, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who has sought to shape the Trump administration’s approach toward Latin America, wrote a series of Twitter posts that encouraged dissident members of the Venezuelan armed forces to topple their commander in chief.
Venezuelans waiting to register with the Brazilian immigration authorities in April. The economic collapse has set off an exodus of desperate Venezuelans.CreditMeridith Kohut for The New York Times
“Soldiers eat out of garbage cans & their families go hungry in Venezuela while Maduro & friends live like kings & block humanitarian aid,” Mr. Rubio wrote. He then added: “The world would support the Armed Forces in #Venezuela if they decide to protect the people & restore democracy by removing a dictator.”
In a speech in April, when he was still White House policy chief for Latin America, Mr. Cruz issued a message to the Venezuelan military. Referring to Mr. Maduro as a “madman,” Mr. Cruz said all Venezuelans should “urge the military to respect the oath they took to perform their functions. Honor your oath.”
As the crisis in Venezuela worsened in recent years, American officials debated the pros and cons of opening lines of dialogue with rebellious factions of the military.
“There were differences of opinion,” said Ms. Aponte, the former top Latin America diplomat under Mr. Obama. “There were people who had a lot of faith in the idea that they could bring about stability, help distribute food, work on practical stuff.”
But others — including Ms. Aponte — saw considerable risk in building bridges with leaders of a military that, in Washington’s assessment, has become a pillar of the cocaine trade and human rights abuses.
Roberta Jacobson, a former ambassador to Mexico who preceded Ms. Aponte as the top State Department official for Latin America policy, said that while Washington has long regarded the Venezuelan military as “widely corrupt, deeply involved in narcotics trafficking and very unsavory,” she saw merit in establishing a back channel with some of them.
“Given the broader breakdown in institutions in Venezuela, there was a feeling that — while they were not necessarily the answer — any kind of democratic resolution would have had to have the military on board,” said Ms. Jacobson, who retired from the State Department this year. “The idea of hearing from actors in those places, no matter how unsavory they may be, is integral to diplomacy.”
But whatever the rationale, holding discussions with coup plotters could set off alarms in a region with a list of infamous interventions: the Central Intelligence Agency’s failed Bay of Pigs invasion to overthrow Fidel Castro as leader of Cuba in 1961; the American-supported coup in Chile in 1973, which led to the long military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet; and the Reagan administration’s covert support of right-wing rebels known as the contras in Nicaragua in the 1980s.
In Venezuela, a coup in 2002 briefly deposed Mr. Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez. The United States knew a plot was being hatched but warned against it, according to a classified document that was later made public. The coup took place anyway and the George W. Bush administration opened a channel to the new leader. Officials then backed away from the new government after popular anger rose against the coup and countries in the region loudly denounced it. Mr. Chávez was reinstated as president.
In the latest coup plot, the number of military figures connected to the plan dwindled from a high of about 300 to 400 last year to about half that after a crackdown this year by Mr. Maduro’s government.
The former Venezuelan military officer worries that the 150 or so comrades who have been detained are probably being tortured. He lamented that the United States did not supply the mutineers with radios, which he believes could have changed the country’s history.
“I’m disappointed,” he said. “But I’m the least affected. I’m not a prisoner.”
Facebook's former security chief: US elections at risk of being 'World Cup of information warfare' - CNN Tech
Facebook's former security chief: US elections at risk of being 'World Cup of information warfare'
by Laurie Segall @LaurieSegallCNN
September 4, 2018: 9:27 AM ET
Ex-Facebook security boss: U.S. elections risk becoming 'World Cup of information warfare'
After three years in the trenches of Facebook's war against disinformation, Alex Stamos brings bad news from the front: US elections are at risk of becoming the "World Cup of information warfare."
"That campaign to drive wedges into American society has not stopped. If anything, it has intensified," Stamos told CNN recently.
Stamos is not an alarmist. He has spent the better part of the past two decades in the digital security business, most recently as the head of information security at Facebook. Before that, he spent a few years at Yahoo — where, among other things, he warned US lawmakers about the impact of online advertising on data security and privacy. He has over the years earned a reputation for speaking his mind, and at one point challenged Michael Rogers, head of the National Security Agency at the time, on the finer points of data encryption.
His warning comes as Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg and other tech leaders are set to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The panel, led by Republican Richard Burr and Democrat Mark Warner, wants to know just what Facebook, Twitter, Google, and others are doing to safeguard November's midterm elections against the sort of disinformation campaigns that peppered their platforms in 2016.
Stamos recently left Facebook, reportedly because he felt the company should be more forthcoming in disclosing Russia's efforts to use the platform to disseminate disinformation. Despite his departure, he told CNN that he gives Facebook and other tech companies credit for moving aggressively to address the problem.
"Facebook has done all of the reasonable steps possible to stop what happened in 2016," he told CNN, referring to the fake accounts and pages that littered the platform. But he warned that it would be difficult to predict how miscreants might use social media to sow discord ahead of the 2018 and 2020 elections. And he said that although most of the attention remains focused on Russia, "dozens" of US adversaries possess cyber warfare capabilities.
That point was underscored earlier this month when Facebook announced the removal of 652 pages, accounts and groups it identified as part of coordinated misinformation campaigns that originated in Iran. The tally included 254 Facebook pages and 116 Instagram accounts that, taken together, amassed more than 1 million followers.
That same day, Twitter said it had removed 284 accounts, many of them also traced to Tehran.
Stamos told CNN he believes that the government has failed to adequately address the problem. America, he said, is under attack, and must respond accordingly.
"Two years after Pearl Harbor, the United States had quadrupled the size of our Navy. We were already on an unstoppable path to the Japanese home islands in the Pacific theater," he said. "Two years on from the election and people are still arguing whether we were even attacked and I find that amazing."
The US intelligence community has agreed that the Russian government actively used social media platforms to influence the 2016 election. In February, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office indicted 13 Russian nationals who allegedly did just that, charging them with conspiracy to defraud the United States. The Russians had engaged in a campaign of "information warfare against the United States," Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said at the time.
Another indictment, handed down in July, outlined how Russian military intelligence officials allegedly obtained through hacking and then disseminated emails belonging to the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Looking back, Stamos told CNN, he was disappointed that the government seemed less interested in the scope of the problem when initially approached in the spring of 2017.
"Considering how much things blew up later in the year, there was a lot less interest from Congress than I would've expected," he said, adding that it seemed most Republicans weren't interested in revisiting what happened in 2016 and that on the Democratic side, it appeared there was less interest because Facebook wasn't pointing to activity directed by the Trump campaign.
Stamos said he believes politics are getting in the way of handling the growing threat of attacks made through social media platforms.
"The political polarization on election hacking is a horrible, horrible problem for the country," he told CNN. "It's the reason why we are in not much better shape in 2018 than we were in 2016."
Stamos told CNN that the government must move more aggressively to safeguard the nation's elections. He has among other things called on Congress to pass legislation addressing online disinformation and create a cybersecurity agency dedicated to protecting US elections and voting infrastructure. He also believes each US state must take more assertive steps to ensure the integrity of elections.
"We have the risk of turning our elections into the World Cup of information warfare, where everybody wants to have a piece in it, because we have not demonstrated that we will punish countries that do this to us and we have not addressed the fundamental issues that caused us to get here in the first place," he said.
Companies like Facebook and Twitter are under close watch as they struggle with the role of cracking down on content in a politically charged environment. Stamos offered a view into the dilemma Facebook and other companies face.
"If there's anything I've learned over the last three years it's that you can't win, right? Any content decision we make, any step we take to try to do something that sounds not controversial like protecting election will be portrayed by somebody else as being a partisan decision," he explained.
by Laurie Segall @LaurieSegallCNN
September 4, 2018: 9:27 AM ET
Ex-Facebook security boss: U.S. elections risk becoming 'World Cup of information warfare'
After three years in the trenches of Facebook's war against disinformation, Alex Stamos brings bad news from the front: US elections are at risk of becoming the "World Cup of information warfare."
"That campaign to drive wedges into American society has not stopped. If anything, it has intensified," Stamos told CNN recently.
Stamos is not an alarmist. He has spent the better part of the past two decades in the digital security business, most recently as the head of information security at Facebook. Before that, he spent a few years at Yahoo — where, among other things, he warned US lawmakers about the impact of online advertising on data security and privacy. He has over the years earned a reputation for speaking his mind, and at one point challenged Michael Rogers, head of the National Security Agency at the time, on the finer points of data encryption.
His warning comes as Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg and other tech leaders are set to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The panel, led by Republican Richard Burr and Democrat Mark Warner, wants to know just what Facebook, Twitter, Google, and others are doing to safeguard November's midterm elections against the sort of disinformation campaigns that peppered their platforms in 2016.
Stamos recently left Facebook, reportedly because he felt the company should be more forthcoming in disclosing Russia's efforts to use the platform to disseminate disinformation. Despite his departure, he told CNN that he gives Facebook and other tech companies credit for moving aggressively to address the problem.
"Facebook has done all of the reasonable steps possible to stop what happened in 2016," he told CNN, referring to the fake accounts and pages that littered the platform. But he warned that it would be difficult to predict how miscreants might use social media to sow discord ahead of the 2018 and 2020 elections. And he said that although most of the attention remains focused on Russia, "dozens" of US adversaries possess cyber warfare capabilities.
That point was underscored earlier this month when Facebook announced the removal of 652 pages, accounts and groups it identified as part of coordinated misinformation campaigns that originated in Iran. The tally included 254 Facebook pages and 116 Instagram accounts that, taken together, amassed more than 1 million followers.
That same day, Twitter said it had removed 284 accounts, many of them also traced to Tehran.
Stamos told CNN he believes that the government has failed to adequately address the problem. America, he said, is under attack, and must respond accordingly.
"Two years after Pearl Harbor, the United States had quadrupled the size of our Navy. We were already on an unstoppable path to the Japanese home islands in the Pacific theater," he said. "Two years on from the election and people are still arguing whether we were even attacked and I find that amazing."
The US intelligence community has agreed that the Russian government actively used social media platforms to influence the 2016 election. In February, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office indicted 13 Russian nationals who allegedly did just that, charging them with conspiracy to defraud the United States. The Russians had engaged in a campaign of "information warfare against the United States," Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said at the time.
Another indictment, handed down in July, outlined how Russian military intelligence officials allegedly obtained through hacking and then disseminated emails belonging to the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Looking back, Stamos told CNN, he was disappointed that the government seemed less interested in the scope of the problem when initially approached in the spring of 2017.
"Considering how much things blew up later in the year, there was a lot less interest from Congress than I would've expected," he said, adding that it seemed most Republicans weren't interested in revisiting what happened in 2016 and that on the Democratic side, it appeared there was less interest because Facebook wasn't pointing to activity directed by the Trump campaign.
Stamos said he believes politics are getting in the way of handling the growing threat of attacks made through social media platforms.
"The political polarization on election hacking is a horrible, horrible problem for the country," he told CNN. "It's the reason why we are in not much better shape in 2018 than we were in 2016."
Stamos told CNN that the government must move more aggressively to safeguard the nation's elections. He has among other things called on Congress to pass legislation addressing online disinformation and create a cybersecurity agency dedicated to protecting US elections and voting infrastructure. He also believes each US state must take more assertive steps to ensure the integrity of elections.
"We have the risk of turning our elections into the World Cup of information warfare, where everybody wants to have a piece in it, because we have not demonstrated that we will punish countries that do this to us and we have not addressed the fundamental issues that caused us to get here in the first place," he said.
Companies like Facebook and Twitter are under close watch as they struggle with the role of cracking down on content in a politically charged environment. Stamos offered a view into the dilemma Facebook and other companies face.
"If there's anything I've learned over the last three years it's that you can't win, right? Any content decision we make, any step we take to try to do something that sounds not controversial like protecting election will be portrayed by somebody else as being a partisan decision," he explained.
Alibaba's Jack Ma 'to step down and focus on philanthropy'- BBC News
Sept. 8, 2018.
Alibaba's Jack Ma 'to step down and focus on philanthropy'
Jack Ma has a net personal wealth of $40bn
One of China's richest men, Jack Ma, is to step down as executive chairman of the Alibaba e-commerce empire on Monday, the New York Times reported.
He will remain on Alibaba's board of directors but focus on philanthropy in education, the newspaper said.
Mr Ma co-founded Alibaba in 1999 and has seen it become one of the world's biggest internet companies.
With a market value of more than $400bn (£309bn), it includes online selling, film production and cloud computing.
In an interview with the Times, former English teacher Mr Ma said retirement would not be the end of an era but "the beginning of an era", adding: "I love education".
Alibaba's sales surge continues
Mr Ma, who will be 54 on Monday, has a net personal wealth of $40bn, making him the third richest person in China, according to the 2017 Forbes' China rich list.
Earlier this week, Mr Ma told Bloomberg TV that he wanted to create a personal foundation, following in the footsteps of Microsoft's Bill Gates.
"There's a lot of things I can learn from Bill Gates," he said.
"I can never be as rich, but one thing I can do better is to retire earlier. I think some day, and soon, I'll go back to teaching. This is something I think I can do much better than being CEO of Alibaba."
Mr Ma began his professional life teaching English at a university in the Chinese city of Hangzhou, in eastern Zhejiang province. He started Alibaba from his flat in Hangzhou with a group of friends.
Alibaba's Jack Ma 'to step down and focus on philanthropy'
Jack Ma has a net personal wealth of $40bn
One of China's richest men, Jack Ma, is to step down as executive chairman of the Alibaba e-commerce empire on Monday, the New York Times reported.
He will remain on Alibaba's board of directors but focus on philanthropy in education, the newspaper said.
Mr Ma co-founded Alibaba in 1999 and has seen it become one of the world's biggest internet companies.
With a market value of more than $400bn (£309bn), it includes online selling, film production and cloud computing.
In an interview with the Times, former English teacher Mr Ma said retirement would not be the end of an era but "the beginning of an era", adding: "I love education".
Alibaba's sales surge continues
Mr Ma, who will be 54 on Monday, has a net personal wealth of $40bn, making him the third richest person in China, according to the 2017 Forbes' China rich list.
Earlier this week, Mr Ma told Bloomberg TV that he wanted to create a personal foundation, following in the footsteps of Microsoft's Bill Gates.
"There's a lot of things I can learn from Bill Gates," he said.
"I can never be as rich, but one thing I can do better is to retire earlier. I think some day, and soon, I'll go back to teaching. This is something I think I can do much better than being CEO of Alibaba."
Mr Ma began his professional life teaching English at a university in the Chinese city of Hangzhou, in eastern Zhejiang province. He started Alibaba from his flat in Hangzhou with a group of friends.
George Papadopoulos: Ex-Trump adviser jailed in Russia inquiry - BBC News
Sept. 8, 2018.
George Papadopoulos: Ex-Trump adviser jailed in Russia inquiry
George Papadopoulos and his wife Simona Mangiante Papadopoulos arrive at US District Court for his sentencing
The former Trump adviser whose remarks in a London pub sparked the US inquiry into possible collusion with Russia has been sentenced to 14 days in jail.
George Papadopoulos, 31, told the court in Washington DC he was a "patriotic American" who made a mistake by lying.
He pleaded guilty last October to lying to the FBI about the timing of meetings with alleged go-betweens for Moscow.
He was the first former Trump aide arrested in the probe into an alleged Kremlin plot to sway the 2016 US vote.
US President Donald Trump reacted by taking an apparent swipe at the cost of the investigation into the former aide.
Skip Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
14 days for $28 MILLION - $2 MILLION a day, No Collusion. A great day for America!
7:39 AM - Sep 8, 2018
Who's who in the Russia-Trump inquiry?
How Trump's Russia trouble unfolded
In Friday's sentencing, Papadopoulos was also handed 12 months of supervised release, 200 hours of community service, and a fine of $9,500 (£7,350).
He said in court that his "entire life has been turned upside down" and he hoped "for a second chance to redeem myself".
Papadopoulos concluded by saying "this investigation has global implications, and the truth matters".
Who is George Papadopoulos?
The Chicago native was a London-based petroleum analyst before he joined the Trump campaign in March 2016 as a volunteer foreign policy adviser.
Will Trump remain bulletproof?
Papadopoulos mistaken for Papadopoulos
Papadopoulos soon made contact with a mysterious Maltese academic, Joseph Mifsud.
The professor told Papadopoulos the Russians had "dirt" on Mr Trump's Democratic presidential rival Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails".
In the following months, thousands of emails linked to the Clinton campaign were published by Wikileaks.
What did Papadopoulo say he told Donald Trump?
The young political operative told Mr Trump, then a Republican presidential candidate, and other members of the campaign's national security team that he could set up a meeting with President Vladimir Putin ahead of the 2016 election.
Papadopoulos says he was told the Russians possessed "dirt" on Hillary Clinton
A pre-sentencing statement last week read: "While some in the room rebuffed George's offer, Mr Trump nodded with approval and deferred to Mr Sessions, who appeared to like the idea and stated that the campaign should look into it."
Papadopoulos told CNN in an interview aired on Friday that Mr Trump "gave me a sort of a nod" and "wasn't committed either way" about the idea of a meeting with the Russian leader.
But he said then-senator and now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions "was actually enthusiastic". Last November, Mr Sessions testified to Congress that he had "pushed back" against Papadopoulos' offer.
How did this come out?
American authorities were alerted in mid-2016 after Papadopoulos told an Australian diplomat during a drinking session in a London pub about his meetings with Professor Mifsud.
The envoy told US investigators, shortly after the emails hacked from the Democratic Party were leaked.
When the FBI interviewed Papadopoulos in January 2017, he falsely claimed he had met two individuals with Russian ties before he joined the president's team in March 2016.
He had actually met them after joining Mr Trump's campaign.
One individual was a Russian woman who Papadopoulos believed had connections to the Russian government.
In July 2018, the US Department of Justice charged 12 Russian intelligence officers with hacking Democratic officials.
What affect did the lies have?
Prosecutors said Papadopoulos's lack of cooperation with investigators meant they were unable to effectively question or detain Mr Mifsud. The professor has since left the United States.
No connection between Mr Misfud and the hacked emails has been proven.
The mystery professor behind Trump Russia inquiry
The Democratic National Committee, which is suing Russia, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over the alleged election interference in the 2016, filed a court document on Friday, saying Mr Mifsud "was missing and may be deceased", without any further explanation, according to Bloomberg News.
It referred to him as a key figure to have evaded the Mueller inquiry.
What did Papadopoulos say?
"I made a dreadful mistake, but I am a good man who is eager for redemption," Papadopoulos said.
He said he lied not to impede investigation but "to preserve a perhaps misguided loyalty to his master".
Judge Randolph Moss said he took the "genuine remorse" into consideration for the sentencing.
The only other person to be sentenced in the investigation - lawyer Alex Van Der Zwaan - received 30 days in prison. His judge referred to his regret as "muted".
Outside court on Friday, Papadopoulos' lawyer, Thomas Breen, said his client was a "fool" and had acted "stupidly" in lying to the FBI.
But the attorney said "the president of the United States hindered this investigation more than Papadopoulos ever could".
He said Mr Trump had hampered the inquiry by calling it a "witch hunt" and "fake news".
George Papadopoulos: Ex-Trump adviser jailed in Russia inquiry
George Papadopoulos and his wife Simona Mangiante Papadopoulos arrive at US District Court for his sentencing
The former Trump adviser whose remarks in a London pub sparked the US inquiry into possible collusion with Russia has been sentenced to 14 days in jail.
George Papadopoulos, 31, told the court in Washington DC he was a "patriotic American" who made a mistake by lying.
He pleaded guilty last October to lying to the FBI about the timing of meetings with alleged go-betweens for Moscow.
He was the first former Trump aide arrested in the probe into an alleged Kremlin plot to sway the 2016 US vote.
US President Donald Trump reacted by taking an apparent swipe at the cost of the investigation into the former aide.
Skip Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
14 days for $28 MILLION - $2 MILLION a day, No Collusion. A great day for America!
7:39 AM - Sep 8, 2018
Who's who in the Russia-Trump inquiry?
How Trump's Russia trouble unfolded
In Friday's sentencing, Papadopoulos was also handed 12 months of supervised release, 200 hours of community service, and a fine of $9,500 (£7,350).
He said in court that his "entire life has been turned upside down" and he hoped "for a second chance to redeem myself".
Papadopoulos concluded by saying "this investigation has global implications, and the truth matters".
Who is George Papadopoulos?
The Chicago native was a London-based petroleum analyst before he joined the Trump campaign in March 2016 as a volunteer foreign policy adviser.
Will Trump remain bulletproof?
Papadopoulos mistaken for Papadopoulos
Papadopoulos soon made contact with a mysterious Maltese academic, Joseph Mifsud.
The professor told Papadopoulos the Russians had "dirt" on Mr Trump's Democratic presidential rival Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails".
In the following months, thousands of emails linked to the Clinton campaign were published by Wikileaks.
What did Papadopoulo say he told Donald Trump?
The young political operative told Mr Trump, then a Republican presidential candidate, and other members of the campaign's national security team that he could set up a meeting with President Vladimir Putin ahead of the 2016 election.
Papadopoulos says he was told the Russians possessed "dirt" on Hillary Clinton
A pre-sentencing statement last week read: "While some in the room rebuffed George's offer, Mr Trump nodded with approval and deferred to Mr Sessions, who appeared to like the idea and stated that the campaign should look into it."
Papadopoulos told CNN in an interview aired on Friday that Mr Trump "gave me a sort of a nod" and "wasn't committed either way" about the idea of a meeting with the Russian leader.
But he said then-senator and now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions "was actually enthusiastic". Last November, Mr Sessions testified to Congress that he had "pushed back" against Papadopoulos' offer.
How did this come out?
American authorities were alerted in mid-2016 after Papadopoulos told an Australian diplomat during a drinking session in a London pub about his meetings with Professor Mifsud.
The envoy told US investigators, shortly after the emails hacked from the Democratic Party were leaked.
When the FBI interviewed Papadopoulos in January 2017, he falsely claimed he had met two individuals with Russian ties before he joined the president's team in March 2016.
He had actually met them after joining Mr Trump's campaign.
One individual was a Russian woman who Papadopoulos believed had connections to the Russian government.
In July 2018, the US Department of Justice charged 12 Russian intelligence officers with hacking Democratic officials.
What affect did the lies have?
Prosecutors said Papadopoulos's lack of cooperation with investigators meant they were unable to effectively question or detain Mr Mifsud. The professor has since left the United States.
No connection between Mr Misfud and the hacked emails has been proven.
The mystery professor behind Trump Russia inquiry
The Democratic National Committee, which is suing Russia, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over the alleged election interference in the 2016, filed a court document on Friday, saying Mr Mifsud "was missing and may be deceased", without any further explanation, according to Bloomberg News.
It referred to him as a key figure to have evaded the Mueller inquiry.
What did Papadopoulos say?
"I made a dreadful mistake, but I am a good man who is eager for redemption," Papadopoulos said.
He said he lied not to impede investigation but "to preserve a perhaps misguided loyalty to his master".
Judge Randolph Moss said he took the "genuine remorse" into consideration for the sentencing.
The only other person to be sentenced in the investigation - lawyer Alex Van Der Zwaan - received 30 days in prison. His judge referred to his regret as "muted".
Outside court on Friday, Papadopoulos' lawyer, Thomas Breen, said his client was a "fool" and had acted "stupidly" in lying to the FBI.
But the attorney said "the president of the United States hindered this investigation more than Papadopoulos ever could".
He said Mr Trump had hampered the inquiry by calling it a "witch hunt" and "fake news".
Friday, September 7, 2018
Trump Ran for President Because He Was Jealous of Gwen Stefani, Michael Moore Says - New York Magazine
Sept. 7, 2018.
Trump Ran for President Because He Was Jealous of Gwen Stefani, Michael Moore Says
By Madeleine Aggeler@mmaggeler
There are many theories as to why Donald Trump ran for president. Some say it was because Seth Meyers and President Obama made fun of him at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner, others say it was to further his business, and this week, Michael Moore told The Hollywood Reporter that Trump ran for president because of former No Doubt front woman and The Voice judge Gwen Stefani.
According to THR, Moore suggested that Trump was inspired to announce his run for president after learning that Stefani was earning higher performance fees from NBC as a judge on The Voice than he was as host of The Apprentice, because he thought staging his elevator-heavy campaign announcement at Trump Tower in June 2015 would show the network just how popular he was. Moore, who is currently promoting his upcoming documentary Fahrenheit 11/9, was reportedly “delighted with the audacity of the claim” after making it.
“He’d been talking about running for president since 1988, but he didn’t really want to be president,” Moore said. “There’s no penthouse in the White House. And he doesn’t want to live in a black city. He was trying to pit NBC against another network, but it just went off the rails.”
It is, indeed, a theory. And it’s not hard to imagine that Trump, upon learning the distressing news that a woman was being fairly compensated for her work, would be prompted to do something drastic. Then again, maybe he just ran so he could spend more time fondling flags.
Sources THR
Trump Ran for President Because He Was Jealous of Gwen Stefani, Michael Moore Says
By Madeleine Aggeler@mmaggeler
There are many theories as to why Donald Trump ran for president. Some say it was because Seth Meyers and President Obama made fun of him at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner, others say it was to further his business, and this week, Michael Moore told The Hollywood Reporter that Trump ran for president because of former No Doubt front woman and The Voice judge Gwen Stefani.
According to THR, Moore suggested that Trump was inspired to announce his run for president after learning that Stefani was earning higher performance fees from NBC as a judge on The Voice than he was as host of The Apprentice, because he thought staging his elevator-heavy campaign announcement at Trump Tower in June 2015 would show the network just how popular he was. Moore, who is currently promoting his upcoming documentary Fahrenheit 11/9, was reportedly “delighted with the audacity of the claim” after making it.
“He’d been talking about running for president since 1988, but he didn’t really want to be president,” Moore said. “There’s no penthouse in the White House. And he doesn’t want to live in a black city. He was trying to pit NBC against another network, but it just went off the rails.”
It is, indeed, a theory. And it’s not hard to imagine that Trump, upon learning the distressing news that a woman was being fairly compensated for her work, would be prompted to do something drastic. Then again, maybe he just ran so he could spend more time fondling flags.
Sources THR
Confidential emails from Judge Kavanaugh’s years as a lawyer in the George W. Bush administration were released on Thursday, prompting a new round of objections to his confirmation from Senate Democrats - New York Times
Confidential emails from Judge Kavanaugh’s years as a lawyer in the George W. Bush administration were released on Thursday, prompting a new round of objections to his confirmation from Senate Democrats.
Sept. 7, 2018
All week, Senate Democrats have furiously protested the decision by Republicans to protect thousands of documents related to Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court. On the third day of his confirmation hearings, that fury came to a head.
On today’s episode:
Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The New York Times.
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh on Thursday was pressed to explain his position on the landmark abortion decision Roe v. Wade. He wrote in a leaked email from 2003, “I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land.”CreditErin Schaff for The New York Times
Background coverage:
Confidential emails from Judge Kavanaugh’s years as a lawyer in the George W. Bush administration were released on Thursday, prompting a new round of objections to his confirmation from Senate Democrats.
Over two days of questioning, Judge Kavanaugh was asked about his stance on major issues including abortion, presidential power, voting rights, gun rights, same-sex marriage and government regulation. Here are rundowns of Day 2 and Day 3 of the hearings.
Three prominent Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee — Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kamala Harris of California and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — are said to be contemplating running for president in 2020 and to have used the live televised event as a proving ground.
Why Emerging Markets Are in Crisis Across the Globe - TIME Business
Why Emerging Markets Are in Crisis Across the Globe
A crisis is looming in developing economies, or what investors know as emerging markets. An economic crisis in Turkey has pushed inflation to new heights and the value of the lira to new lows. Argentina’s peso is in trouble as President Mauricio Macri reaches to the International Monetary Fund for emergency help. South Africa’s rand, Mexico’s peso and Indonesia’s rupiah are all under pressure. India and Brazil are looking volatile too.
The risk of contagion to other emerging markets is real. In part, that’s thanks to investment vehicles that allow investors to buy debt and equities of multiple countries in a single bundle. In some cases, investors–spooked by weakness in one market–sell shares in all of them to reduce risk.
It might be tempting to blame President Donald Trump for this turmoil. He’s declared trade wars on countries large and small. Looming tariffs on another $200 billion in U.S. and Chinese goods mark the latest use of heavy weapons in an escalating fight between the world’s two largest economies. He’s also battling with Europe, Canada and even Japan, while also throwing punches at vulnerable Turkey as part of a bitter political battle with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. These confrontations doubtless create uncertainty.
Yet the current crisis follows decisions taken by U.S. central bankers, not the U.S. President. Emerging markets suffer when rising U.S. interest rates boost the dollar at the expense of their currencies. The Federal Reserve will continue to raise rates in coming months, because its governors believe this policy best serves the longer-term needs of the U.S. economy.
In addition, the longer-term weaknesses that make so many emerging markets vulnerable to higher U.S. rates existed long before Trump became President. Many governments of these developing countries haven’t done enough in recent years to boost productivity. Some spend ever larger sums on various entitlements while adjusting too slowly to changes in commodity prices or the availability of cheap credit.
Crucially, there’s also the problem of populism. Leaders in Turkey, Argentina, Venezuela, Hungary, Poland and South Africa have each pushed economic policies in recent years that delivered short-term political benefits while creating long-term economic weaknesses. Many constrain their institutions, including central banks, from making the necessary adjustments the Fed is now making in the U.S.
Take Turkey. Erdogan’s various fights with Trump have led to tariffs and sanctions, but his government has badly mismanaged Turkey’s economy. As Erdogan has pressed Turkey’s central bank to keep interest rates low, he has made the lira artificially cheap while making dollars and euros more expensive. That, in turn, makes it harder for Turkish companies to pay down large debts denominated in foreign currencies and to borrow more money from overseas. Investors see Erdogan prioritizing political gains over stability.
Argentina offers another example. Here there’s no political battle with Trump to worry investors. But Macri has not yet restored investor confidence in his country’s long-term financial health. Macri has imposed enough austerity to inflict pain on Argentine voters, but some fear it isn’t enough to guarantee that his government can make its debt payments.
Vulnerable emerging markets are like houses built atop faulty foundations. It’s the threat of earthquakes that creates fear. But until repairs are made, those who built these homes must shoulder blame when frightening cracks appear.
This appears in the September 17, 2018 issue of TIME.
A crisis is looming in developing economies, or what investors know as emerging markets. An economic crisis in Turkey has pushed inflation to new heights and the value of the lira to new lows. Argentina’s peso is in trouble as President Mauricio Macri reaches to the International Monetary Fund for emergency help. South Africa’s rand, Mexico’s peso and Indonesia’s rupiah are all under pressure. India and Brazil are looking volatile too.
The risk of contagion to other emerging markets is real. In part, that’s thanks to investment vehicles that allow investors to buy debt and equities of multiple countries in a single bundle. In some cases, investors–spooked by weakness in one market–sell shares in all of them to reduce risk.
It might be tempting to blame President Donald Trump for this turmoil. He’s declared trade wars on countries large and small. Looming tariffs on another $200 billion in U.S. and Chinese goods mark the latest use of heavy weapons in an escalating fight between the world’s two largest economies. He’s also battling with Europe, Canada and even Japan, while also throwing punches at vulnerable Turkey as part of a bitter political battle with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. These confrontations doubtless create uncertainty.
Yet the current crisis follows decisions taken by U.S. central bankers, not the U.S. President. Emerging markets suffer when rising U.S. interest rates boost the dollar at the expense of their currencies. The Federal Reserve will continue to raise rates in coming months, because its governors believe this policy best serves the longer-term needs of the U.S. economy.
In addition, the longer-term weaknesses that make so many emerging markets vulnerable to higher U.S. rates existed long before Trump became President. Many governments of these developing countries haven’t done enough in recent years to boost productivity. Some spend ever larger sums on various entitlements while adjusting too slowly to changes in commodity prices or the availability of cheap credit.
Crucially, there’s also the problem of populism. Leaders in Turkey, Argentina, Venezuela, Hungary, Poland and South Africa have each pushed economic policies in recent years that delivered short-term political benefits while creating long-term economic weaknesses. Many constrain their institutions, including central banks, from making the necessary adjustments the Fed is now making in the U.S.
Take Turkey. Erdogan’s various fights with Trump have led to tariffs and sanctions, but his government has badly mismanaged Turkey’s economy. As Erdogan has pressed Turkey’s central bank to keep interest rates low, he has made the lira artificially cheap while making dollars and euros more expensive. That, in turn, makes it harder for Turkish companies to pay down large debts denominated in foreign currencies and to borrow more money from overseas. Investors see Erdogan prioritizing political gains over stability.
Argentina offers another example. Here there’s no political battle with Trump to worry investors. But Macri has not yet restored investor confidence in his country’s long-term financial health. Macri has imposed enough austerity to inflict pain on Argentine voters, but some fear it isn’t enough to guarantee that his government can make its debt payments.
Vulnerable emerging markets are like houses built atop faulty foundations. It’s the threat of earthquakes that creates fear. But until repairs are made, those who built these homes must shoulder blame when frightening cracks appear.
This appears in the September 17, 2018 issue of TIME.
Elizabeth Warren Calls for the Cabinet to 'Invoke the 25th' and Remove President Trump - TIME
Elizabeth Warren Calls for the Cabinet to 'Invoke the 25th' and Remove President Trump
By GINA MARTINEZ 8:39 PM EDT
In the wake of an explosive New York Times anonymous op-ed, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is calling on President Donald Trump’s Cabinet to invoke the Constitution’s 25th Amendment and remove him from office.
On Wednesday the Times published an op-ed titled “I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration.” The piece, written by an unnamed senior official at the White House, claimed the President was “amoral,” “anti-democratic” and that much of senior officials’ job is to work against the President’s agenda. One of the most shocking claims in the piece was that, at one point, members of his cabinet reportedly considered invoking the 25th Amendment but decided against it to avoid a “constitutional crisis.”
The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967, is meant to be a failsafe to handle when a President is unable to fulfill the duties of the office for reasons besides injury or death. According to the Constitution, under the Amendment, if the Vice President and a majority of “principle officers” agree that the President is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”
The Times op-ed has shocked many and confirmed suspicions for some that Trump is unfit to lead. Senator Warren, for one, came out on Thursday to push for the President’s cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment if they actually believe that Trump is unable to adequately fulfill the responsibilities of his office. She shared on social media and her website a call for the Cabinet to use the Amendment if it saw fit.
“Every minute they make excuses is a minute that our country is at risk.” Warren said.
Elizabeth Warren
✔
@elizabethforma
Let’s be clear: We already have a constitutional crisis if the cabinet believes the President of the United States can’t do his job and then refuses to follow the rules that have been laid down in the Constitution. They can’t have it both ways.
8:35 AM - Sep 7, 2018
“If senior officials believe the president is unfit, they should stop hiding behind anonymous op-eds and leaking information to Bob Woodward boasting that they’re trying to save our country, and instead do what the Constitution demands they do: invoke the 25th Amendment and remove this president from office.” Warren posted on her website.
By GINA MARTINEZ 8:39 PM EDT
In the wake of an explosive New York Times anonymous op-ed, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is calling on President Donald Trump’s Cabinet to invoke the Constitution’s 25th Amendment and remove him from office.
On Wednesday the Times published an op-ed titled “I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration.” The piece, written by an unnamed senior official at the White House, claimed the President was “amoral,” “anti-democratic” and that much of senior officials’ job is to work against the President’s agenda. One of the most shocking claims in the piece was that, at one point, members of his cabinet reportedly considered invoking the 25th Amendment but decided against it to avoid a “constitutional crisis.”
The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967, is meant to be a failsafe to handle when a President is unable to fulfill the duties of the office for reasons besides injury or death. According to the Constitution, under the Amendment, if the Vice President and a majority of “principle officers” agree that the President is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”
The Times op-ed has shocked many and confirmed suspicions for some that Trump is unfit to lead. Senator Warren, for one, came out on Thursday to push for the President’s cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment if they actually believe that Trump is unable to adequately fulfill the responsibilities of his office. She shared on social media and her website a call for the Cabinet to use the Amendment if it saw fit.
“Every minute they make excuses is a minute that our country is at risk.” Warren said.
Elizabeth Warren
✔
@elizabethforma
Let’s be clear: We already have a constitutional crisis if the cabinet believes the President of the United States can’t do his job and then refuses to follow the rules that have been laid down in the Constitution. They can’t have it both ways.
8:35 AM - Sep 7, 2018
“If senior officials believe the president is unfit, they should stop hiding behind anonymous op-eds and leaking information to Bob Woodward boasting that they’re trying to save our country, and instead do what the Constitution demands they do: invoke the 25th Amendment and remove this president from office.” Warren posted on her website.
Hong Kong now has more super-rich people than any other city - CNN Money
Hong Kong now has more super-rich people than any other city
by Daniel Shane @CNNMoneyInvest
September 6, 2018: 10:17 AM ET
New York is no longer the city with the biggest super-rich population.
Hong Kong overtook the Big Apple to become the top destination for the planet's wealthiest people last year, according to a study published Thursday by research firm Wealth-X. The number of ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs) residing in the Asian financial hub rose by almost a third in 2017 to 10,000, the study said.
Rates Beat Your Banks
Powered by
New York had held the top spot since Wealth-X first started ranking cities in 2011. The firm defines a UHNWI as a person worth $30 million or more.
It said the rise in the number of ultra rich in Hong Kong was propelled by its booming stock market and growing financial links with the broader Chinese economy.
China's rapid economic growth in recent decades has helped drive a dramatic increase in the number of ultra-rich people in the region.
A view of Hong Kong skyline from Victoria Peak.
Among Hong Kong's most prominent billionaires are Li Ka-shing, whose Cheung Kong (CKHUY) empire controls ports, telecommunications networks and energy companies across the globe.
No single city in mainland China made it into Wealth-X's top 10 in terms of its number of super-rich individuals.
It said that was because Chinese wealth was not concentrated in any one area, but distributed around the country. Its wealthiest citizens include tech tycoons Jack Ma and Pony Ma who founded internet juggernauts Alibaba (BABA) and Tencent (TCEHY), respectively.
"The dynamism of wealth creation across China's vast landscape is nevertheless staggering," the report read.
Overall, the United States remains the preferred country for the world's richest and is home to almost a third of the world's ultra-high-net-worth individuals.
But Asia, and China in particular, are catching up. Last year the number of ultra-rich people in Asia rose by 20%. Rising Asian wealth has been helped by increasing consumer spending, more investment in infrastructure and economic reforms, among other factors, Wealth-X said.
"Asia-Pacific is forecast to close the ultra-wealth gap with other regions over the next five years," the report added.
For the past four years, the region's tally of people with $1 million in investable assets has been higher than anywhere else in the world, according to another study by consulting firm Capgemini. And by one estimate, China alone already has more billionaires than the United States.
hong kong ultra rich chart
But things could get tougher in 2018. China faces headwinds from its trade war with the United States and the huge levels of debt in its financial system. Chinese stocks entered a bear market this year, while its currency has plunged versus the dollar.
Globally, the number of ultra-rich individuals rose by 13% last year to more than 250,000. Their combined total wealth hit $31.5 trillion, boosted by an upturn in the global economy and good performances of stock markets.
Other cities in the top 10 for global wealth included Tokyo, Los Angeles, Paris and London.
by Daniel Shane @CNNMoneyInvest
September 6, 2018: 10:17 AM ET
New York is no longer the city with the biggest super-rich population.
Hong Kong overtook the Big Apple to become the top destination for the planet's wealthiest people last year, according to a study published Thursday by research firm Wealth-X. The number of ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs) residing in the Asian financial hub rose by almost a third in 2017 to 10,000, the study said.
Rates Beat Your Banks
Powered by
New York had held the top spot since Wealth-X first started ranking cities in 2011. The firm defines a UHNWI as a person worth $30 million or more.
It said the rise in the number of ultra rich in Hong Kong was propelled by its booming stock market and growing financial links with the broader Chinese economy.
China's rapid economic growth in recent decades has helped drive a dramatic increase in the number of ultra-rich people in the region.
A view of Hong Kong skyline from Victoria Peak.
Among Hong Kong's most prominent billionaires are Li Ka-shing, whose Cheung Kong (CKHUY) empire controls ports, telecommunications networks and energy companies across the globe.
No single city in mainland China made it into Wealth-X's top 10 in terms of its number of super-rich individuals.
It said that was because Chinese wealth was not concentrated in any one area, but distributed around the country. Its wealthiest citizens include tech tycoons Jack Ma and Pony Ma who founded internet juggernauts Alibaba (BABA) and Tencent (TCEHY), respectively.
"The dynamism of wealth creation across China's vast landscape is nevertheless staggering," the report read.
Overall, the United States remains the preferred country for the world's richest and is home to almost a third of the world's ultra-high-net-worth individuals.
But Asia, and China in particular, are catching up. Last year the number of ultra-rich people in Asia rose by 20%. Rising Asian wealth has been helped by increasing consumer spending, more investment in infrastructure and economic reforms, among other factors, Wealth-X said.
"Asia-Pacific is forecast to close the ultra-wealth gap with other regions over the next five years," the report added.
For the past four years, the region's tally of people with $1 million in investable assets has been higher than anywhere else in the world, according to another study by consulting firm Capgemini. And by one estimate, China alone already has more billionaires than the United States.
hong kong ultra rich chart
But things could get tougher in 2018. China faces headwinds from its trade war with the United States and the huge levels of debt in its financial system. Chinese stocks entered a bear market this year, while its currency has plunged versus the dollar.
Globally, the number of ultra-rich individuals rose by 13% last year to more than 250,000. Their combined total wealth hit $31.5 trillion, boosted by an upturn in the global economy and good performances of stock markets.
Other cities in the top 10 for global wealth included Tokyo, Los Angeles, Paris and London.
Trump: If it was up to me, I'd shut down the government over border security - Reuters
Trump: If it was up to me, I'd shut down the government over border security
Berkeley Lovelace Jr. | @BerkeleyJr
CNBC.com
President Donald Trump disparages the New York Times as he speaks following a meeting with sheriffs from across the country at the White House in Washington, September 5, 2018.
Leah Millis | Reuters
President Donald Trump disparages the New York Times as he speaks following a meeting with sheriffs from across the country at the White House in Washington, September 5, 2018.
President Donald Trump said he won't consider a government shutdown over funding for his proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border until after the November midterm elections.
In an interview with "Fox & Friends" that aired Friday, Trump said he doesn't want to hurt the Republican party's chances during midterms. If it was up to him, Trump said, he would "shut down the government over border security."
"We need Republicans elected in the midterms," Trump said. "We are getting the wall done. But I've had so many people, good people, great people, they would rather not do [it] before [the midterms], they'd rather do it right after the election."
Berkeley Lovelace Jr. | @BerkeleyJr
CNBC.com
President Donald Trump disparages the New York Times as he speaks following a meeting with sheriffs from across the country at the White House in Washington, September 5, 2018.
Leah Millis | Reuters
President Donald Trump disparages the New York Times as he speaks following a meeting with sheriffs from across the country at the White House in Washington, September 5, 2018.
President Donald Trump said he won't consider a government shutdown over funding for his proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border until after the November midterm elections.
In an interview with "Fox & Friends" that aired Friday, Trump said he doesn't want to hurt the Republican party's chances during midterms. If it was up to him, Trump said, he would "shut down the government over border security."
"We need Republicans elected in the midterms," Trump said. "We are getting the wall done. But I've had so many people, good people, great people, they would rather not do [it] before [the midterms], they'd rather do it right after the election."
Fears grow for Japan quake survivors as death toll rises - BBC News
Sept. 7, 2018.
Fears grow for Japan quake survivors as death toll rises
Emergency crews are racing against the clock to find survivors
Rescuers continued to search for survivors of a powerful earthquake on Japan's island of Hokkaido, as the death toll rose to 16.
Dozens are still missing with many feared buried under rubble after the magnitude 6.7 quake triggered landslides.
Some 1.6 million residents across Hokkaido remain without power.
The quake is the second disaster to hit Japan this week, after a deadly typhoon lashed the country's west coast.
The earthquake struck early on Thursday and thousands of people spent the night in evacuation centres.
'I thought I would die'
The village of Atsuma was among the hardest hit, where roads and houses collapsed after huge landslides.
"We've heard there are people still stuck under the mud, so we've been working around the clock but it's been difficult to rescue them," a rescue worker in Atsuma told public broadcaster NHK.
One resident said: "It was horrendous. The land slid all the way down and I thought I would die. I thought my house would collapse."
Many residents are still missing
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe confirmed 16 people had been killed, many people injured, and 26 remained missing.
"Please give your sympathy to people who spent a dark night in fear, and do everything you can to restore electricity as soon as possible," he instructed his ministers at an emergency cabinet meeting on Friday.
Authorities said it could take at least one week to restore power lines to the sparsely populated countryside.
With bad weather expected over the next days, officials are warning people to remain cautious and be prepared for aftershocks.
Transport to resume
The island's main airport resumed flights on Friday and train services are also scheduled to restart before the weekend.
The quake also affected several manufacturers on the island. Operations at Toyota plant will be suspended until power is restored, the carmaker said.
A football friendly between Japan and Chile scheduled for Friday has been called off.
The earthquake caused landslides which engulfed houses
Japan is prone to earthquakes
The earthquake comes on the heels of a deadly typhoon lashing the west of Japan over the past few days.
Jebi, the strongest typhoon to hit the country in 25 years, killed at least 10 people and caused widespread damage and disruption.
Japan is one of the world's most seismically active nations and accounts for around 20% of quakes worldwide of magnitude 6.0 or more.
In June, a deadly tremor hit Osaka region, killing five and injuring more than 300 people.
Fears grow for Japan quake survivors as death toll rises
Emergency crews are racing against the clock to find survivors
Rescuers continued to search for survivors of a powerful earthquake on Japan's island of Hokkaido, as the death toll rose to 16.
Dozens are still missing with many feared buried under rubble after the magnitude 6.7 quake triggered landslides.
Some 1.6 million residents across Hokkaido remain without power.
The quake is the second disaster to hit Japan this week, after a deadly typhoon lashed the country's west coast.
The earthquake struck early on Thursday and thousands of people spent the night in evacuation centres.
'I thought I would die'
The village of Atsuma was among the hardest hit, where roads and houses collapsed after huge landslides.
"We've heard there are people still stuck under the mud, so we've been working around the clock but it's been difficult to rescue them," a rescue worker in Atsuma told public broadcaster NHK.
One resident said: "It was horrendous. The land slid all the way down and I thought I would die. I thought my house would collapse."
Many residents are still missing
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe confirmed 16 people had been killed, many people injured, and 26 remained missing.
"Please give your sympathy to people who spent a dark night in fear, and do everything you can to restore electricity as soon as possible," he instructed his ministers at an emergency cabinet meeting on Friday.
Authorities said it could take at least one week to restore power lines to the sparsely populated countryside.
With bad weather expected over the next days, officials are warning people to remain cautious and be prepared for aftershocks.
Transport to resume
The island's main airport resumed flights on Friday and train services are also scheduled to restart before the weekend.
The quake also affected several manufacturers on the island. Operations at Toyota plant will be suspended until power is restored, the carmaker said.
A football friendly between Japan and Chile scheduled for Friday has been called off.
The earthquake caused landslides which engulfed houses
Japan is prone to earthquakes
The earthquake comes on the heels of a deadly typhoon lashing the west of Japan over the past few days.
Jebi, the strongest typhoon to hit the country in 25 years, killed at least 10 people and caused widespread damage and disruption.
Japan is one of the world's most seismically active nations and accounts for around 20% of quakes worldwide of magnitude 6.0 or more.
In June, a deadly tremor hit Osaka region, killing five and injuring more than 300 people.
Boris Johnson and wife Marina Wheeler to get divorced - BBC News
Sept. 7, 2018.
Boris Johnson and wife Marina Wheeler to get divorced
The couple have been married for 25 years and have four children together
Former foreign secretary Boris Johnson and his wife Marina Wheeler have confirmed they have separated.
In a joint statement, they said they are now in the process of divorcing, after the Sun newspaper broke the news of their split.
The couple have been married for 25 years and said the decision was taken some months ago.
Mr Johnson, long touted as a future Tory leader, quit the cabinet in July attacking Theresa May's Brexit plan.
Boris Johnson quits amid Brexit crisis
In a joint statement, he and Ms Wheeler said: "Several months ago, after 25 years of marriage, we decided it was in our best interests to separate.
"We have subsequently agreed to divorce and that process is under way.
"As friends we will continue to support our four children in the years ahead.
"We will not be commenting further".
Mr Johnson and Ms Wheeler, a barrister, married in 1993 and have four children together, Lara Lettice, Milo Arthur, Cassia Peaches and Theodore Apollo. He was previously married to Allegra Mostyn-Owen, who had been a fellow student at Oxford.
News of the split follows newspaper allegations about Mr Johnson having had another extra-marital affair.
In 2004, the MP was sacked from a shadow ministerial role by then Conservative leader Michael Howard for allegedly lying over an affair with journalist Petronella Wyatt - something he had denied as an "inverted pyramid of piffle".
He fronted the Vote Leave campaign during the 2016 EU referendum and joined Theresa May's first cabinet as foreign secretary but quit in July, shortly after his fellow cabinet Brexiteer David Davis resigned, over the prime minister's Chequers plan for the UK's future relationship with the EU.
In 2016, following David Cameron's resignation, Mr Johnson dramatically ruled himself out of the race to be the next Conservative leader and prime minister, after his fellow Brexit campaigner Michael Gove's surprise announcement that he would run.
But the former mayor of London and current MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip is widely thought to continue to harbour leadership ambitions.
Boris Johnson and wife Marina Wheeler to get divorced
The couple have been married for 25 years and have four children together
Former foreign secretary Boris Johnson and his wife Marina Wheeler have confirmed they have separated.
In a joint statement, they said they are now in the process of divorcing, after the Sun newspaper broke the news of their split.
The couple have been married for 25 years and said the decision was taken some months ago.
Mr Johnson, long touted as a future Tory leader, quit the cabinet in July attacking Theresa May's Brexit plan.
Boris Johnson quits amid Brexit crisis
In a joint statement, he and Ms Wheeler said: "Several months ago, after 25 years of marriage, we decided it was in our best interests to separate.
"We have subsequently agreed to divorce and that process is under way.
"As friends we will continue to support our four children in the years ahead.
"We will not be commenting further".
Mr Johnson and Ms Wheeler, a barrister, married in 1993 and have four children together, Lara Lettice, Milo Arthur, Cassia Peaches and Theodore Apollo. He was previously married to Allegra Mostyn-Owen, who had been a fellow student at Oxford.
News of the split follows newspaper allegations about Mr Johnson having had another extra-marital affair.
In 2004, the MP was sacked from a shadow ministerial role by then Conservative leader Michael Howard for allegedly lying over an affair with journalist Petronella Wyatt - something he had denied as an "inverted pyramid of piffle".
He fronted the Vote Leave campaign during the 2016 EU referendum and joined Theresa May's first cabinet as foreign secretary but quit in July, shortly after his fellow cabinet Brexiteer David Davis resigned, over the prime minister's Chequers plan for the UK's future relationship with the EU.
In 2016, following David Cameron's resignation, Mr Johnson dramatically ruled himself out of the race to be the next Conservative leader and prime minister, after his fellow Brexit campaigner Michael Gove's surprise announcement that he would run.
But the former mayor of London and current MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip is widely thought to continue to harbour leadership ambitions.
Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil's presidential front-runner, stabbed at rally - BBC News
Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil's presidential front-runner, stabbed at rally
7 September 2018
Presidential candidate Jair Bolsonaro, pictured seconds after being stabbed in the stomach
The front-runner in Brazil's presidential election, Jair Bolsonaro, has been stabbed at a campaign rally.
The far-right politician was attacked amid a crowd in the south-east state of Minas Gerais. A suspect was arrested.
Mr Bolsonaro had surgery for injuries to his intestines and is expected to recover, hospital officials said.
The controversial politician, who has outraged many in Brazil with racist and homophobic comments, has performed strongly in recent opinion polls.
The polls suggest he will get the most votes in the first round of the October presidential elections if former President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva remains blocked from standing, but he is unlikely to win a run-off.
Left-wing Lula had been the long-standing favourite but he is currently in prison, appealing against a ban on his candidacy that was imposed after his conviction for corruption.
'Brazil's Trump' enters presidential race
Some of Mr Bolsonaro's past comments have caused uproar, including equating homosexuality with paedophilia, and saying a congresswoman was too ugly to be raped.
Campaigning from hospital and prison
Katy Watson, BBC South America correspondent, São Paulo
This is another twist - a dramatic one - in what has already been a turbulent campaign for one of Brazil's most uncertain elections in decades.
Jair Bolsonaro is the front-runner and he is in a hospital bed, while the only person thought to be able to beat him is Lula - and he is in a prison cell. It is a surreal situation.
One of Jair Bolsonaro's key campaign messages is that he will try to turn around the growth in violent crime. The fact that he is now a victim himself plays into the hands of his supporters, who see this as a very important problem for Brazil to tackle. Everyone - including his detractors - has rallied around him to condemn the attack.
As it has happened so close to the October election, he won't be on the campaign trail for the next week or so. Nevertheless, his supporters will be strengthened, seeing that his concerns are their concerns.
How did the attack unfold?
Footage of the incident in the city of Juiz de Fora shows Mr Bolsonaro making a thumbs-up gesture and being held aloft by supporters when he is stabbed with what appears to be a knife.
He then doubles over with pain and his supporters quickly lower him to the ground and bundle him into a car.
After the attack, his son Flavio tweeted: "Unfortunately it was more serious than we had expected. He lost a lot of blood, arrived at the hospital with a [blood] pressure of 10/3, almost dead. His condition now seems stabilised. Pray, please!"
Hospital officials later said Mr Bolsonaro had suffered a "deep" and life-threatening stab wound in his intestines and was in a "serious but stable" condition.
Image caption
Military police released a picture of the man suspected of stabbing Mr Bolsonaro
He was recuperating well in intensive care after two hours of surgery, they added, but would spend at least a week to 10 days in hospital.
He has since been filmed in his hospital bed, making a hoarse statement. He described how what he thought was "just a blow" turned into an unbearable pain. He had "never hurt anyone", he said.
Police said a suspect has been arrested and named him as Adelio Obispo de Oliveira, 40. Officials quoted by Reuters news agency said he appeared to be mentally disturbed.
He was manhandled and beaten by angry supporters of Mr Bolsonaro before being taken into custody.
Stabbing suspect Adelio Obispo de Oliveira was grabbed by members of the crowd
Image caption
It took the crowd some moments to realise Jair Bolsonaro, top right, had been stabbed
What has been the reaction?
Mr Bolsonaro's electoral rivals have all condemned the stabbing. Fernando Haddad, who is expected to replace Lula on the Workers' Party ticket, said the attack was "absurd and regrettable".
Speaking in the capital Brasilia, President Michel Temer said such an attack was "intolerable" in a democratic state and that he hoped Mr Bolsonaro recovered soon.
The president's predecessor, Dilma Rousseff, warned that the attack must not go unpunished.
Brazilian stocks rose after the attack on Mr Bolsonaro, as it was seen as increasing his chances. His free-market economics make him popular with investors.
Image caption
Supporters of Mr Bolsonaro in Sao Paulo held a vigil for him
Why is Mr Bolsonaro so polarising?
The 63-year-old, who is representing the Social Liberal Party (PSL), is followed by millions of Brazilians on social media, and many refer to him as the "Brazilian Trump".
Brazil's unlikely young conservatives
He also supports loosening gun control laws, and is backed by millions of evangelical Christians for his uncompromising anti-abortion stance.
A former army captain, Mr Bolsonaro entered politics in the 1980s to defend the rights of military personnel.
Few imagined at that time that he could become a serious contender. But the collapse of the Workers' Party government and the impeachment of President Rousseff two years ago revealed the extent of political divisions.
Image caption
Mr Bolsonaro has performed strongly in polls ahead of next month's election
Mr Bolsonaro's outspoken rhetoric and his defence of law and order appealed to many who blamed the left for corruption and the economic crisis.
In 2011, he told Playboy magazine that he would be "incapable of loving a gay son" and that he would rather see such a son of his "die in an accident".
In 2015, he was fined for saying in a newspaper interview that Congresswoman Maria do Rosario was "not worth raping; she is very ugly".
He is currently being investigated for alleged racism over derogatory remarks he made about Afro-Brazilians.
Who will be Brazil's next president?
President Temer, an unpopular leader, is not standing for re-election, and millions of voters remain undecided.
Mr Bolsonaro is expected to have a strong first round but lose a run-off to leftist Ciro Gomes, environmentalist Marina Silva or ex-Governor of Sao Paulo Geraldo Alckmin, according to leading research company Ibope.
A race against Lula's likely replacement, Fernando Haddad, could be much narrower. Ibope said its most recent survey showed Mr Bolsonaro losing to him by just one percentage point.
Mr Haddad was charged with corruption earlier this week and, like Lula, denies any wrongdoing.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected Lula's latest appeal to run. The Workers' Party has until the end of Tuesday to register Mr Haddad as its presidential candidate.
7 September 2018
Presidential candidate Jair Bolsonaro, pictured seconds after being stabbed in the stomach
The front-runner in Brazil's presidential election, Jair Bolsonaro, has been stabbed at a campaign rally.
The far-right politician was attacked amid a crowd in the south-east state of Minas Gerais. A suspect was arrested.
Mr Bolsonaro had surgery for injuries to his intestines and is expected to recover, hospital officials said.
The controversial politician, who has outraged many in Brazil with racist and homophobic comments, has performed strongly in recent opinion polls.
The polls suggest he will get the most votes in the first round of the October presidential elections if former President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva remains blocked from standing, but he is unlikely to win a run-off.
Left-wing Lula had been the long-standing favourite but he is currently in prison, appealing against a ban on his candidacy that was imposed after his conviction for corruption.
'Brazil's Trump' enters presidential race
Some of Mr Bolsonaro's past comments have caused uproar, including equating homosexuality with paedophilia, and saying a congresswoman was too ugly to be raped.
Campaigning from hospital and prison
Katy Watson, BBC South America correspondent, São Paulo
This is another twist - a dramatic one - in what has already been a turbulent campaign for one of Brazil's most uncertain elections in decades.
Jair Bolsonaro is the front-runner and he is in a hospital bed, while the only person thought to be able to beat him is Lula - and he is in a prison cell. It is a surreal situation.
One of Jair Bolsonaro's key campaign messages is that he will try to turn around the growth in violent crime. The fact that he is now a victim himself plays into the hands of his supporters, who see this as a very important problem for Brazil to tackle. Everyone - including his detractors - has rallied around him to condemn the attack.
As it has happened so close to the October election, he won't be on the campaign trail for the next week or so. Nevertheless, his supporters will be strengthened, seeing that his concerns are their concerns.
How did the attack unfold?
Footage of the incident in the city of Juiz de Fora shows Mr Bolsonaro making a thumbs-up gesture and being held aloft by supporters when he is stabbed with what appears to be a knife.
He then doubles over with pain and his supporters quickly lower him to the ground and bundle him into a car.
After the attack, his son Flavio tweeted: "Unfortunately it was more serious than we had expected. He lost a lot of blood, arrived at the hospital with a [blood] pressure of 10/3, almost dead. His condition now seems stabilised. Pray, please!"
Hospital officials later said Mr Bolsonaro had suffered a "deep" and life-threatening stab wound in his intestines and was in a "serious but stable" condition.
Image caption
Military police released a picture of the man suspected of stabbing Mr Bolsonaro
He was recuperating well in intensive care after two hours of surgery, they added, but would spend at least a week to 10 days in hospital.
He has since been filmed in his hospital bed, making a hoarse statement. He described how what he thought was "just a blow" turned into an unbearable pain. He had "never hurt anyone", he said.
Police said a suspect has been arrested and named him as Adelio Obispo de Oliveira, 40. Officials quoted by Reuters news agency said he appeared to be mentally disturbed.
He was manhandled and beaten by angry supporters of Mr Bolsonaro before being taken into custody.
Stabbing suspect Adelio Obispo de Oliveira was grabbed by members of the crowd
Image caption
It took the crowd some moments to realise Jair Bolsonaro, top right, had been stabbed
What has been the reaction?
Mr Bolsonaro's electoral rivals have all condemned the stabbing. Fernando Haddad, who is expected to replace Lula on the Workers' Party ticket, said the attack was "absurd and regrettable".
Speaking in the capital Brasilia, President Michel Temer said such an attack was "intolerable" in a democratic state and that he hoped Mr Bolsonaro recovered soon.
The president's predecessor, Dilma Rousseff, warned that the attack must not go unpunished.
Brazilian stocks rose after the attack on Mr Bolsonaro, as it was seen as increasing his chances. His free-market economics make him popular with investors.
Image caption
Supporters of Mr Bolsonaro in Sao Paulo held a vigil for him
Why is Mr Bolsonaro so polarising?
The 63-year-old, who is representing the Social Liberal Party (PSL), is followed by millions of Brazilians on social media, and many refer to him as the "Brazilian Trump".
Brazil's unlikely young conservatives
He also supports loosening gun control laws, and is backed by millions of evangelical Christians for his uncompromising anti-abortion stance.
A former army captain, Mr Bolsonaro entered politics in the 1980s to defend the rights of military personnel.
Few imagined at that time that he could become a serious contender. But the collapse of the Workers' Party government and the impeachment of President Rousseff two years ago revealed the extent of political divisions.
Image caption
Mr Bolsonaro has performed strongly in polls ahead of next month's election
Mr Bolsonaro's outspoken rhetoric and his defence of law and order appealed to many who blamed the left for corruption and the economic crisis.
In 2011, he told Playboy magazine that he would be "incapable of loving a gay son" and that he would rather see such a son of his "die in an accident".
In 2015, he was fined for saying in a newspaper interview that Congresswoman Maria do Rosario was "not worth raping; she is very ugly".
He is currently being investigated for alleged racism over derogatory remarks he made about Afro-Brazilians.
Who will be Brazil's next president?
President Temer, an unpopular leader, is not standing for re-election, and millions of voters remain undecided.
Mr Bolsonaro is expected to have a strong first round but lose a run-off to leftist Ciro Gomes, environmentalist Marina Silva or ex-Governor of Sao Paulo Geraldo Alckmin, according to leading research company Ibope.
A race against Lula's likely replacement, Fernando Haddad, could be much narrower. Ibope said its most recent survey showed Mr Bolsonaro losing to him by just one percentage point.
Mr Haddad was charged with corruption earlier this week and, like Lula, denies any wrongdoing.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected Lula's latest appeal to run. The Workers' Party has until the end of Tuesday to register Mr Haddad as its presidential candidate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
