Sept. 21, 2018.
Brett Kavanaugh nomination: Trump challenges accuser
Brett Kavanaugh denies the allegations by Christine Blasey Ford
President Donald Trump has challenged the woman who has accused his Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault, demanding she provide evidence.
Mr Trump questioned why the FBI was not called at the time of the alleged assault, in 1982, if it was "as bad as she says".
The nomination of Brett Kavanaugh has been held up while the allegations of Christine Blasey Ford are assessed.
Both have agreed to testify before a Senate committee.
However, Prof Ford has set out conditions for her appearance which have yet to be agreed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The committee must approve the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh before it passes to the full Senate for a vote.
The truth about false assault accusations
Kavanaugh accuser 'faces death threats'
Could Kavanaugh confirmation be derailed?
The choice of a new justice for the Supreme Court is pivotal, as it often gives the final word on highly contentious laws and its nine judges have an immense impact on US political life.
What has Mr Trump said?
In a series of tweets, the president again delivered his full support for Judge Kavanaugh, saying he was a "fine man, with an impeccable reputation".
He went on: "I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn date, time, and place!"
He added: "Why didn't someone call the FBI 36 years ago?"
Mr Trump also attacked "radical left wing politicians who don't want to know the answers, they just want to destroy and delay".
Skip Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
The radical left lawyers want the FBI to get involved NOW. Why didn’t someone call the FBI 36 years ago?
11:29 PM - Sep 21, 2018
President Trump had also weighed in on the process on Thursday, telling Fox News: "I don't think you can delay it any longer. They've delayed it a week already... they have to get on with it."
The Senate Judiciary Committee vote on Judge Kavanaugh had originally been scheduled for Thursday.
What was Prof Ford's account?
The details of the alleged assault at a gathering of teenagers at a house in Montgomery County, Maryland, were carried in the Washington Post this week when Prof Ford decided to reveal her identity and tell the story.
She made it clear in the Post that she had told no-one of the incident in any detail until 2012 when she attended couples therapy with her husband.
The psychology professor at Palo Alto University in California said she was being treated for what she said had been the long-term effects of the incident.
She told a senior Democratic lawmaker of her allegation in a confidential letter this summer and only went public after it was leaked.
Judge Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied the allegation.
Where is the committee at now?
Committee chairman Chuck Grassley had called for written testimony by this Friday from Prof Ford and scheduled a hearing on the matter for Monday.
Her lawyer, Debra Katz, rejected this and in a phone call to the committee on Thursday spelled out her client's conditions for testifying.
They include:
Prof Ford will not testify if Judge Kavanaugh is in the room
Judge Kavanaugh must testify first
There can be no appearance before next Thursday
Questions to be posed preferably by senators and not outside counsel
Mark Judge, who is reported to have been a witness to the alleged assault, should be subpoenaed to appear
Agrees to a public hearing but wants limits on the media coverage
Will the conditions be accepted?
There are problems with at least three of the requests.
Why it can take sexual assault allegations years to come out
The Senate Judiciary Committee would have to change the Monday hearing.
It is also not traditional for the accused to testify first and not have an opportunity for rebuttal.
White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said: "Asking for that usual sequence to be reversed is very unusual."
Why is the US top court so important??
Meet the Supremes - who are the justices?
Neither is it traditional for any subpoenas to be issued for the nomination process.
However, Ms Katz suggested there appeared to be room for negotiation when she sent a letter to the committee after the phone call, saying: "The only issue I said was a deal breaker was that Dr Ford cannot appear at a hearing on Monday."
Threats to all sides
Prof Ford, Mr Kavanaugh and the judge's wife have all been receiving threats, as the case becomes increasingly contentious.
Ms Katz said of her client: "She's been receiving death threats which have been reported to the FBI and she and her family have been forced out of their home."
Friday, September 21, 2018
Thursday, September 20, 2018
How the Financial Crisis Undermined America’s Place Atop the Global Order - TIME Business
How the Financial Crisis Undermined America’s Place Atop the Global Order
Posted: ( will be posted in October isue of TIME )
Ten years on, the reverberations from the global financial crisis are still shaking up the world order. While the catastrophe led to movements toward nationalism in several countries, it also accelerated America’s departure from its position as leader of the world–and in the void, a new power has begun to rise.
Confidence that the U.S. is a force for international stability began eroding well before Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy. U.S. policymakers had presided over a downsizing of the nation’s role in the world in advance of the 2008 crash, and Americans elected increasingly isolationist Presidents. Widespread opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq marked a crucial post–Cold War turning point by aligning the views of a majority of America’s European allies with Russia.
The financial crisis and all that followed sharply exacerbated these negative attitudes by calling into question the long-term viability of Western capitalism. (If the U.S. can’t properly regulate its own banks, how can it serve as a model for developing countries?) The search for an alternative model took on new urgency.
A decade ago, China wasn’t yet ready to offer one. But the U.S.-based meltdown presented Beijing with an unprecedented opportunity to showcase the virtues of state-driven economic development. The country’s political leaders demonstrated their ability to respond to the crisis with fast and effective emergency measures. In 2008, China’s economy was smaller than Japan’s. Today it’s more than twice as large–and about equal to the combined total of the 19 countries that use the euro. As China’s economy expanded, so did its influence.
Stability had rarely been more appealing. A sovereign debt crisis created existential threats for the euro zone. A collapse in commodity prices–in late 2008, oil fell from $147 per barrel to about $30 per barrel in less than five months–helped create conditions for the wave of unrest that toppled governments in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya; set the Saudis on edge; and shoved Syria and Yemen into civil war. Waves of desperate migrants fleeing this upheaval made their way north, further irritating Europe’s precarious politics and inspiring pressure for tighter borders and new attitudes toward immigration.
These pressures certainly boosted support for Brexit and Trump. They also led voters to turn from traditional parties of center right and center left in France, Germany, Italy and elsewhere toward new voices and political parties promising new kinds of change. But this was not just a U.S.-European trend. Voters in Mexico and Pakistan pushed aside establishment parties and political dynasties in search of a new direction. Voters in Brazil may well follow suit in October.
Today, the global balance of power is no longer clear. Trump says the U.S. can win a trade war with China, but his political vulnerability has only emboldened Chinese President Xi Jinping. In the realm of cyberspace, meanwhile, conflicts are even more dangerous because unlike nuclear missiles, these weapons can actually be used to test an adversary’s strength.
China also now offers an increasingly credible alternative to both multiparty democracy and free-market capitalism, one with real appeal for governments, particularly in the Middle East and Africa, that want to maintain a tight grip on power. As China’s investments expand in every region of the world, it becomes ever more obvious that U.S. power isn’t as persuasive as it used to be.
Additionally, the U.S. has not responded to the 2008 crisis by investing in the future. It’s one thing to bail out industry and banks. It’s another to address the country’s growing inequality that leaves many people feeling as if they have no future. There is no credible plan to help those who lose jobs as the workplace automates. And Americans still invest for short-term gain rather than long-term productivity. That’s why the stock market is rising while infrastructure crumbles. Ten years on, these important lessons have still not been learned.
As a result, America’s longevity at the top is now very much in doubt. China, North Korea and Iran have reason to believe they can wait Trump out. And given that the U.S.’s influence has been eroding so quickly and for so long, it’s clear that for the foreseeable future, its leaders will need to continue to grapple with the limits of a superpower’s power.
This appears in the October 01, 2018 issue of TIME.
Ex-Malaysia PM Najib hit with 25 charges of money laundering and abuse of power - BBC News
Sept. 20, 2018.
Ex-Malaysia PM Najib hit with 25 charges of money laundering and abuse of power
Mr Najib has pleaded not guilty to all 25 charges
Malaysia's former prime minister, Najib Razak, has been charged with 21 counts of money laundering, in a case linked to a multi-million dollar corruption scandal.
He was charged in court on Thursday in relation to the alleged transfer of $556m (£421m) from state fund 1MDB into his personal bank account.
He was also charged with four counts of abuse of power.
Mr Najib has pleaded not guilty to all 25 charges.
The latest charges come on top of three counts of money laundering levelled against him in August.
Mr Najib, members of his family and several allies are accused of embezzling huge sums allegedly used to buy everything from artwork to high-end real estate around the globe.
Corruption, money and Malaysia's election
Najib Razak: Malaysia's PM defeated by his mentor
1MDB: The case that has riveted Malaysia
The allegations played a central role in his defeat in an election that was eventually won by his former mentor and long-time PM, 93-year old Mahathir Mohamad.
Demonstrators took to the streets in the run-up to Mr Razak's electoral defeat
1MDB, set up by Mr Najib in 2009, was meant to turn the capital, Kuala Lumpur, into a financial hub and boost the economy through strategic investments.
Instead, it started to attract negative attention in early 2015 after it missed payments for some of the $11bn it owed to banks and bondholders.
Then the Wall Street Journal reported it had seen a paper trail that allegedly traced close to $700m from the fund to Mr Najib's personal bank accounts.
Billions of dollars are still unaccounted for.
Ex-Malaysia PM Najib hit with 25 charges of money laundering and abuse of power
Mr Najib has pleaded not guilty to all 25 charges
Malaysia's former prime minister, Najib Razak, has been charged with 21 counts of money laundering, in a case linked to a multi-million dollar corruption scandal.
He was charged in court on Thursday in relation to the alleged transfer of $556m (£421m) from state fund 1MDB into his personal bank account.
He was also charged with four counts of abuse of power.
Mr Najib has pleaded not guilty to all 25 charges.
The latest charges come on top of three counts of money laundering levelled against him in August.
Mr Najib, members of his family and several allies are accused of embezzling huge sums allegedly used to buy everything from artwork to high-end real estate around the globe.
Corruption, money and Malaysia's election
Najib Razak: Malaysia's PM defeated by his mentor
1MDB: The case that has riveted Malaysia
The allegations played a central role in his defeat in an election that was eventually won by his former mentor and long-time PM, 93-year old Mahathir Mohamad.
Demonstrators took to the streets in the run-up to Mr Razak's electoral defeat
1MDB, set up by Mr Najib in 2009, was meant to turn the capital, Kuala Lumpur, into a financial hub and boost the economy through strategic investments.
Instead, it started to attract negative attention in early 2015 after it missed payments for some of the $11bn it owed to banks and bondholders.
Then the Wall Street Journal reported it had seen a paper trail that allegedly traced close to $700m from the fund to Mr Najib's personal bank accounts.
Billions of dollars are still unaccounted for.
Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court Confirmation Is Now the Ultimate Test of Political Power in 2018 - TIME Politics
Sept. 20, 2018.
Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court Confirmation Is Now the Ultimate Test of Political Power in 2018
Kavanaugh is sworn in for his Supreme Court confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 4.
By MOLLY BALL 6:06 AM EDT
From the beginning, the women were determined to be disruptive. There sat Brett Kavanaugh, looking every bit the world’s most decent man, with his even demeanor and sparkling résumé, ready to go through the motions and receive the benediction of the Senators before him.
Since the day of his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, Kavanaugh had portrayed himself as a champion of women. Introducing himself to the nation, he emphasized the women he cherished, saying his mother, a judge, was his ultimate role model, talking about his daughters and the “majority” of female law clerks he’d hired. Members of the girls’ basketball teams he’s coached sat in the front rows behind him at his Senate confirmation hearing. Earlier, he had recited the names of his daughter’s teammates: “Anna, Quinn, Kelsey, Ceane, Chloe, Alex, Ava, Sophia and Margaret,” he said. “I love helping the girls grow into confident players.”
He had spent a lifetime pushing all the right buttons, and now nothing seemed to stand between the conservative federal judge and a seat on the nation’s highest court. But one after another, women interrupted. Protesters popped up in the back of the room, yelling and waving signs before being hustled out by police. Women Senators spoke out of turn: “Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized,” pleaded Democrat Kamala Harris of California, to no avail. Kavanaugh sat quietly in the middle of it all, a cherubic smile on his face.
TIME photo-illustration; Thomas: J. David Ake–Getty Images; Kavanaugh: Chip Somodevilla–Getty Images
But the women, it turned out, weren’t done disrupting him. Just when the end seemed in sight–his confirmation vote less than a week away after a hearing that had turned up no more than the usual partisan angst–Christine Blasey Ford, a California college professor, decided to put her name to a devastating accusation, charging that, some 36 years prior, when they were both in high school, Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her.
It was a hazy accusation: hesitantly lodged, short on detail and curiously timed. But Ford’s charge shattered Kavanaugh’s carefully crafted tableau, calling into doubt the image he projected. The row of young girls, legs bare in their private-school skirts, looked different now. In the ensuing scramble, Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote was postponed, and he and Ford were invited to testify before the committee on Sept. 24. The prospect of such an extraordinary public hearing conjured obvious parallels to Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas. Twenty-seven years later, another professor with misgivings about coming forward had leveled allegations against a conservative Supreme Court nominee on the eve of his confirmation. And what had seemed a done deal became a fraught and fitting modern morality play.
But while the political spectacle may be similar, this battle will unfold in a different era. Every week brings new variations on the theme of women, racked with pain and rage, rising up in protest after too many years of trauma and terrified silence. Every week, too, has brought fresh reminders of the extent to which our whole reality is the product of the privilege and prejudices of entitled men. They decided what the story was, who got ahead, what the laws were and to whom they applied. Who lived and who died, from prisoners on death row to the fetus in the womb. Who was believed and who was destroyed. The men handled the disruptions quickly and quietly, with lawyers and payments and handshakes, with the grip of a policeman’s fist and a gavel pounded on a desk. Until suddenly there were too many to be contained.
Kavanaugh rejects the charge made against him. “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation,” he said in response. “I did not do this back in high school or at any time.” The White House has stood behind him, and his supporters say he is determined to surmount this last-minute obstacle. “What is being attempted here is a smear campaign to destroy his reputation as a decent man, and he’s not going to allow that to happen,” says a source involved in the confirmation process who speaks to Kavanaugh regularly. “He’s steadfast in his resolve to see it through and to tell the truth and to clear his name.”
His opponents say this must be the time when the scales tip in the other direction. “Now is our moment,” says Ilyse Hogue, head of the abortion-rights group NARAL. “We’ve had enough. We’re not going to take any more. Women are determined to make this a turning point in this country.”
With just a few weeks to go until the first national election of the Trump era, one in which all signs point to a tsunami of female rage as the decisive factor, a dramatic face-off between Kavanaugh and his accuser may be on the horizon–a showdown between two individuals and their memories of what did or didn’t happen so many years ago. But the stakes go beyond that, to who is believed and who decides the truth at this turbulent moment in America. Decisions–a high schooler’s, a judge’s, a middle-aged professor’s–have consequences. How the Kavanaugh drama plays out could be the ultimate test of today’s struggle for political and cultural power.
Kavanaugh answers questions from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearings.
Kavanaugh answers questions from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearings. Mark Peterson—Redux
It was 1982 or thereabouts: “Eye of the Tiger,” Reaganomics, E.T. Christine Blasey, approximately 15, lived in an affluent suburb of Washington, D.C., and attended an elite all-girls private school in Bethesda, Md. One summer night, perhaps after a day at the country-club pool, she went to a party at someone’s house. She was wearing her one-piece bathing suit under her clothes.
She drank beer in the family room, along with some boys she didn’t know well. They were from Georgetown Prep, the all-boys private school a few miles away. The boys at Georgetown Prep had fathers who were lobbyists and businessmen and government officials. They were being groomed to perpetuate the prosperity and status into which they’d been born.
In Ford’s account, Kavanaugh pushed her into a bedroom as she came up the stairs. Loud music was playing. His friend Mark Judge, across the room, was laughing, Ford recalled, as a drunken Kavanaugh pinned her down and tried to get under her clothes to her teenage body.
Ford wasn’t laughing. She was terrified. What if I die? she thought. She tried to scream, but he covered her mouth with his hand. He fumbled, frustrated, with her swimsuit. Finally, after Judge jumped on them, she wriggled free, locked herself in a bathroom and, when she’d heard the boys leave the room, ran out of the house, she said in an interview with the Washington Post.
About a decade later, as Ford moved through young adulthood to her academic career, a different man, Clarence Thomas, was nominated to the Supreme Court. Anita Hill, a woman who’d worked with him, came forward to accuse him of a prolonged campaign of sexual harassment. She faced a wall of male Senators from both parties, who needled and disbelieved her, and voted through the nominee, after he called the hearing a “high-tech lynching.” A year later there was an election, and women mobbed the polls, vastly expanding their numbers in Congress. Hill had lost her confrontation with the forces of power, but she’d helped propel a decades-long shift in the way women perceived their place in society.
Many more years would pass before Christine Blasey Ford confronted what she said happened when she was a teenager. Thirty years after the alleged incident, a 51-year-old married mother of two working as a research psychologist at a university in Northern California, it still weighed on her. She’d never told anyone the details of the incident until, in 2012, she related the story to her therapist and her husband. Notes from that session largely corroborate her account, according to the Post story, but if Ford said the boy’s name, the therapist didn’t write it down.
By July 2018, the boy she remembered was mentioned on the short list of potential nominees to the Supreme Court. The last thing she wanted was to be caught in the middle of that–she had a quiet life, was politically liberal but hardly an activist, had suffered enough already. But it didn’t feel right not to say anything. So she sent a letter to her Congresswoman and left an anonymous message on a newspaper tip line. She figured they would find a way to do something about it; she figured she could keep her name out of it.
The Congresswoman and the newspaper didn’t know what to do with the anonymous accusation. The boy was on course to replace his former boss, retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, potentially changing the face of American law by cementing a conservative majority for a generation. On July 30, Ford wrote a letter to California Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, saying Kavanaugh had assaulted her but requesting anonymity. Feinstein said nothing publicly until mid-September, when, with Kavanaugh on the cusp of his confirmation vote, she announced that she had referred an unspecified matter to the FBI.
Ford had hired a lawyer and taken a lie-detector test, but as rumors circulated and reporters started showing up at her door, she concluded she would have to put her name behind the allegation. “Now I feel like my civic responsibility is outweighing my anguish and terror about retaliation,” she told the Washington Post in a detailed account that is the only public statement she has made. Ford’s lawyer didn’t respond to an interview request for this article.
For his part, Kavanaugh stood by his blanket denial. “This is a completely false allegation,” he said. “I have never done anything like what the accuser describes–to her or to anyone.”
The reaction was swift and furious. The Senate delayed a Sept. 20 committee vote on Kavanaugh, and Judiciary chairman Chuck Grassley scheduled a hearing for Monday, Sept. 24. Ford had said she was willing to give her testimony to the Senate, but on Sept. 18 her lawyer announced that Ford wanted a proper investigation first. Democrats insisted more time was needed for the FBI to probe the matter; by midweek it wasn’t clear whether the planned hearing would go forward.
Ford’s fears about going public have been validated. Furious partisans bombarded her with threats and abuse, forcing her to hire security and move out of her home temporarily, her lawyer said. Ford also received an outpouring of support, the lawyer added. The White House of Donald Trump–a President who has been accused of sexual misconduct by at least 19 women, has been caught on tape boasting about sexual assault and has admitted to paying off women who claim to have had affairs with him–was measured in its response. Senior counselor Kellyanne Conway said Ford “should not be insulted and should not be ignored.” Trump, who has called all his accusers liars and frequently expressed sympathy for men accused of sexual misconduct, lamented the accusation but said it merited a delay in the process.
At the same time, Republicans geared up to defend Kavanaugh. A conservative group announced it would spend $1.5 million to air an ad featuring a longtime female friend attesting to his character. Advocates released supportive statements from two of his former girlfriends. The suite of offices on the fourth floor of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building that served as the nerve center for Kavanaugh’s nomination hearings once again bustled with activity. Kavanaugh huddled with White House counsel Don McGahn, who is shepherding his nomination, and repeated his blanket denials, a White House official said. He made calls to lawmakers and spent hours in mock cross-examination about the allegation, his conduct and his character.
Because he has explicitly denied ever behaving in the manner Ford described, any evidence that supports her account would shatter his credibility. “He emphatically denied that the allegations were true,” said Senator Susan Collins, the moderate Maine Republican who is considered a key swing vote, after discussing the allegations with Kavanaugh in an hourlong phone conversation. “He said that he had never acted that way, not only with this unnamed accuser but with any woman. He was absolutely emphatic about that.” Collins added, “Obviously, if Judge Kavanaugh has lied about what happened, that would be disqualifying.”
At the same time, the details missing from Ford’s story make it equally possible that evidence will emerge to undermine it. She says she is not sure when the alleged incident occurred, who hosted the party or how she got to the party. The source involved in the process expects new revelations to fill what he called the “gaps” in Ford’s story. “An individual who puts an allegation out with some serious gaps invites that kind of gap filling,” the source says. “Sometimes that gap filling helps corroborate what’s already there, and sometimes it completely blows the story out of the water.”
The same moderate Republicans and red-state Democrats to whom Kavanaugh’s squeaky-clean introduction was targeted are now jittery and hesitant about his confirmation prospects. Collins and Senator Lisa Murkowski, another Republican who supports abortion rights, were among the first to call for hearings. Democrats Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Donnelly, Jon Tester, Claire McCaskill and Joe Manchin, all of whom are up for re-election in states Trump won handily and were considered possible votes for Kavanaugh, also called for further investigation. The GOP’s one-vote majority means that without any Democratic votes, it can afford only one defection to get the nomination through.
All this comes against the backdrop of an election season that was already shaping up as a referendum on male impunity and female empowerment. Before Ford came forward, the major issues in Kavanaugh’s hearings were how he might rule on cases related to abortion and Trump’s susceptibility to prosecution–two issues that relate directly to the same questions of power and autonomy. Both parties have every incentive to fight to the finish: Democrats see an opportunity to galvanize their already furious base, while Republicans, who’d hoped to put a big election-eve win on the board, fear discouraging theirs.
Into this storm will step two people, a man and a woman, who were once a boy and a girl, who may or may not have collided on a hot suburban night so many years ago. What happens next will answer the central question: Decisions have consequences–but for whom?
With reporting by Charlotte Alter and Alana Abramson/New York; Philip Elliot/Tampa; and Brian Bennet, Tessa Berenson, Abby Vesoulis and Justin Worland/Washington
Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court Confirmation Is Now the Ultimate Test of Political Power in 2018
Kavanaugh is sworn in for his Supreme Court confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 4.
By MOLLY BALL 6:06 AM EDT
From the beginning, the women were determined to be disruptive. There sat Brett Kavanaugh, looking every bit the world’s most decent man, with his even demeanor and sparkling résumé, ready to go through the motions and receive the benediction of the Senators before him.
Since the day of his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, Kavanaugh had portrayed himself as a champion of women. Introducing himself to the nation, he emphasized the women he cherished, saying his mother, a judge, was his ultimate role model, talking about his daughters and the “majority” of female law clerks he’d hired. Members of the girls’ basketball teams he’s coached sat in the front rows behind him at his Senate confirmation hearing. Earlier, he had recited the names of his daughter’s teammates: “Anna, Quinn, Kelsey, Ceane, Chloe, Alex, Ava, Sophia and Margaret,” he said. “I love helping the girls grow into confident players.”
He had spent a lifetime pushing all the right buttons, and now nothing seemed to stand between the conservative federal judge and a seat on the nation’s highest court. But one after another, women interrupted. Protesters popped up in the back of the room, yelling and waving signs before being hustled out by police. Women Senators spoke out of turn: “Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized,” pleaded Democrat Kamala Harris of California, to no avail. Kavanaugh sat quietly in the middle of it all, a cherubic smile on his face.
TIME photo-illustration; Thomas: J. David Ake–Getty Images; Kavanaugh: Chip Somodevilla–Getty Images
But the women, it turned out, weren’t done disrupting him. Just when the end seemed in sight–his confirmation vote less than a week away after a hearing that had turned up no more than the usual partisan angst–Christine Blasey Ford, a California college professor, decided to put her name to a devastating accusation, charging that, some 36 years prior, when they were both in high school, Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her.
It was a hazy accusation: hesitantly lodged, short on detail and curiously timed. But Ford’s charge shattered Kavanaugh’s carefully crafted tableau, calling into doubt the image he projected. The row of young girls, legs bare in their private-school skirts, looked different now. In the ensuing scramble, Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote was postponed, and he and Ford were invited to testify before the committee on Sept. 24. The prospect of such an extraordinary public hearing conjured obvious parallels to Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas. Twenty-seven years later, another professor with misgivings about coming forward had leveled allegations against a conservative Supreme Court nominee on the eve of his confirmation. And what had seemed a done deal became a fraught and fitting modern morality play.
But while the political spectacle may be similar, this battle will unfold in a different era. Every week brings new variations on the theme of women, racked with pain and rage, rising up in protest after too many years of trauma and terrified silence. Every week, too, has brought fresh reminders of the extent to which our whole reality is the product of the privilege and prejudices of entitled men. They decided what the story was, who got ahead, what the laws were and to whom they applied. Who lived and who died, from prisoners on death row to the fetus in the womb. Who was believed and who was destroyed. The men handled the disruptions quickly and quietly, with lawyers and payments and handshakes, with the grip of a policeman’s fist and a gavel pounded on a desk. Until suddenly there were too many to be contained.
Kavanaugh rejects the charge made against him. “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation,” he said in response. “I did not do this back in high school or at any time.” The White House has stood behind him, and his supporters say he is determined to surmount this last-minute obstacle. “What is being attempted here is a smear campaign to destroy his reputation as a decent man, and he’s not going to allow that to happen,” says a source involved in the confirmation process who speaks to Kavanaugh regularly. “He’s steadfast in his resolve to see it through and to tell the truth and to clear his name.”
His opponents say this must be the time when the scales tip in the other direction. “Now is our moment,” says Ilyse Hogue, head of the abortion-rights group NARAL. “We’ve had enough. We’re not going to take any more. Women are determined to make this a turning point in this country.”
With just a few weeks to go until the first national election of the Trump era, one in which all signs point to a tsunami of female rage as the decisive factor, a dramatic face-off between Kavanaugh and his accuser may be on the horizon–a showdown between two individuals and their memories of what did or didn’t happen so many years ago. But the stakes go beyond that, to who is believed and who decides the truth at this turbulent moment in America. Decisions–a high schooler’s, a judge’s, a middle-aged professor’s–have consequences. How the Kavanaugh drama plays out could be the ultimate test of today’s struggle for political and cultural power.
Kavanaugh answers questions from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearings.
Kavanaugh answers questions from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearings. Mark Peterson—Redux
It was 1982 or thereabouts: “Eye of the Tiger,” Reaganomics, E.T. Christine Blasey, approximately 15, lived in an affluent suburb of Washington, D.C., and attended an elite all-girls private school in Bethesda, Md. One summer night, perhaps after a day at the country-club pool, she went to a party at someone’s house. She was wearing her one-piece bathing suit under her clothes.
She drank beer in the family room, along with some boys she didn’t know well. They were from Georgetown Prep, the all-boys private school a few miles away. The boys at Georgetown Prep had fathers who were lobbyists and businessmen and government officials. They were being groomed to perpetuate the prosperity and status into which they’d been born.
In Ford’s account, Kavanaugh pushed her into a bedroom as she came up the stairs. Loud music was playing. His friend Mark Judge, across the room, was laughing, Ford recalled, as a drunken Kavanaugh pinned her down and tried to get under her clothes to her teenage body.
Ford wasn’t laughing. She was terrified. What if I die? she thought. She tried to scream, but he covered her mouth with his hand. He fumbled, frustrated, with her swimsuit. Finally, after Judge jumped on them, she wriggled free, locked herself in a bathroom and, when she’d heard the boys leave the room, ran out of the house, she said in an interview with the Washington Post.
About a decade later, as Ford moved through young adulthood to her academic career, a different man, Clarence Thomas, was nominated to the Supreme Court. Anita Hill, a woman who’d worked with him, came forward to accuse him of a prolonged campaign of sexual harassment. She faced a wall of male Senators from both parties, who needled and disbelieved her, and voted through the nominee, after he called the hearing a “high-tech lynching.” A year later there was an election, and women mobbed the polls, vastly expanding their numbers in Congress. Hill had lost her confrontation with the forces of power, but she’d helped propel a decades-long shift in the way women perceived their place in society.
Many more years would pass before Christine Blasey Ford confronted what she said happened when she was a teenager. Thirty years after the alleged incident, a 51-year-old married mother of two working as a research psychologist at a university in Northern California, it still weighed on her. She’d never told anyone the details of the incident until, in 2012, she related the story to her therapist and her husband. Notes from that session largely corroborate her account, according to the Post story, but if Ford said the boy’s name, the therapist didn’t write it down.
By July 2018, the boy she remembered was mentioned on the short list of potential nominees to the Supreme Court. The last thing she wanted was to be caught in the middle of that–she had a quiet life, was politically liberal but hardly an activist, had suffered enough already. But it didn’t feel right not to say anything. So she sent a letter to her Congresswoman and left an anonymous message on a newspaper tip line. She figured they would find a way to do something about it; she figured she could keep her name out of it.
The Congresswoman and the newspaper didn’t know what to do with the anonymous accusation. The boy was on course to replace his former boss, retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, potentially changing the face of American law by cementing a conservative majority for a generation. On July 30, Ford wrote a letter to California Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, saying Kavanaugh had assaulted her but requesting anonymity. Feinstein said nothing publicly until mid-September, when, with Kavanaugh on the cusp of his confirmation vote, she announced that she had referred an unspecified matter to the FBI.
Ford had hired a lawyer and taken a lie-detector test, but as rumors circulated and reporters started showing up at her door, she concluded she would have to put her name behind the allegation. “Now I feel like my civic responsibility is outweighing my anguish and terror about retaliation,” she told the Washington Post in a detailed account that is the only public statement she has made. Ford’s lawyer didn’t respond to an interview request for this article.
For his part, Kavanaugh stood by his blanket denial. “This is a completely false allegation,” he said. “I have never done anything like what the accuser describes–to her or to anyone.”
The reaction was swift and furious. The Senate delayed a Sept. 20 committee vote on Kavanaugh, and Judiciary chairman Chuck Grassley scheduled a hearing for Monday, Sept. 24. Ford had said she was willing to give her testimony to the Senate, but on Sept. 18 her lawyer announced that Ford wanted a proper investigation first. Democrats insisted more time was needed for the FBI to probe the matter; by midweek it wasn’t clear whether the planned hearing would go forward.
Ford’s fears about going public have been validated. Furious partisans bombarded her with threats and abuse, forcing her to hire security and move out of her home temporarily, her lawyer said. Ford also received an outpouring of support, the lawyer added. The White House of Donald Trump–a President who has been accused of sexual misconduct by at least 19 women, has been caught on tape boasting about sexual assault and has admitted to paying off women who claim to have had affairs with him–was measured in its response. Senior counselor Kellyanne Conway said Ford “should not be insulted and should not be ignored.” Trump, who has called all his accusers liars and frequently expressed sympathy for men accused of sexual misconduct, lamented the accusation but said it merited a delay in the process.
At the same time, Republicans geared up to defend Kavanaugh. A conservative group announced it would spend $1.5 million to air an ad featuring a longtime female friend attesting to his character. Advocates released supportive statements from two of his former girlfriends. The suite of offices on the fourth floor of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building that served as the nerve center for Kavanaugh’s nomination hearings once again bustled with activity. Kavanaugh huddled with White House counsel Don McGahn, who is shepherding his nomination, and repeated his blanket denials, a White House official said. He made calls to lawmakers and spent hours in mock cross-examination about the allegation, his conduct and his character.
Because he has explicitly denied ever behaving in the manner Ford described, any evidence that supports her account would shatter his credibility. “He emphatically denied that the allegations were true,” said Senator Susan Collins, the moderate Maine Republican who is considered a key swing vote, after discussing the allegations with Kavanaugh in an hourlong phone conversation. “He said that he had never acted that way, not only with this unnamed accuser but with any woman. He was absolutely emphatic about that.” Collins added, “Obviously, if Judge Kavanaugh has lied about what happened, that would be disqualifying.”
At the same time, the details missing from Ford’s story make it equally possible that evidence will emerge to undermine it. She says she is not sure when the alleged incident occurred, who hosted the party or how she got to the party. The source involved in the process expects new revelations to fill what he called the “gaps” in Ford’s story. “An individual who puts an allegation out with some serious gaps invites that kind of gap filling,” the source says. “Sometimes that gap filling helps corroborate what’s already there, and sometimes it completely blows the story out of the water.”
The same moderate Republicans and red-state Democrats to whom Kavanaugh’s squeaky-clean introduction was targeted are now jittery and hesitant about his confirmation prospects. Collins and Senator Lisa Murkowski, another Republican who supports abortion rights, were among the first to call for hearings. Democrats Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Donnelly, Jon Tester, Claire McCaskill and Joe Manchin, all of whom are up for re-election in states Trump won handily and were considered possible votes for Kavanaugh, also called for further investigation. The GOP’s one-vote majority means that without any Democratic votes, it can afford only one defection to get the nomination through.
All this comes against the backdrop of an election season that was already shaping up as a referendum on male impunity and female empowerment. Before Ford came forward, the major issues in Kavanaugh’s hearings were how he might rule on cases related to abortion and Trump’s susceptibility to prosecution–two issues that relate directly to the same questions of power and autonomy. Both parties have every incentive to fight to the finish: Democrats see an opportunity to galvanize their already furious base, while Republicans, who’d hoped to put a big election-eve win on the board, fear discouraging theirs.
Into this storm will step two people, a man and a woman, who were once a boy and a girl, who may or may not have collided on a hot suburban night so many years ago. What happens next will answer the central question: Decisions have consequences–but for whom?
With reporting by Charlotte Alter and Alana Abramson/New York; Philip Elliot/Tampa; and Brian Bennet, Tessa Berenson, Abby Vesoulis and Justin Worland/Washington
China Raises Tariffs on $60 Billion of U.S. Goods in Technology Fight - TIME
China Raises Tariffs on $60 Billion of U.S. Goods in Technology Fight
Posted: 18 Sep 2018
(BEIJING) — China on Tuesday announced a tariff hike on $60 billion of U.S. products in response to President Donald Trump’s latest duty increase in a dispute over Beijing’s technology policy.
The announcement followed a warning by an American business group that a “downward spiral” in their conflict appeared certain following Trump’s penalties on $200 billion of Chinese goods.
The Finance Ministry said it was going ahead with plans announced in August for the increases of 10 percent and 5 percent on 5,207 types of U.S. goods. A list released last month included coffee, honey and industrial chemicals.
The increase is aimed at curbing “trade friction” and the “unilateralism and protectionism of the United States,” the ministry said on its website. It appealed for “pragmatic dialogue” to “jointly safeguard the principle of free trade and the multilateral trading system.”
The Trump administration announced the tariffs on some 5,000 Chinese-made goods will start at 10 percent, beginning Monday. They are to rise to 25 percent on Jan. 1.
A Commerce Ministry statement earlier said Trump’s increase “brings new uncertainty to the consultations” but there was no word on whether Beijing would back out of talks proposed last week by Washington.
The United States complains Chinese industry development plans including “Made in China 2025,” which calls for creating global champions in robotics and other fields, are based on stolen technology, violate Beijing’s market-opening commitments and might erode American industrial leadership.
American companies and trading partners including the European Union and Japan have longstanding complaints about Chinese market barriers and industrial policy. But they object to Trump’s tactics and warn the dispute could chill global economic growth and undermine international trade regulation.
The American Chamber of Commerce in China warned Washington is underestimating Beijing’s determination to fight back.
“The downward spiral that we have previously warned about now seems certain to materialize,” the chamber chairman, William Zarit, said in a statement.
Trump imposed 25 percent duties on $50 billion of Chinese products in July. Beijing retaliated with similar penalties on the same amount of American goods.
The U.S. duties targeted Chinese goods Washington says have benefited from improper industrial policies. Beijing’s penalties hit soybeans and other farm goods from states that voted for Trump in 2016.
Trump threatened Monday to add a further $267 billion in Chinese imports to the target list if China retaliates for the latest U.S. duties. That would raise the total affected by U.S. penalties to $517 billion — covering nearly everything China sells the United States.
“Contrary to views in Washington, China can — and will — dig its heels in and we are not optimistic about the prospect for a resolution in the short term,” said Zarit of the American Chamber of Commerce. “No one will emerge victorious from this counter-productive cycle.”
The chamber appealed to both governments for “results-oriented negotiations.”
As Beijing runs out of U.S. goods for retaliation, American companies say regulators are starting to disrupt their operations.
Last week, the American Chambers of Commerce in China and in Shanghai reported 52 percent of more than 430 companies that responded to a survey said they have faced slower customs clearance and increased inspections and bureaucratic procedures.
The U.S. government withdrew some items from its preliminary list of $200 billion in Chinese imports to be taxed, including child-safety products such as bicycle helmets. And in a victory for Apple Inc., the administration removed smart watches and some other consumer electronics products.
“China has had many opportunities to fully address our concerns,” Trump said in a statement. “I urge China’s leaders to take swift action to end their country’s unfair trade practices.”
Trump has also complained about America’s gaping trade deficit — $336 billion last year — with China, its biggest trading partner.
In May, in fact, it looked briefly as if Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He had brokered a truce built around a Chinese offer to buy enough American farm products and liquefied natural gas to put a dent in the trade deficit. But Trump quickly backed away from the truce.
In the first two rounds of tariffs, the Trump administration took care to try to spare American consumers from the direct impact of the import taxes. The tariffs focused on industrial products, not on things Americans buy at the mall or via Amazon.
By expanding the list to $200 billion of Chinese products, Trump may spread the pain to ordinary households. The administration is targeting a bewildering variety of goods — from sockeye salmon to baseball gloves to bamboo mats — forcing U.S. companies to scramble for suppliers outside China, absorb the import taxes or pass along the cost to their customers.
Sohn said the Trump administration is pursuing a legitimate goal of getting China to stop violating international trade rules but that it should have enlisted support from other trading partners, such as the European Union, Canada and Mexico, and presented Beijing with a united front.
Trump has strained relations with potential allies including the European Union, Canada and Mexico by raising tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. He demanded Canada and Mexico renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement to make it more favorable to the United States.
Posted: 18 Sep 2018
(BEIJING) — China on Tuesday announced a tariff hike on $60 billion of U.S. products in response to President Donald Trump’s latest duty increase in a dispute over Beijing’s technology policy.
The announcement followed a warning by an American business group that a “downward spiral” in their conflict appeared certain following Trump’s penalties on $200 billion of Chinese goods.
The Finance Ministry said it was going ahead with plans announced in August for the increases of 10 percent and 5 percent on 5,207 types of U.S. goods. A list released last month included coffee, honey and industrial chemicals.
The increase is aimed at curbing “trade friction” and the “unilateralism and protectionism of the United States,” the ministry said on its website. It appealed for “pragmatic dialogue” to “jointly safeguard the principle of free trade and the multilateral trading system.”
The Trump administration announced the tariffs on some 5,000 Chinese-made goods will start at 10 percent, beginning Monday. They are to rise to 25 percent on Jan. 1.
A Commerce Ministry statement earlier said Trump’s increase “brings new uncertainty to the consultations” but there was no word on whether Beijing would back out of talks proposed last week by Washington.
The United States complains Chinese industry development plans including “Made in China 2025,” which calls for creating global champions in robotics and other fields, are based on stolen technology, violate Beijing’s market-opening commitments and might erode American industrial leadership.
American companies and trading partners including the European Union and Japan have longstanding complaints about Chinese market barriers and industrial policy. But they object to Trump’s tactics and warn the dispute could chill global economic growth and undermine international trade regulation.
The American Chamber of Commerce in China warned Washington is underestimating Beijing’s determination to fight back.
“The downward spiral that we have previously warned about now seems certain to materialize,” the chamber chairman, William Zarit, said in a statement.
Trump imposed 25 percent duties on $50 billion of Chinese products in July. Beijing retaliated with similar penalties on the same amount of American goods.
The U.S. duties targeted Chinese goods Washington says have benefited from improper industrial policies. Beijing’s penalties hit soybeans and other farm goods from states that voted for Trump in 2016.
Trump threatened Monday to add a further $267 billion in Chinese imports to the target list if China retaliates for the latest U.S. duties. That would raise the total affected by U.S. penalties to $517 billion — covering nearly everything China sells the United States.
“Contrary to views in Washington, China can — and will — dig its heels in and we are not optimistic about the prospect for a resolution in the short term,” said Zarit of the American Chamber of Commerce. “No one will emerge victorious from this counter-productive cycle.”
The chamber appealed to both governments for “results-oriented negotiations.”
As Beijing runs out of U.S. goods for retaliation, American companies say regulators are starting to disrupt their operations.
Last week, the American Chambers of Commerce in China and in Shanghai reported 52 percent of more than 430 companies that responded to a survey said they have faced slower customs clearance and increased inspections and bureaucratic procedures.
The U.S. government withdrew some items from its preliminary list of $200 billion in Chinese imports to be taxed, including child-safety products such as bicycle helmets. And in a victory for Apple Inc., the administration removed smart watches and some other consumer electronics products.
“China has had many opportunities to fully address our concerns,” Trump said in a statement. “I urge China’s leaders to take swift action to end their country’s unfair trade practices.”
Trump has also complained about America’s gaping trade deficit — $336 billion last year — with China, its biggest trading partner.
In May, in fact, it looked briefly as if Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He had brokered a truce built around a Chinese offer to buy enough American farm products and liquefied natural gas to put a dent in the trade deficit. But Trump quickly backed away from the truce.
In the first two rounds of tariffs, the Trump administration took care to try to spare American consumers from the direct impact of the import taxes. The tariffs focused on industrial products, not on things Americans buy at the mall or via Amazon.
By expanding the list to $200 billion of Chinese products, Trump may spread the pain to ordinary households. The administration is targeting a bewildering variety of goods — from sockeye salmon to baseball gloves to bamboo mats — forcing U.S. companies to scramble for suppliers outside China, absorb the import taxes or pass along the cost to their customers.
Sohn said the Trump administration is pursuing a legitimate goal of getting China to stop violating international trade rules but that it should have enlisted support from other trading partners, such as the European Union, Canada and Mexico, and presented Beijing with a united front.
Trump has strained relations with potential allies including the European Union, Canada and Mexico by raising tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. He demanded Canada and Mexico renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement to make it more favorable to the United States.
Tesla Says It Has Turned Over Documents to the Justice Department -
Tesla Says It Has Turned Over Documents to the Justice Department
Posted: 18 Sep 2018 01:34 PM PDT
(DETROIT) — Tesla Inc. has turned over documents to the U.S. Justice Department after statements by CEO Elon Musk about taking the company private, the electric car maker confirmed Tuesday.
The Palo Alto, California, company cooperated with the request and believes the matter should be resolved quickly once federal prosecutors review information they have received, according to a company statement.
News of a potential criminal investigation pushed Tesla stock down 5 percent in morning trading Tuesday, but the decline subsided a bit by early afternoon to 3.4 percent, at $284.89.
“We have not received a subpoena, a request for testimony, or any other formal process,” Tesla’s statement said.
Bloomberg News reported Tuesday morning that the Justice Department is running a criminal probe parallel to an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The news service cited two people familiar with the matter that it did not identify.
The Justice Department generally does not confirm or deny investigations, spokeswoman Nicole Navas Oxman in Washington said. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in San Francisco took the same stance.
Tesla said it was contacted by prosecutors after Musk tweeted last month while driving to the airport that funding was secured to take the company private. The announcement raised the stock price 11 percent in one day, but it has since fallen.
Later the company admitted that funding wasn’t lined up and eventually Musk abandoned the idea.
Short-sellers, who bet against the stock appreciating, complained that Musk’s announcement was done to manipulate the stock price and cost them money.
Stephen Crimmins, a former deputy chief of litigation for the SEC, said prosecutors probably are looking at Musk’s tweets to be cautious. “It automatically becomes so high profile that the government enforcers have to be particularly conscientious in taking a look at things,” he said.
Crimmins said Musk “speaks loosely,” but his conduct probably doesn’t rise to the criminal level. Prosecutors would have to prove Musk lied in order to move the stock price, which would be difficult, Crimmins said. Any loss to short-sellers would be for a short period and wouldn’t be worth the risk of Musk intentionally manipulating the stock price, Crimmins said.
The SEC likely would pursue a civil remedy that would include a provision that someone at Tesla review Musk’s tweets on corporate matters before they are sent out, he said.
'Least impressive sex I ever had': Stormy Daniels tells all about Trump in bombshell book The book, titled "Full Disclosure, -
'Least impressive sex I ever had': Stormy Daniels tells all about Trump in bombshell book
The book, titled "Full Disclosure," was obtained ahead of its Oct. 2 release by The Guardian newspaper.
by Adam Edelman / Sep.18.2018
Adult film actress/director Stormy Daniels attends the 2018 Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas.Gabe Ginsberg / Getty Images file
Adult film star Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an affair with President Donald Trump more than a decade ago and is suing the president, described sex with the future commander in chief as "the least impressive sex I’d ever had" in a new book.
The book, titled "Full Disclosure," was obtained ahead of its Oct. 2 release by The Guardian newspaper. NBC News has not obtained the book.
"It may have been the least impressive sex I'd ever had, but clearly, he didn't share that opinion," she wrote, according to The Guardian.
Daniels had lingering remorse over the experience for years, writing that any time she'd see Trump on television, she'd think: "I had sex with that, I’d say to myself. Eech."
The White House had no immediate comment about the new book.
Victory for Stormy Daniels as Trump, Cohen give up on hush deal
SEP.11.201802:51
After the tryst with Daniels, Trump promised to put her on his "The Apprentice" reality show, Daniels writes in the book, according to The Guardian, and even indicated he would fix the results in her favor to have her last on the show.
"We'll figure out a way to get you the challenges beforehand," Daniels quoted Trump has having told her. "And we can devise your technique."
"He was going to have me cheat, and it was 100 percent his idea," she wrote, according to The Guardian.
Brett Kavanaugh's accuser Christine Blasey Ford is changing how society deals with sexual assault accusations
Russia, China embrace uneasily, aim for 'desirable world order'
Years later, when Trump would decide to run for president, Daniels repeatedly dismissed the idea he could win — until, of course, he eventually did.
"It will never happen, I would say," Daniels wrote. "He doesn’t even want to be president."
Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, also describes Trump’s sex organs in graphic detail.
Daniels has suggested she had a one-time sexual encounter with Trump in a hotel room. She alleged in a civil lawsuit that she and Trump had an "intimate relationship" that lasted from summer 2006 "well into the year 2007" and which included meetings in Lake Tahoe and at the Beverly Hills Hotel. The White House denies Trump had an affair with her.
But Trump's private attorney, Michael Cohen, admitted in February he had paid her $130,000 — which she says was to buy her silence over the "intimate relationship." NBC News reported in April that Daniels is cooperating with federal investigators as part of their criminal investigation into Cohen.
In May, Trump said Daniels was paid to stop "false and extortionist accusations" she made about a sexual encounter with him. Trump has forcefully denied the affair. Daniels has filed two lawsuits against Trump, one to get out of a nondisclosure agreement she signed in October 2016 ahead of the November presidential election in exchange for the $130,000, and another for defamation.
Important news headlines - September 20, 2018 - NBC News
September 20, 2018
Important news headlines
Good Thursday morning. Here are some of the stories making news in Washington and politics today.
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing this month in Washington.
• The woman who accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault rejected the idea of a Senate hearing, saying it would not be a “good faith investigation.” [Read the story]
• Here’s the story of Christine Blasey Ford, the researcher and statistician who was reluctant to come forward with her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh. [Read the story]
• The accusation against the judge has scrambled the political calculations for 10 Democratic senators running for re-election in states won by President Trump. [Read the story]
• Mr. Trump’s pugilistic approach to trade and China could rupture relations for years to come. [Read the story]
• Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s leader, agreed to “permanently dismantle” key nuclear facilities in a bid to ease tensions with South Korea, but his offers stop short of denuclearization. [Read the story]
• President Andrzej Duda of Poland offered to host an American military base as a bulwark against Russia and even name it Fort Trump. Mr. Trump said Warsaw would have to pay billions to use his name.
• Mr. Trump excoriated his attorney general, the F.B.I., the special counsel and members of the intelligence community, citing conspiracy theories. [Read the story]
• While other presidents have treated natural disaster tours as dignified, even grave affairs, Mr. Trump has deployed humor and enthusiasm. [Read the story]
• A progressive group in Utah filed a federal complaint against Representative Mia Love, a Republican, over alleged campaign finance violations. [Read the story]
• A State Department report said that terrorist attacks and deaths declined in 2017 after a concerted push against the Islamic State, but that Al Qaeda and militant groups linked to Iran remain deadly.
Important news headlines
Good Thursday morning. Here are some of the stories making news in Washington and politics today.
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing this month in Washington.
• The woman who accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault rejected the idea of a Senate hearing, saying it would not be a “good faith investigation.” [Read the story]
• Here’s the story of Christine Blasey Ford, the researcher and statistician who was reluctant to come forward with her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh. [Read the story]
• The accusation against the judge has scrambled the political calculations for 10 Democratic senators running for re-election in states won by President Trump. [Read the story]
• Mr. Trump’s pugilistic approach to trade and China could rupture relations for years to come. [Read the story]
• Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s leader, agreed to “permanently dismantle” key nuclear facilities in a bid to ease tensions with South Korea, but his offers stop short of denuclearization. [Read the story]
• President Andrzej Duda of Poland offered to host an American military base as a bulwark against Russia and even name it Fort Trump. Mr. Trump said Warsaw would have to pay billions to use his name.
• Mr. Trump excoriated his attorney general, the F.B.I., the special counsel and members of the intelligence community, citing conspiracy theories. [Read the story]
• While other presidents have treated natural disaster tours as dignified, even grave affairs, Mr. Trump has deployed humor and enthusiasm. [Read the story]
• A progressive group in Utah filed a federal complaint against Representative Mia Love, a Republican, over alleged campaign finance violations. [Read the story]
• A State Department report said that terrorist attacks and deaths declined in 2017 after a concerted push against the Islamic State, but that Al Qaeda and militant groups linked to Iran remain deadly.
Kim Jong Un hugs Moon Jae-in at start of Korean summit - MSNBC MNews
Kim Jong Un hugs Moon Jae-in at start of Korean summit
Moon Jae-in said he intends to push for "irreversible, permanent peace" and for better dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington.
by Associated Press / Sep.18.2018
Hugs, praise and high expectations as Korean leaders meet in Pyongyang
SEP.18.201801:17
PYONGYANG, North Korea — South Korean President Moon Jae-in arrived in North Korea on Tuesday for his third and possibly most challenging summit yet with leader Kim Jong Un.
Moon hopes to break an impasse in talks with the United States over the North's denuclearization and breathe energy into his own efforts to expand and improve relations between the Koreas.
In what are by now familiar images of the two Korean leaders hugging and exchanging warm smiles, Kim greeted Moon at Pyongyang's airport. They have met twice this year at the border village of Panmunjom, but Moon's visit is the first by a South Korean leader to the North Korean capital in 11 years.
WORLD NEWS
Behind the scenes, Trump’s team is about to get tough with North Korea
Traveling with Moon are business tycoons including Samsung scion Lee Jae-yong, underscoring Moon's hopes to expand cross-border business projects. Currently, all major joint projects between the Koreas are stalled because of U.S.-led sanctions.
Moon was expected to have talks with Kim on Tuesday and Wednesday, according to Moon's chief of staff. Moon and Kim were also expected to jointly announce the results of their talks on Wednesday if things go smoothly. Moon is to return to Seoul on Thursday.
Moon and his wife, Kim Jung-sook, were greeted by Kim and his wife, Ri Sol Ju. The North Korean leader then led his guests to meet some of his senior officials, and they exchanged mutual greetings with Moon's delegation.
Image: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and his wife Ri Sol Ju greet South Korean President Moon Jae-in and First Lady Kim Jung-sookNorth Korean leader Kim Jong Un and his wife Ri Sol Ju greet South Korean President Moon Jae-in and first lady Kim Jung-sook at Pyongyang Sunan International Airport on Tuesday.Pyeongyang press corps
Thousands of North Koreans cheered and waved flower bouquets and national and unification flags. North Korean soldiers and naval troops quick-marched into position to welcome Moon, and the two leaders inspected the honor guard, according to South Korean media pool footage from the site. A signboard said, "We ardently welcome President Moon Jae-in."
As Moon arrived, the North's main newspaper said the United States was responsible for the lack of progress in denuclearization talks.
"The U.S. is totally to blame for the deadlocked DPRK-U.S. negotiations," the Rodong Sinmun said in an editorial. It said Washington is "stubbornly insisting" the North dismantle its nuclear weapons first, an approach "which was rejected in the past DPRK-U.S. dialogues," while failing to show its will for confidence-building "including the declaration of the end of war which it had already pledged."
State-run media reported Moon was to begin a visit, but gave few details. Security was tight all morning. Requests by The Associated Press to go to the airport or to drive around the city were denied.
Moon is under intense pressure from Washington to advance the denuclearization process. Before his departure he said he intends to push for "irreversible, permanent peace" and for better dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington
Kavanaugh allegations add yet another crisis to a besieged White House
"This summit would be very meaningful if it yielded a resumption of North Korea-U.S. talks," Moon said Tuesday morning just before his departure. "It's very important for South and North Korea to meet frequently, and we are turning to a phase where we can meet anytime we want."
But his chief of staff tried to lower expectations of major progress on the future of Kim's nuclear arsenal.
Kim, meanwhile, is seemingly riding a wave of success.
North Korea holds major military parade to mark 70th anniversary
SEP.09.201802:46
The North just completed an elaborate celebration replete with a military parade and huge rallies across the country to mark North Korea's 70th anniversary. China, signaling its support for Kim's recent diplomatic moves, sent its third-highest party official to those festivities. That's important because China is the North's biggest economic partner and is an important political counterbalance to the United States.
WORLD NEWS
China jumpstarts trade with North Korea, undercutting the Trump admin
North Korea maintains that it has developed its nuclear weapons to the point that it can now defend itself against a potential U.S. attack, and can now shift its focus to economic development and improved ties with the South. While signaling his willingness to talk with Washington, Kim's strategy has been to try to elbow the U.S. away from Seoul so that the two Koreas can take the lead in deciding how to bring peace and stability to their peninsula.
Talks between the United States and North Korea, which Moon brokered through his April and May summits with Kim, have stalled since Kim's meeting with President Donald Trump in Singapore in June.
NBC News exclusive: North Korea producing new nuclear weapons
SEP.11.201801:15
North Korea has taken some steps, like dismantling its nuclear and rocket-engine testing sites, but U.S. officials have said it must take more serious disarmament steps before receiving outside concessions. Trump has indicated he may be open to holding another summit to resuscitate the talks, however.
To keep expectations from getting too high, Moon's chief of staff, Im Jong-seok, said it's "difficult to have any optimistic outlook" for progress on denuclearization during the summit.
But he said he still expects the summit to produce meaningful agreements that "fundamentally remove the danger of armed clashes and ease fears of war" between the two Koreas.
UNITED NATIONS
Amb. Haley attacks Russia for undermining sanctions on North Korea
South Korea last week opened a liaison office in the North's city of Kaesong, near the Demilitarized Zone. Another possible area of progress could be on a formal agreement ending the Korean War, which was halted in 1953 by what was intended to be a temporary armistice. Military officials have discussed possibly disarming a jointly controlled area at the Koreas' shared border village, removing front-line guard posts and halting hostile acts along their sea boundary.
Moon is the third South Korean leader to visit North Korea's capital for summits. Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun went to Pyongyang in 2000 and 2007 respectively to meet Kim's father, Kim Jong Il. Those trips produced a slew of inter-Korean rapprochement projects, which were suspended after conservatives took power in Seoul.
Moon Jae-in said he intends to push for "irreversible, permanent peace" and for better dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington.
by Associated Press / Sep.18.2018
Hugs, praise and high expectations as Korean leaders meet in Pyongyang
SEP.18.201801:17
PYONGYANG, North Korea — South Korean President Moon Jae-in arrived in North Korea on Tuesday for his third and possibly most challenging summit yet with leader Kim Jong Un.
Moon hopes to break an impasse in talks with the United States over the North's denuclearization and breathe energy into his own efforts to expand and improve relations between the Koreas.
In what are by now familiar images of the two Korean leaders hugging and exchanging warm smiles, Kim greeted Moon at Pyongyang's airport. They have met twice this year at the border village of Panmunjom, but Moon's visit is the first by a South Korean leader to the North Korean capital in 11 years.
WORLD NEWS
Behind the scenes, Trump’s team is about to get tough with North Korea
Traveling with Moon are business tycoons including Samsung scion Lee Jae-yong, underscoring Moon's hopes to expand cross-border business projects. Currently, all major joint projects between the Koreas are stalled because of U.S.-led sanctions.
Moon was expected to have talks with Kim on Tuesday and Wednesday, according to Moon's chief of staff. Moon and Kim were also expected to jointly announce the results of their talks on Wednesday if things go smoothly. Moon is to return to Seoul on Thursday.
Moon and his wife, Kim Jung-sook, were greeted by Kim and his wife, Ri Sol Ju. The North Korean leader then led his guests to meet some of his senior officials, and they exchanged mutual greetings with Moon's delegation.
Image: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and his wife Ri Sol Ju greet South Korean President Moon Jae-in and First Lady Kim Jung-sookNorth Korean leader Kim Jong Un and his wife Ri Sol Ju greet South Korean President Moon Jae-in and first lady Kim Jung-sook at Pyongyang Sunan International Airport on Tuesday.Pyeongyang press corps
Thousands of North Koreans cheered and waved flower bouquets and national and unification flags. North Korean soldiers and naval troops quick-marched into position to welcome Moon, and the two leaders inspected the honor guard, according to South Korean media pool footage from the site. A signboard said, "We ardently welcome President Moon Jae-in."
As Moon arrived, the North's main newspaper said the United States was responsible for the lack of progress in denuclearization talks.
"The U.S. is totally to blame for the deadlocked DPRK-U.S. negotiations," the Rodong Sinmun said in an editorial. It said Washington is "stubbornly insisting" the North dismantle its nuclear weapons first, an approach "which was rejected in the past DPRK-U.S. dialogues," while failing to show its will for confidence-building "including the declaration of the end of war which it had already pledged."
State-run media reported Moon was to begin a visit, but gave few details. Security was tight all morning. Requests by The Associated Press to go to the airport or to drive around the city were denied.
Moon is under intense pressure from Washington to advance the denuclearization process. Before his departure he said he intends to push for "irreversible, permanent peace" and for better dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington
Kavanaugh allegations add yet another crisis to a besieged White House
"This summit would be very meaningful if it yielded a resumption of North Korea-U.S. talks," Moon said Tuesday morning just before his departure. "It's very important for South and North Korea to meet frequently, and we are turning to a phase where we can meet anytime we want."
But his chief of staff tried to lower expectations of major progress on the future of Kim's nuclear arsenal.
Kim, meanwhile, is seemingly riding a wave of success.
North Korea holds major military parade to mark 70th anniversary
SEP.09.201802:46
The North just completed an elaborate celebration replete with a military parade and huge rallies across the country to mark North Korea's 70th anniversary. China, signaling its support for Kim's recent diplomatic moves, sent its third-highest party official to those festivities. That's important because China is the North's biggest economic partner and is an important political counterbalance to the United States.
WORLD NEWS
China jumpstarts trade with North Korea, undercutting the Trump admin
North Korea maintains that it has developed its nuclear weapons to the point that it can now defend itself against a potential U.S. attack, and can now shift its focus to economic development and improved ties with the South. While signaling his willingness to talk with Washington, Kim's strategy has been to try to elbow the U.S. away from Seoul so that the two Koreas can take the lead in deciding how to bring peace and stability to their peninsula.
Talks between the United States and North Korea, which Moon brokered through his April and May summits with Kim, have stalled since Kim's meeting with President Donald Trump in Singapore in June.
NBC News exclusive: North Korea producing new nuclear weapons
SEP.11.201801:15
North Korea has taken some steps, like dismantling its nuclear and rocket-engine testing sites, but U.S. officials have said it must take more serious disarmament steps before receiving outside concessions. Trump has indicated he may be open to holding another summit to resuscitate the talks, however.
To keep expectations from getting too high, Moon's chief of staff, Im Jong-seok, said it's "difficult to have any optimistic outlook" for progress on denuclearization during the summit.
But he said he still expects the summit to produce meaningful agreements that "fundamentally remove the danger of armed clashes and ease fears of war" between the two Koreas.
UNITED NATIONS
Amb. Haley attacks Russia for undermining sanctions on North Korea
South Korea last week opened a liaison office in the North's city of Kaesong, near the Demilitarized Zone. Another possible area of progress could be on a formal agreement ending the Korean War, which was halted in 1953 by what was intended to be a temporary armistice. Military officials have discussed possibly disarming a jointly controlled area at the Koreas' shared border village, removing front-line guard posts and halting hostile acts along their sea boundary.
Moon is the third South Korean leader to visit North Korea's capital for summits. Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun went to Pyongyang in 2000 and 2007 respectively to meet Kim's father, Kim Jong Il. Those trips produced a slew of inter-Korean rapprochement projects, which were suspended after conservatives took power in Seoul.
Elizabeth Warren's New Argument: Corruption Drives Inequality - TIME
Elizabeth Warren's New Argument: Corruption Drives Inequality
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) speaks at the George J. Kostas Research Institute for Homeland Security in Burlington, MA on April 9, 2018.
By ABBY VESOULIS September 18, 2018
President Donald Trump pledged to “drain the swamp” in Washington, D.C., but his Administration has been beset by ethics scandals both big and small.
Now, one of his potential opponents in 2020 has put together a detailed legislative proposal to tackle a wide range of issues involving lobbying and self-dealing in Washington, some of which seem aimed directly at Trump’s indiscretions.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act would institute a lifetime ban on lobbying for presidents, vice presidents, members of Congress, federal judges and Cabinet secretaries; require the president and vice president to place certain assets, such as real estate, into a blind trust; mandate the IRS release eight years’ worth of tax returns for all presidential and vice presidential candidates and create a new independent U.S. Office of Public Integrity to enforce ethics laws — among other things.
In an interview with TIME, the Massachusetts Democrat, who polls show is cruising to re-election in this year’s midterms, said that the bill would help Washington work more ethically and help the working class.
Donald Trump campaigned on a pledge to “drain the swamp,” how is your bill different than his attempts?
He hasn’t made any attempts since he became president. In fact, he’s been loading up the swamp. I have a comprehensive set of policy solutions that would fundamentally change the way Washington does business and restore the American public’s faith in democracy.
Your bill includes a lifetime ban on lobbying for [certain senior officials]. Some have argued that could be [challenged] on First Amendment grounds. Do you have a response to that?
I disagree. There are conditions on different jobs all the time. I believe that members of Congress ought to be willing to say, “My job as a Senator or Representative is that and nothing else. And I not only promise that I am not looking over the edge at my next, more lucrative job, I will back that up with a law that prohibits me from doing that.”
You have long campaigned on leveling the playing field economically for working-class Americans. How does an anti-corruption bill tie into that goal?
The reason this government works so well for the wealthy and well-connected is corruption. People with money and power have figured out that they can flood Washington with cash in dozens of different places and get the government to tilt in their favor over and over and over. The only way we will get a level playing field is if government once again works for the people, and that means rooting out corruption. I can even put it the way my daddy would: “ending corruption root and branch” — that’s how he would have described it.
The bill would restrict Democrats as well as Republicans from owning stock and lobbying. How would you convince members of your own party who would end up forgoing money from this to back it?
If the American people demand it, elected officials will enact it.
What role do you think stricter regulations on lobbying and ethics should play in the 2020 presidential campaign?
I think the fundamental question in the 2020 campaign will be who government works for. Corruption in Washington is right in the heart of that question.
Is this bill a sign that you’re considering running for president in 2020?
No. This bill is a sign that we need to make Washington work for the people, and I’ve got an idea of how to do that. I’ll be out there fighting for this bill every single day.
You said in earlier interviews that this bill was a common sense solution to corruption. Why do you think it has taken so long for this kind of legislation to be considered?
The current system is too comfortable for too many people. No one wants to rock the boat. I think it’s time to rock the boat, to make Washington work for the people.
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) speaks at the George J. Kostas Research Institute for Homeland Security in Burlington, MA on April 9, 2018.
By ABBY VESOULIS September 18, 2018
President Donald Trump pledged to “drain the swamp” in Washington, D.C., but his Administration has been beset by ethics scandals both big and small.
Now, one of his potential opponents in 2020 has put together a detailed legislative proposal to tackle a wide range of issues involving lobbying and self-dealing in Washington, some of which seem aimed directly at Trump’s indiscretions.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act would institute a lifetime ban on lobbying for presidents, vice presidents, members of Congress, federal judges and Cabinet secretaries; require the president and vice president to place certain assets, such as real estate, into a blind trust; mandate the IRS release eight years’ worth of tax returns for all presidential and vice presidential candidates and create a new independent U.S. Office of Public Integrity to enforce ethics laws — among other things.
In an interview with TIME, the Massachusetts Democrat, who polls show is cruising to re-election in this year’s midterms, said that the bill would help Washington work more ethically and help the working class.
Donald Trump campaigned on a pledge to “drain the swamp,” how is your bill different than his attempts?
He hasn’t made any attempts since he became president. In fact, he’s been loading up the swamp. I have a comprehensive set of policy solutions that would fundamentally change the way Washington does business and restore the American public’s faith in democracy.
Your bill includes a lifetime ban on lobbying for [certain senior officials]. Some have argued that could be [challenged] on First Amendment grounds. Do you have a response to that?
I disagree. There are conditions on different jobs all the time. I believe that members of Congress ought to be willing to say, “My job as a Senator or Representative is that and nothing else. And I not only promise that I am not looking over the edge at my next, more lucrative job, I will back that up with a law that prohibits me from doing that.”
You have long campaigned on leveling the playing field economically for working-class Americans. How does an anti-corruption bill tie into that goal?
The reason this government works so well for the wealthy and well-connected is corruption. People with money and power have figured out that they can flood Washington with cash in dozens of different places and get the government to tilt in their favor over and over and over. The only way we will get a level playing field is if government once again works for the people, and that means rooting out corruption. I can even put it the way my daddy would: “ending corruption root and branch” — that’s how he would have described it.
The bill would restrict Democrats as well as Republicans from owning stock and lobbying. How would you convince members of your own party who would end up forgoing money from this to back it?
If the American people demand it, elected officials will enact it.
What role do you think stricter regulations on lobbying and ethics should play in the 2020 presidential campaign?
I think the fundamental question in the 2020 campaign will be who government works for. Corruption in Washington is right in the heart of that question.
Is this bill a sign that you’re considering running for president in 2020?
No. This bill is a sign that we need to make Washington work for the people, and I’ve got an idea of how to do that. I’ll be out there fighting for this bill every single day.
You said in earlier interviews that this bill was a common sense solution to corruption. Why do you think it has taken so long for this kind of legislation to be considered?
The current system is too comfortable for too many people. No one wants to rock the boat. I think it’s time to rock the boat, to make Washington work for the people.
Faced with a president who places a premium on loyalty, the FBI is gently asserting its independence - Bloomberg Politics
Sept, 20, 2018.
Faced with a president who places a premium on loyalty, the FBI is gently asserting its independence.
Donald Trump is seeking to pull the bureau into two of the most heated political controversies of his tenure: The probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and the sexual assault allegations that have jeopardized Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination.
But FBI officials aren’t acquiescing to Trump’s demand for the “immediate declassification” of some materials related to the Russia investigation and are likely to push for redactions. And the agency is willing to probe the claims against Kavanaugh — despite Trump’s assertions to the contrary — but it can’t do so without a formal White House request, Chris Strohm reports.
The tensions add to an already fraught relationship between the president and the law enforcement agencies he oversees and who he and his allies have accused of political bias. Trump reportedly unsuccessfully sought a loyalty pledge from former FBI Director James Comey, who he later fired. He has also repeatedly attacked Attorney General Jeff Sessions for failing to quash the Russia investigation.
Trump’s actions are testing the meddle of FBI Director Christopher Wray, who has vowed to defend the agency’s work from political manipulation.
— Kathleen Hunter
Faced with a president who places a premium on loyalty, the FBI is gently asserting its independence.
Donald Trump is seeking to pull the bureau into two of the most heated political controversies of his tenure: The probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and the sexual assault allegations that have jeopardized Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination.
But FBI officials aren’t acquiescing to Trump’s demand for the “immediate declassification” of some materials related to the Russia investigation and are likely to push for redactions. And the agency is willing to probe the claims against Kavanaugh — despite Trump’s assertions to the contrary — but it can’t do so without a formal White House request, Chris Strohm reports.
The tensions add to an already fraught relationship between the president and the law enforcement agencies he oversees and who he and his allies have accused of political bias. Trump reportedly unsuccessfully sought a loyalty pledge from former FBI Director James Comey, who he later fired. He has also repeatedly attacked Attorney General Jeff Sessions for failing to quash the Russia investigation.
Trump’s actions are testing the meddle of FBI Director Christopher Wray, who has vowed to defend the agency’s work from political manipulation.
— Kathleen Hunter
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
Wilbur Ross: Trump's new China tariffs will increase prices but 'nobody is going to actually notice' - CNBC News
Wilbur Ross: Trump's new China tariffs will increase prices but 'nobody is going to actually notice'
The Commerce secretary concedes prices in the U.S. will increase as a result of the new China tariffs put in place by President Trump.
However, Ross says they will be "spread across thousands and thousands of products" and "nobody is going to actually notice it at the end of the day."
Matthew J. Belvedere | @Matt_Belvedere
Published on Sept. 19, 2018.
CNBC.com
Ross: EU, Japan has joined us for WTO consultation process Ross: Tariffs to have minimal inflation impact
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross concedes that prices in the U.S. will increase as a result of the new China tariffs put in place by President Donald Trump.
However, Ross told CNBC on Tuesday, "Nobody is going to actually notice it at the end of the day," because the hikes will be "spread across thousands and thousands of products."
Jim Cramer: Wilbur Ross is right Jim Cramer: Wilbur Ross is right
20 Hours Ago | 03:14
"If you have a 10 percent tariff on another $200 billion, that's $20 billion a year. That's a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of 1 percent [of] inflation in the U.S.," Ross said.
The Trump administration on Monday announced tariffs of 10 percent on another $200 billion worth of Chinese imports, rising to 25 percent at the end of the year.
In response Tuesday morning, China said it will institute retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods worth $60 billion on Monday.
Before China weighed in, Ross said on "Squawk Box" that China is "out of bullets" to retaliate because its imports to the U.S. are nearly four times larger than the U.S. exports to China.
The Commerce secretary concedes prices in the U.S. will increase as a result of the new China tariffs put in place by President Trump.
However, Ross says they will be "spread across thousands and thousands of products" and "nobody is going to actually notice it at the end of the day."
Matthew J. Belvedere | @Matt_Belvedere
Published on Sept. 19, 2018.
CNBC.com
Ross: EU, Japan has joined us for WTO consultation process Ross: Tariffs to have minimal inflation impact
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross concedes that prices in the U.S. will increase as a result of the new China tariffs put in place by President Donald Trump.
However, Ross told CNBC on Tuesday, "Nobody is going to actually notice it at the end of the day," because the hikes will be "spread across thousands and thousands of products."
Jim Cramer: Wilbur Ross is right Jim Cramer: Wilbur Ross is right
20 Hours Ago | 03:14
"If you have a 10 percent tariff on another $200 billion, that's $20 billion a year. That's a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of 1 percent [of] inflation in the U.S.," Ross said.
The Trump administration on Monday announced tariffs of 10 percent on another $200 billion worth of Chinese imports, rising to 25 percent at the end of the year.
In response Tuesday morning, China said it will institute retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods worth $60 billion on Monday.
Before China weighed in, Ross said on "Squawk Box" that China is "out of bullets" to retaliate because its imports to the U.S. are nearly four times larger than the U.S. exports to China.
Kavanaugh accuser calls for FBI investigation before she testifies - CBS News
September 18, 2018, 11:05 PM
Kavanaugh accuser calls for FBI investigation before she testifies
The woman who has accused Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, Christine Blasey Ford, is calling for an FBI investigation before testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. And Ford's lawyers admonished the committee for scheduling the hearing so soon after her allegations became public.
"While Dr. Ford's life was being turned upside down, you and your staff scheduled a public hearing for her to testify at the same table as Judge Kavanaugh in front of two dozen U.S. senators on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident," said a letter Tuesday evening from Ford's lawyers to Sen. Charles Grassley, the committee chairman.
The committee invited both Kavanaugh and Ford to testify on the allegations, and Kavanaugh accepted. Mark Judge, who allegedly was also at the party in question in the 1980s, and in the room with Kavanaugh, said through his attorney he has no memory of the alleged incident and does not wish to testify publicly.
Democrats are accusing Grassley of trying to rush through the confirmation. They say that two witnesses are insufficient, and the rushed nature could lead to the "mistakes" of the Anita Hill hearings during Clarence Thomas' Supreme Court confirmation hearings.
The hearing scheduled for Monday represents a significant change in Kavanaugh's confirmation process. The committee had planned a meeting Thursday, but postponed it to allow for Kavanaugh and Ford to testify.
Even if Ford does not appear Monday, Republicans could continue to give Kavanaugh the opportunity address the allegations.
The letter on Tuesday said that Ford "wants to cooperate with the Committee and with law enforcement." The lawyers said an FBI investigation should come first. "A full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a non-partisan manner, and that the Committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions."
The lawyers said that Ford has been the target of "vicious harassment and even death threats" and that her family has relocated.
Grassley responded to the letter later Tuesday evening: "Dr. Ford's testimony would reflect her personal knowledge and memory of events. Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr. Ford tells the committee, so there is no reason for any further delay."
Read Ford's letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee here:
Context on the FBI's role in investigating Kavanaugh
Democrats -- and now Ford -- are urging the FBI to reopen the investigation into Kavanaugh's history, which was essentially a background check. According to CBS News contributor Ron Hosko, who is a former assistant director of the FBI, the FBI could investigate if evidence arose of a federal crime or of a national security matter while investigators were conducting Kavanaugh's background check. (For instance, if a federal crime had been committed 35 years ago and beyond the statute of limitations, the bureau might opt not to investigate).
The FBI's investigative work here is neither criminal nor national security. It is, Hosko explains, a background investigation led by the Security Division for a customer -- the White House. The results are packaged and provided to the customer.
There is no local criminal investigation in this case, and the allegations so far do not fall under federal criminal statutes or national security areas. The FBI therefore puts the information in Kavanaugh's background check folder, which the FBI has already said it did. The White House must then decide if the FBI should investigate the matter further.
A U.S. official tells CBS News that under the existing memorandum of understanding, the White House would need to ask the FBI to look into the allegations raised by Ford.
Based on such a request from the White House, the bureau would then move forward.
Andres Triay contributed to this report.
4:52 p.m.: George W. Bush says he stands by Kavanaugh
Former President George W. Bush said he and his wife, former first lady Laura Bush, stand by their support for Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh worked in the Bush White House as a top aide.
"Laura and I have known and respected Brett Kavanaugh for decades, and we stand by our comments the night Judge Kavanaugh was nominated: 'He is a fine husband, father, and friend – and a man of the highest integrity. He will make a superb Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,'" the Bushes said in a statement provided to CBS News and first reported by Politico.
4:25 p.m.: Mark Judge says he doesn't wish to testify publicly
Mark Judge, the other person Ford said was also in the room during the alleged incident, told the committee through his lawyer that he doesn't wish to testify publicly. Judge denies any memory or knowledge of the alleged incident.
"I have no more information to offer the committee and I do not wish to speak publicly regarding the incidents described in Dr. Ford's letter," Judge wrote to the committee.
3 p.m.: Trump says he feels "so badly" for Kavanaugh amid allegations
During a joint press conference with Poland's president, President Trump said he feels "terribly" for Judge Brett Kavanaugh and his family as he faces allegations of sexual misconduct.
He called him an incredible individual with an "impeccable history in every way." Mr. Trump said that the allegations should have been brought to light a long time ago and that he "doesn't deserve this."
2:20 p.m.: Sen. Mazie Hirono to men: "Just shut up and step up"
"Guess who's perpetuating all these kinds of actions? It's the men in this country, and I just want to say to the men in this country, just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change. As you can see I'm a little upset by this, the fairness of it," an impassioned Hirono told reporters Tuesday on Capitol Hill.
Hirono added that the White House was "victimizing" Ford for no reason. "Why should we participate in the victimization of someone who has the courage to come forward and she is under absolutely no obligation to participate in a smearing of her and her family."
In op-ed, Anita Hill gives guidelines on how to get Kavanaugh hearing right
"There is no way to redo 1991, but there are ways to do better," wrote Anita Hill who testified before the very same Senate Judiciary Committee during Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' confirmation process with her own allegations of sexual misconduct. In a New York Times op-ed, Hill recommended that committee "must demonstrate a clear understanding that sexual violence is a social reality to which elected representatives must respond."
Basic ground rules the committee should follow, according to Hill, include:
"Refrain from pitting the public interest in confronting sexual harassment against the need for a fair confirmation hearing"
Select a neutral investigative body with experience in sexual misconduct cases
Do not rush the hearings
Refer to Christine Blasey Ford by name and not simply "Judge Kavanaugh's accuser"
Liberal group Demand Justice releases new ad "Enough" tying Trump misconduct claims to Kavanaugh
Demand Justice rolled out a new ad in the DC market attacking President Trump for his own misconduct allegations in the wake of Judge Brett Kavanaugh's. The ad references both the Access Hollywood tape and Mr. Trump's support for Alabama senate candidate Roy Moore. The group claims it plans to spend $700k.
Enough by Demand Justice on YouTube
How Brett Kavanaugh's supporters are defending the allegations against him
Amid detailed revelations of sexual misconduct, Kavanaugh's supporters have been making several arguments in his defense. Some are suspicious of the timing of the allegations coming just as the Senate aimed to wrap up Kavanaugh's confirmation process. Although Sen. Dianne Feinstein was aware of Ford's story in July, she did not attempt to delay the confirmation process until this month.
12:50 p.m.: Trump: "We want everybody to be able to speak up and speak out"
Speaking from the Oval Office in a meeting with Poland's president, Mr. Trump said that Judge Brett Kavanaugh is "anxious" to speak before the Senate. "I don't know about the other party, a delay is certainly acceptable we want to get to the bottom of everything," he said.
"We want everybody to be able to speak up and speak out," he added, "We feel we want to go through a process, we want to hear both sides." Mr. Trump said that he felt the FBI shouldn't be involved in the process "because they don't want to be." He had confidence, however, in the Senate to do a "very good job" in the confirmation process.
11:45 a.m.: Grassley aide: Ford has not responded to invitation
Ford and her laywer have not yet responded to requests to attend Monday's hearing according to an aide to Chairman Grassley.
"Our staff reached out to Dr. Ford's lawyer with multiple emails yesterday to schedule a similar call and inform her of the upcoming hearing, where she will have the opportunity to share her story with the Committee. Her lawyer has not yet responded," the statement said.
Grassley expanded on the non-committal from Ford in his interview with Hugh Hewitt.
"It kind of raises the question do they want to, do they want to come to the public hearing or not? And the reason we're having the public hearing is obviously, well, number one is accusations like this deserve consideration and looking into, and that's what the purpose of the hearing is."
He added, "Even before we requested him [Kavanaugh] to testify, he said he was willing to testify. As of Sunday night, I had that message. So we still haven't heard from Dr. Ford. So do they want to have the hearing or not? We're delaying the vote, strictly, to get all the facts out on the table."
Grassley says he'd "hate" to have someone ask "what I did 35 years ago"
In an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that aired on Tuesday, Chairman Grassley contended that he'd "hate" to have "somebody ask me what I did 35 years ago" in reference to Ford's upcoming testimony on Monday.
He added, "I think I look at it this way. Accusers deserve to be heard. And after they're heard, we also have a responsibility to hear Judge Kavanaugh. And I want to hear from Dr. Ford. And she deserves to be heard, because these are serious accusations."
11 a.m.: Schumer calls hearing process "wrong, unfair"
Sen. Chuck Schumer on the Senate floor Tuesday called out Chairman Grassley for once again rushing through the confirmation process. He said Monday's hearing with Ford and Kavanaugh will not provide adequate time for senators who are not on the committee to review testimony before a scheduled vote the next day. He also questioned the lack of witnesses beyond Ford and Kavanaugh.
"This morning, Chairman Grassley said that there would only be two witnesses. That's simply inadequate, unfair, wrong and a desire not to get at the whole truth and nothing but the truth," said Schumer.
Schumer went on, comparing the nature of the Kavanaugh hearings to that of Anita Hill testifying before the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. "What a shame in this Senate," said Schumer. "Let's not repeat the mistakes made in the Anita Hill hearings. Let's call all the relevant witnesses, not just two selected by Chairman Grassley who did not want to call the hearings to begin with. Let's do this fair and full and right."
9:40 a.m.: Kavanaugh friend of 25 years calls judge a "wonderful" person
In an interview with CBS This Morning, Helgi Walker, a partner at the law firm Gibson Dunn and friend of Kavanaugh's for over 25 years, called Kavanaugh a "great public servant." The two worked together in the White House counsel's office during the Bush administration.
"He's so smart and so dedicated, a hard worker, courteous, kind. He's actually a very gentle souled person. And just a terrific friend," Walker said. She added that the allegations were a "complete shock" to her and cited the six FBI background checks into his record.
"To my knowledge nothing like this has ever come up. And I think he has said this was a total surprise to him, he had no idea even who was making these allegations until she came forward and identified herself. So I think this was a bolt of out of the blue for him and also everybody who has known him for a good period of time like I have been lucky to know him."
Walker, who clerked with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, noted the parallels to the controversies that blanketed much of the confirmation process for both judges.
"I think it is unfortunately somewhat reminiscent of those hearings in the 1990's in that something as brought forward at the last minute and has created a situation that is so politically charged," said Walker.
Tuesday, 7:06 a.m.: Sen. Kamala Harris says Kavanaugh accuser has "nothing to gain" in stepping forward
Speaking to "CBS This Morning", Sen. Kamala Harris said she believes Ford's story and commended her "courage" for stepping forward and being willing to testify before the Judiciary Committee.
"I think it's going to be about, it comes down to credibility...and it's going to about listening to what each party has to say, but I believe her," said Harris.
Harris' comments come after the committee announced late Monday that both Kavanaugh and Ford will be scheduled to testify on Monday, delaying the committee's vote previously scheduled for Thursday.
Monday, Sept. 19
5:52 p.m.: White House says Kavanaugh is ready to testify about "false" allegation
The White House issued yet another statement Monday on Kavanaugh late Monday afternoon.
"Judge Kavanaugh looks forward to a hearing where he can clear his name of this false allegation," White House spokesman Raj Shah said. "He stands ready to testify tomorrow if the Senate is ready to hear him."
4:27 p.m. Kavanaugh expected to address Senate Judiciary Committee staffers in phone call
Kavanaugh is speaking to staffers on the Senate Judiciary Committee about the allegation on a call at 5:30 p.m., a source familiar with the committee's process and schedule said. Democratic staffers, according to the source, have no plans to participate.
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee explained in a statement why they are not participating.
"With only a few hours' notice and over the objections of Ranking Member Feinstein, Judiciary Committee Republicans scheduled a staff-level phone call with BrettKavanaugh concerning allegations that he sexually assaulted a young woman," the statement said. "In view of the enormity and seriousness of these allegations, a staff-only phone call behind closed doors is unacceptable and Democratic staff will not participate. This isn't how things should be done and is in complete violation of how this committee has worked in the past."
"The FBI has the resources and know-how to conduct an objective, independent evaluation of these sensitive allegations with appropriately trained investigators. This isn't just about an interview, it's about analyzing information and gathering the facts. That's what the FBI does, and that's why they're in charge of the background review process.
3:30 p.m.: Mitch McConnell calls into question Democrats "11th hour" allegation
Taking to the Senate floor, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Democrats' handling of the Kavanaugh allegations was "really not fair." McConnell commended Chairman Grassley for following regular order in the process and urged to "pursue this by the book."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer however argued that Grassley has to "stop playing games" with the process, saying that "hastily arranged private phone calls" are "not even close to constituting a fair and thorough review" and are not a substitute for an FBI background check or public hearing.
He urged that the Senate "should and must provide a forum" for Ford to speak to her allegations.
3 p.m.: Trump praises Kavanaugh, but is open to a slight delay
President Trump spoke up about Kavanaugh for the first time Monday afternoon in a meeting at the White House. Mr. Trump praised Kavanaugh's intellect and background, but also said he wants everyone in the process to be happy and is open to a slight delay.
"He's an outstanding intellect. An outstanding judge. Respected by everybody," the president told reporters. "Never even had a little blemish on his record. The FBI has I think gone through a process six times with him over the years where he went to higher and higher positions. He is somebody very special. At the same time, we want to go through a process. We want to make sure everything is perfect, everything is just right."
1:40 p.m.: TIMES UP releases statement in support of Ford
Organizers of the TIMES UP movement, which first became known during the wave of sexual assault allegations that rocked Hollywood, said in a statement, "If this moment in time feels strangely familiar, it's because it is. Listen to Christine Blasey Ford. A woman's experience should never be valued less than a man's career."
TIME'S UP
✔
@TIMESUPNOW
If this moment in time feels strangely familiar, it’s because it is. Listen to Christine Blasey Ford. A woman's experience should never be valued less than a man’s career.
Full statement below:
4:44 AM - Sep 18, 2018
12:20 p.m.: Grassley says Ford deserves to be heard
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said in a statement that anyone who comes forward as Ford does should be heard — but stopped short of suggesting testifying before the full committee. Ford has expressed a willingness to speak before the committee, as has Kavanaugh.
"Anyone who comes forward as Dr. Ford has deserves to be heard, so I will continue working on a way to hear her out in an appropriate,precedented and respectful manner," Grassley said. "The standard procedure for updates to any nominee's background investigation file is to conduct separate follow-up calls with relevant parties."
"In this case, that would entail phone calls with at least Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford," Grassley continued. "Consistent with that practice, I asked Senator Feinstein's office yesterday to join me in scheduling these follow-ups. Thus far, they have refused. But as a necessary step in evaluating these claims, I'll continue working to set them up."
12:03 p.m.: Conservative group launches $1.5 million ad campaign for Kavanaugh
A spokeswoman for the Judicial Crisis Network, which has been working to help confirm Kavanaugh, confirmed the group will be announcing a $1.5 million cable and broadcast TV ad blitz to support Kavanaugh. It will feature a 35-year friend of Kavanaugh.
"We are not going to allow a last-minute smear campaign destroy a good and decent man who has an unblemished personal record," the spokeswoman said.
12:03 p.m.: Sen. Susan Collins says Ford and Kavanaugh should testify under oath
Sen. Susan Collins, one of the Republicans her own party has been working to ensure votes for Kavanaugh, tweeted that she wants both Ford and Kavanaugh to testify under oath in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
"Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh should both testify under oath before the Judiciary Committee," she wrote.
11:34 a.m.: FBI reiterates there is no investigation into Kavanaugh
Asked whether the FBI is investigating the Kavanaugh allegation, the FBI said, as it did last week, that there is no FBI investigation. The FBI pointed CBS News back to its statement from last week:
"Upon receipt of the information on the night of September 12, we included it as part of Judge Kavanaugh's background file, as per the standard process," the FBI repeated.
10:11 a.m.: Kavanaugh issues new denial statement:
Kavanaugh issued a new denial Monday morning in response to a woman's allegation that he assaulted her when they were both in high school. Kavanaugh said he's willing to "refute" her "false allegation" before the Senate Judiciary Committee "in any way the committee deems appropriate."
Kavanaugh had issued a flat denial of claims outlined in a letter Ford sent to Democrats, but in his new statement, Kavanaugh said he had no idea who had made the accusation "until she identified herself yesterday." The White House is standing by Kavanaugh's initial denial.
"This is a completely false allegation," Kavanaugh said in a statement Monday morning. "I have never done anything like what the accuser describes—to her or to anyone. Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday. I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity."
It's unclear whether the willingness to testify expressed from both Ford and Kavanaugh will delay the confirmation process. As of Sunday afternoon, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley intended to move forward with the committee vote as planned. But some Republicans, not to mention Democrats, have expressed they want to hear from Ford first, and the Senate is out of session Wednesday for the Jewish holiday Yom Kippur.
Kavanaugh accuser calls for FBI investigation before she testifies
The woman who has accused Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, Christine Blasey Ford, is calling for an FBI investigation before testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. And Ford's lawyers admonished the committee for scheduling the hearing so soon after her allegations became public.
"While Dr. Ford's life was being turned upside down, you and your staff scheduled a public hearing for her to testify at the same table as Judge Kavanaugh in front of two dozen U.S. senators on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident," said a letter Tuesday evening from Ford's lawyers to Sen. Charles Grassley, the committee chairman.
The committee invited both Kavanaugh and Ford to testify on the allegations, and Kavanaugh accepted. Mark Judge, who allegedly was also at the party in question in the 1980s, and in the room with Kavanaugh, said through his attorney he has no memory of the alleged incident and does not wish to testify publicly.
Democrats are accusing Grassley of trying to rush through the confirmation. They say that two witnesses are insufficient, and the rushed nature could lead to the "mistakes" of the Anita Hill hearings during Clarence Thomas' Supreme Court confirmation hearings.
The hearing scheduled for Monday represents a significant change in Kavanaugh's confirmation process. The committee had planned a meeting Thursday, but postponed it to allow for Kavanaugh and Ford to testify.
Even if Ford does not appear Monday, Republicans could continue to give Kavanaugh the opportunity address the allegations.
The letter on Tuesday said that Ford "wants to cooperate with the Committee and with law enforcement." The lawyers said an FBI investigation should come first. "A full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a non-partisan manner, and that the Committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions."
The lawyers said that Ford has been the target of "vicious harassment and even death threats" and that her family has relocated.
Grassley responded to the letter later Tuesday evening: "Dr. Ford's testimony would reflect her personal knowledge and memory of events. Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr. Ford tells the committee, so there is no reason for any further delay."
Read Ford's letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee here:
Context on the FBI's role in investigating Kavanaugh
Democrats -- and now Ford -- are urging the FBI to reopen the investigation into Kavanaugh's history, which was essentially a background check. According to CBS News contributor Ron Hosko, who is a former assistant director of the FBI, the FBI could investigate if evidence arose of a federal crime or of a national security matter while investigators were conducting Kavanaugh's background check. (For instance, if a federal crime had been committed 35 years ago and beyond the statute of limitations, the bureau might opt not to investigate).
The FBI's investigative work here is neither criminal nor national security. It is, Hosko explains, a background investigation led by the Security Division for a customer -- the White House. The results are packaged and provided to the customer.
There is no local criminal investigation in this case, and the allegations so far do not fall under federal criminal statutes or national security areas. The FBI therefore puts the information in Kavanaugh's background check folder, which the FBI has already said it did. The White House must then decide if the FBI should investigate the matter further.
A U.S. official tells CBS News that under the existing memorandum of understanding, the White House would need to ask the FBI to look into the allegations raised by Ford.
Based on such a request from the White House, the bureau would then move forward.
Andres Triay contributed to this report.
4:52 p.m.: George W. Bush says he stands by Kavanaugh
Former President George W. Bush said he and his wife, former first lady Laura Bush, stand by their support for Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh worked in the Bush White House as a top aide.
"Laura and I have known and respected Brett Kavanaugh for decades, and we stand by our comments the night Judge Kavanaugh was nominated: 'He is a fine husband, father, and friend – and a man of the highest integrity. He will make a superb Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,'" the Bushes said in a statement provided to CBS News and first reported by Politico.
4:25 p.m.: Mark Judge says he doesn't wish to testify publicly
Mark Judge, the other person Ford said was also in the room during the alleged incident, told the committee through his lawyer that he doesn't wish to testify publicly. Judge denies any memory or knowledge of the alleged incident.
"I have no more information to offer the committee and I do not wish to speak publicly regarding the incidents described in Dr. Ford's letter," Judge wrote to the committee.
3 p.m.: Trump says he feels "so badly" for Kavanaugh amid allegations
During a joint press conference with Poland's president, President Trump said he feels "terribly" for Judge Brett Kavanaugh and his family as he faces allegations of sexual misconduct.
He called him an incredible individual with an "impeccable history in every way." Mr. Trump said that the allegations should have been brought to light a long time ago and that he "doesn't deserve this."
2:20 p.m.: Sen. Mazie Hirono to men: "Just shut up and step up"
"Guess who's perpetuating all these kinds of actions? It's the men in this country, and I just want to say to the men in this country, just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change. As you can see I'm a little upset by this, the fairness of it," an impassioned Hirono told reporters Tuesday on Capitol Hill.
Hirono added that the White House was "victimizing" Ford for no reason. "Why should we participate in the victimization of someone who has the courage to come forward and she is under absolutely no obligation to participate in a smearing of her and her family."
In op-ed, Anita Hill gives guidelines on how to get Kavanaugh hearing right
"There is no way to redo 1991, but there are ways to do better," wrote Anita Hill who testified before the very same Senate Judiciary Committee during Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' confirmation process with her own allegations of sexual misconduct. In a New York Times op-ed, Hill recommended that committee "must demonstrate a clear understanding that sexual violence is a social reality to which elected representatives must respond."
Basic ground rules the committee should follow, according to Hill, include:
"Refrain from pitting the public interest in confronting sexual harassment against the need for a fair confirmation hearing"
Select a neutral investigative body with experience in sexual misconduct cases
Do not rush the hearings
Refer to Christine Blasey Ford by name and not simply "Judge Kavanaugh's accuser"
Liberal group Demand Justice releases new ad "Enough" tying Trump misconduct claims to Kavanaugh
Demand Justice rolled out a new ad in the DC market attacking President Trump for his own misconduct allegations in the wake of Judge Brett Kavanaugh's. The ad references both the Access Hollywood tape and Mr. Trump's support for Alabama senate candidate Roy Moore. The group claims it plans to spend $700k.
Enough by Demand Justice on YouTube
How Brett Kavanaugh's supporters are defending the allegations against him
Amid detailed revelations of sexual misconduct, Kavanaugh's supporters have been making several arguments in his defense. Some are suspicious of the timing of the allegations coming just as the Senate aimed to wrap up Kavanaugh's confirmation process. Although Sen. Dianne Feinstein was aware of Ford's story in July, she did not attempt to delay the confirmation process until this month.
12:50 p.m.: Trump: "We want everybody to be able to speak up and speak out"
Speaking from the Oval Office in a meeting with Poland's president, Mr. Trump said that Judge Brett Kavanaugh is "anxious" to speak before the Senate. "I don't know about the other party, a delay is certainly acceptable we want to get to the bottom of everything," he said.
"We want everybody to be able to speak up and speak out," he added, "We feel we want to go through a process, we want to hear both sides." Mr. Trump said that he felt the FBI shouldn't be involved in the process "because they don't want to be." He had confidence, however, in the Senate to do a "very good job" in the confirmation process.
11:45 a.m.: Grassley aide: Ford has not responded to invitation
Ford and her laywer have not yet responded to requests to attend Monday's hearing according to an aide to Chairman Grassley.
"Our staff reached out to Dr. Ford's lawyer with multiple emails yesterday to schedule a similar call and inform her of the upcoming hearing, where she will have the opportunity to share her story with the Committee. Her lawyer has not yet responded," the statement said.
Grassley expanded on the non-committal from Ford in his interview with Hugh Hewitt.
"It kind of raises the question do they want to, do they want to come to the public hearing or not? And the reason we're having the public hearing is obviously, well, number one is accusations like this deserve consideration and looking into, and that's what the purpose of the hearing is."
He added, "Even before we requested him [Kavanaugh] to testify, he said he was willing to testify. As of Sunday night, I had that message. So we still haven't heard from Dr. Ford. So do they want to have the hearing or not? We're delaying the vote, strictly, to get all the facts out on the table."
Grassley says he'd "hate" to have someone ask "what I did 35 years ago"
In an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that aired on Tuesday, Chairman Grassley contended that he'd "hate" to have "somebody ask me what I did 35 years ago" in reference to Ford's upcoming testimony on Monday.
He added, "I think I look at it this way. Accusers deserve to be heard. And after they're heard, we also have a responsibility to hear Judge Kavanaugh. And I want to hear from Dr. Ford. And she deserves to be heard, because these are serious accusations."
11 a.m.: Schumer calls hearing process "wrong, unfair"
Sen. Chuck Schumer on the Senate floor Tuesday called out Chairman Grassley for once again rushing through the confirmation process. He said Monday's hearing with Ford and Kavanaugh will not provide adequate time for senators who are not on the committee to review testimony before a scheduled vote the next day. He also questioned the lack of witnesses beyond Ford and Kavanaugh.
"This morning, Chairman Grassley said that there would only be two witnesses. That's simply inadequate, unfair, wrong and a desire not to get at the whole truth and nothing but the truth," said Schumer.
Schumer went on, comparing the nature of the Kavanaugh hearings to that of Anita Hill testifying before the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. "What a shame in this Senate," said Schumer. "Let's not repeat the mistakes made in the Anita Hill hearings. Let's call all the relevant witnesses, not just two selected by Chairman Grassley who did not want to call the hearings to begin with. Let's do this fair and full and right."
9:40 a.m.: Kavanaugh friend of 25 years calls judge a "wonderful" person
In an interview with CBS This Morning, Helgi Walker, a partner at the law firm Gibson Dunn and friend of Kavanaugh's for over 25 years, called Kavanaugh a "great public servant." The two worked together in the White House counsel's office during the Bush administration.
"He's so smart and so dedicated, a hard worker, courteous, kind. He's actually a very gentle souled person. And just a terrific friend," Walker said. She added that the allegations were a "complete shock" to her and cited the six FBI background checks into his record.
"To my knowledge nothing like this has ever come up. And I think he has said this was a total surprise to him, he had no idea even who was making these allegations until she came forward and identified herself. So I think this was a bolt of out of the blue for him and also everybody who has known him for a good period of time like I have been lucky to know him."
Walker, who clerked with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, noted the parallels to the controversies that blanketed much of the confirmation process for both judges.
"I think it is unfortunately somewhat reminiscent of those hearings in the 1990's in that something as brought forward at the last minute and has created a situation that is so politically charged," said Walker.
Tuesday, 7:06 a.m.: Sen. Kamala Harris says Kavanaugh accuser has "nothing to gain" in stepping forward
Speaking to "CBS This Morning", Sen. Kamala Harris said she believes Ford's story and commended her "courage" for stepping forward and being willing to testify before the Judiciary Committee.
"I think it's going to be about, it comes down to credibility...and it's going to about listening to what each party has to say, but I believe her," said Harris.
Harris' comments come after the committee announced late Monday that both Kavanaugh and Ford will be scheduled to testify on Monday, delaying the committee's vote previously scheduled for Thursday.
Monday, Sept. 19
5:52 p.m.: White House says Kavanaugh is ready to testify about "false" allegation
The White House issued yet another statement Monday on Kavanaugh late Monday afternoon.
"Judge Kavanaugh looks forward to a hearing where he can clear his name of this false allegation," White House spokesman Raj Shah said. "He stands ready to testify tomorrow if the Senate is ready to hear him."
4:27 p.m. Kavanaugh expected to address Senate Judiciary Committee staffers in phone call
Kavanaugh is speaking to staffers on the Senate Judiciary Committee about the allegation on a call at 5:30 p.m., a source familiar with the committee's process and schedule said. Democratic staffers, according to the source, have no plans to participate.
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee explained in a statement why they are not participating.
"With only a few hours' notice and over the objections of Ranking Member Feinstein, Judiciary Committee Republicans scheduled a staff-level phone call with BrettKavanaugh concerning allegations that he sexually assaulted a young woman," the statement said. "In view of the enormity and seriousness of these allegations, a staff-only phone call behind closed doors is unacceptable and Democratic staff will not participate. This isn't how things should be done and is in complete violation of how this committee has worked in the past."
"The FBI has the resources and know-how to conduct an objective, independent evaluation of these sensitive allegations with appropriately trained investigators. This isn't just about an interview, it's about analyzing information and gathering the facts. That's what the FBI does, and that's why they're in charge of the background review process.
3:30 p.m.: Mitch McConnell calls into question Democrats "11th hour" allegation
Taking to the Senate floor, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Democrats' handling of the Kavanaugh allegations was "really not fair." McConnell commended Chairman Grassley for following regular order in the process and urged to "pursue this by the book."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer however argued that Grassley has to "stop playing games" with the process, saying that "hastily arranged private phone calls" are "not even close to constituting a fair and thorough review" and are not a substitute for an FBI background check or public hearing.
He urged that the Senate "should and must provide a forum" for Ford to speak to her allegations.
3 p.m.: Trump praises Kavanaugh, but is open to a slight delay
President Trump spoke up about Kavanaugh for the first time Monday afternoon in a meeting at the White House. Mr. Trump praised Kavanaugh's intellect and background, but also said he wants everyone in the process to be happy and is open to a slight delay.
"He's an outstanding intellect. An outstanding judge. Respected by everybody," the president told reporters. "Never even had a little blemish on his record. The FBI has I think gone through a process six times with him over the years where he went to higher and higher positions. He is somebody very special. At the same time, we want to go through a process. We want to make sure everything is perfect, everything is just right."
1:40 p.m.: TIMES UP releases statement in support of Ford
Organizers of the TIMES UP movement, which first became known during the wave of sexual assault allegations that rocked Hollywood, said in a statement, "If this moment in time feels strangely familiar, it's because it is. Listen to Christine Blasey Ford. A woman's experience should never be valued less than a man's career."
TIME'S UP
✔
@TIMESUPNOW
If this moment in time feels strangely familiar, it’s because it is. Listen to Christine Blasey Ford. A woman's experience should never be valued less than a man’s career.
Full statement below:
4:44 AM - Sep 18, 2018
12:20 p.m.: Grassley says Ford deserves to be heard
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said in a statement that anyone who comes forward as Ford does should be heard — but stopped short of suggesting testifying before the full committee. Ford has expressed a willingness to speak before the committee, as has Kavanaugh.
"Anyone who comes forward as Dr. Ford has deserves to be heard, so I will continue working on a way to hear her out in an appropriate,precedented and respectful manner," Grassley said. "The standard procedure for updates to any nominee's background investigation file is to conduct separate follow-up calls with relevant parties."
"In this case, that would entail phone calls with at least Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford," Grassley continued. "Consistent with that practice, I asked Senator Feinstein's office yesterday to join me in scheduling these follow-ups. Thus far, they have refused. But as a necessary step in evaluating these claims, I'll continue working to set them up."
12:03 p.m.: Conservative group launches $1.5 million ad campaign for Kavanaugh
A spokeswoman for the Judicial Crisis Network, which has been working to help confirm Kavanaugh, confirmed the group will be announcing a $1.5 million cable and broadcast TV ad blitz to support Kavanaugh. It will feature a 35-year friend of Kavanaugh.
"We are not going to allow a last-minute smear campaign destroy a good and decent man who has an unblemished personal record," the spokeswoman said.
12:03 p.m.: Sen. Susan Collins says Ford and Kavanaugh should testify under oath
Sen. Susan Collins, one of the Republicans her own party has been working to ensure votes for Kavanaugh, tweeted that she wants both Ford and Kavanaugh to testify under oath in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
"Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh should both testify under oath before the Judiciary Committee," she wrote.
11:34 a.m.: FBI reiterates there is no investigation into Kavanaugh
Asked whether the FBI is investigating the Kavanaugh allegation, the FBI said, as it did last week, that there is no FBI investigation. The FBI pointed CBS News back to its statement from last week:
"Upon receipt of the information on the night of September 12, we included it as part of Judge Kavanaugh's background file, as per the standard process," the FBI repeated.
10:11 a.m.: Kavanaugh issues new denial statement:
Kavanaugh issued a new denial Monday morning in response to a woman's allegation that he assaulted her when they were both in high school. Kavanaugh said he's willing to "refute" her "false allegation" before the Senate Judiciary Committee "in any way the committee deems appropriate."
Kavanaugh had issued a flat denial of claims outlined in a letter Ford sent to Democrats, but in his new statement, Kavanaugh said he had no idea who had made the accusation "until she identified herself yesterday." The White House is standing by Kavanaugh's initial denial.
"This is a completely false allegation," Kavanaugh said in a statement Monday morning. "I have never done anything like what the accuser describes—to her or to anyone. Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday. I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity."
It's unclear whether the willingness to testify expressed from both Ford and Kavanaugh will delay the confirmation process. As of Sunday afternoon, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley intended to move forward with the committee vote as planned. But some Republicans, not to mention Democrats, have expressed they want to hear from Ford first, and the Senate is out of session Wednesday for the Jewish holiday Yom Kippur.
Wall Street Fears the End of an Era - Bloomberg
Wall Street Fears the End of an Era
By Alastair Marsh
September 19, 2018, 2:00 PM GMT+10
Bank trading heads say funds now have access to trading data
Banks’ complaints highlight scramble for profit in debt world
The masters of the corporate-bond world believe one of their few remaining preserves is slipping away. But they’re not letting it go without a fight.
Credit traders at some of the world’s largest banks are convinced hedge funds and brokers have penetrated their members-only club. The claim -- based on interviews with more than 16 bankers, including seven who head trading desks -- is that rivals and even clients are now accessing information from trading platforms that have long been the exclusive domain of the banks.
These wholesale trading venues are operated by firms known as interdealer brokers. And according to practices developed over decades, they were used solely by big banks that have served as the primary market makers for institutional investors looking to trade corporate bonds and other debt.
The platforms allow the banks to anonymously unload unwanted positions or source bonds from each other, as well as gain pricing intelligence. Effectively, this has helped the banks maintain a significant amount of control over who gets what and how much is paid in a marketplace that now trades more than $30 billion a day.
New Rules
But post-crisis regulations that curbed the banks’ ability to take risks -- while ushering in a wave of new trading venues -- diminished the banks’ role. What has followed is a brutish world where bankers, investors and smaller brokers jostle for influence and profits.
“The banks are trying to defend their turf and maintain the advantages they used to enjoy,” said Suki Mann, a debt-market analyst who previously ran credit strategy in Europe for Societe Generale SA and UBS Group AG. “But they’re fighting a losing battle.”
Caught in the middle of all of this are the interdealer firms, such as TP ICAP Plc, BGC Partners Inc. and Cie. Financiere Tradition SA. They’re fighting for a share of a shrinking pie while trying not to alienate their primary clients -- the banks.
Credit traders at 11 of the world’s largest banks -- including some that head trading desks -- said that they’re convinced that pressures faced by the interdealer brokers to boost commissions is prompting them to let investors and brokers onto platforms where dealers trade -- giving them access to a bigger universe of product and prices.
Market Conventions
The traders, who asked not to be identified because they’re not authorized to talk about their business operations, based those suspicions on trades they saw on the platforms and client queries about trades. The head of a credit trading unit at a U.S. bank also said a hedge fund client told him that they had access to the platforms.
The traders aren’t claiming any laws are being broken. But they say that -- in addition to their own profits -- it’s threatening long-standing conventions that have helped maintain market integrity and liquidity. One senior trader at a French lender said banks often try to buy or sell bonds for clients in the interdealer market, and if those investors are also present on the platforms then their ability to trade will decrease.
Spokesmen for TP ICAP, BGC and Tradition declined to comment on the bankers’ claims about their industry. Four credit brokers employed at interdealer firms spoke to Bloomberg News, asking not to be identified because they’re not allowed to talk about their business dealings. They said they hadn’t seen first-hand evidence of non-bank entities trading on their platforms.
Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News, also offers bond-trading services to banks and fund managers.
Higher Costs
The tensions emerged after new rules intended to prevent another financial crisis forced banks to pull back from some risky trading activities. The regulations also made it costlier for them to facilitate trades by holding debt on their own balance sheets or maintaining large warehouses of securities.
As the banks’ roles were reduced, that allowed others to step in -- namely smaller brokerage firms that simply match buyers and sellers without taking assets on to their balance sheets. Investment firms, like asset managers and hedge funds, have also increased trading among themselves since they can no longer rely on deposit-taking giants to always help them enter or exit a trade.
Out of Bonds
Banks now hold far fewer corporate bonds than they did before the financial crisis
One trader at a unit of an interdealer broker who asked not to be identified because he is not authorized to speak publicly, said hedge funds should be able to trade on the interdealer platforms. Since banks provide considerably less liquidity than they used to, funds shouldn’t have to rely only on investment banks to help them find the other side of a trade, he said.
“I don’t think we should put restrictions on who can deal on what platform to favor particular groups,” said Brian Scott-Quinn, the non-executive chairman of the ICMA Centre, part of Henley Business School at the University of Reading, England. “That creates a bifurcated market and is just plain wrong. Just because the banks had privileges in the past they think they should continue to have them, but if they don’t provide adequate liquidity anymore, then those benefits should disappear.”
The interdealer firms, which earn commission for every trade they match, enjoyed their best years before the financial crisis, and also had strong trading volumes immediately afterward as banks unwound unprofitable positions. Since then, growth has stalled.
* Includes revenue from some electronic services; ** Includes revenue from hybrid platforms such as iSwap; *** TP ICAP stops reporting separate revenue numbers for ICAP and Tullett
ICAP does have a trading portal specifically for investment firms and its parent has said a division that serves asset managers and hedge funds will help the company increase revenues.
The tension spilled over earlier this year.
In May, a senior high-yield bond trader at Credit Suisse Group AG in London refused to trade through ICAP after he believed he had been the victim of a copycat trade, according to people familiar with the matter. Within minutes of making a price in a bond of a European retailer on an ICAP platform, the Credit Suisse trader was told that a trader at a brokerage firm had sent a similar price for a comparable size of trade in the same security to its customers, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the information is private.
The trader’s boycott lasted six weeks until ICAP wrote to Credit Suisse, its biggest client for European junk bond trades, saying it will not allow brokers on its platform, the people said.
“This is an inaccurate description of events,” said a spokesman for Credit Suisse. “No such trade occurred. Our traders have not stopped using this particular platform at any point.”
The spokesman for TP ICAP, which was formed by Tullett Prebon Plc’s takeover of ICAP Plc’s voice-broking business at the end of 2016, declined to comment on the incident.
“It’s not a very pleasant time, whether you’re in a bank or a hedge fund,” said Derrick Herndon, who has run credit businesses in New York and London for Credit Suisse, Toronto-Dominion Bank and UBS Group AG. “Both sides are pointing at each other, but it’s a deeper issue than banks just don’t have market clout the way they used to.”
— With assistance by Will Hadfield
By Alastair Marsh
September 19, 2018, 2:00 PM GMT+10
Bank trading heads say funds now have access to trading data
Banks’ complaints highlight scramble for profit in debt world
The masters of the corporate-bond world believe one of their few remaining preserves is slipping away. But they’re not letting it go without a fight.
Credit traders at some of the world’s largest banks are convinced hedge funds and brokers have penetrated their members-only club. The claim -- based on interviews with more than 16 bankers, including seven who head trading desks -- is that rivals and even clients are now accessing information from trading platforms that have long been the exclusive domain of the banks.
These wholesale trading venues are operated by firms known as interdealer brokers. And according to practices developed over decades, they were used solely by big banks that have served as the primary market makers for institutional investors looking to trade corporate bonds and other debt.
The platforms allow the banks to anonymously unload unwanted positions or source bonds from each other, as well as gain pricing intelligence. Effectively, this has helped the banks maintain a significant amount of control over who gets what and how much is paid in a marketplace that now trades more than $30 billion a day.
New Rules
But post-crisis regulations that curbed the banks’ ability to take risks -- while ushering in a wave of new trading venues -- diminished the banks’ role. What has followed is a brutish world where bankers, investors and smaller brokers jostle for influence and profits.
“The banks are trying to defend their turf and maintain the advantages they used to enjoy,” said Suki Mann, a debt-market analyst who previously ran credit strategy in Europe for Societe Generale SA and UBS Group AG. “But they’re fighting a losing battle.”
Caught in the middle of all of this are the interdealer firms, such as TP ICAP Plc, BGC Partners Inc. and Cie. Financiere Tradition SA. They’re fighting for a share of a shrinking pie while trying not to alienate their primary clients -- the banks.
Credit traders at 11 of the world’s largest banks -- including some that head trading desks -- said that they’re convinced that pressures faced by the interdealer brokers to boost commissions is prompting them to let investors and brokers onto platforms where dealers trade -- giving them access to a bigger universe of product and prices.
Market Conventions
The traders, who asked not to be identified because they’re not authorized to talk about their business operations, based those suspicions on trades they saw on the platforms and client queries about trades. The head of a credit trading unit at a U.S. bank also said a hedge fund client told him that they had access to the platforms.
The traders aren’t claiming any laws are being broken. But they say that -- in addition to their own profits -- it’s threatening long-standing conventions that have helped maintain market integrity and liquidity. One senior trader at a French lender said banks often try to buy or sell bonds for clients in the interdealer market, and if those investors are also present on the platforms then their ability to trade will decrease.
Spokesmen for TP ICAP, BGC and Tradition declined to comment on the bankers’ claims about their industry. Four credit brokers employed at interdealer firms spoke to Bloomberg News, asking not to be identified because they’re not allowed to talk about their business dealings. They said they hadn’t seen first-hand evidence of non-bank entities trading on their platforms.
Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News, also offers bond-trading services to banks and fund managers.
Higher Costs
The tensions emerged after new rules intended to prevent another financial crisis forced banks to pull back from some risky trading activities. The regulations also made it costlier for them to facilitate trades by holding debt on their own balance sheets or maintaining large warehouses of securities.
As the banks’ roles were reduced, that allowed others to step in -- namely smaller brokerage firms that simply match buyers and sellers without taking assets on to their balance sheets. Investment firms, like asset managers and hedge funds, have also increased trading among themselves since they can no longer rely on deposit-taking giants to always help them enter or exit a trade.
Out of Bonds
Banks now hold far fewer corporate bonds than they did before the financial crisis
One trader at a unit of an interdealer broker who asked not to be identified because he is not authorized to speak publicly, said hedge funds should be able to trade on the interdealer platforms. Since banks provide considerably less liquidity than they used to, funds shouldn’t have to rely only on investment banks to help them find the other side of a trade, he said.
“I don’t think we should put restrictions on who can deal on what platform to favor particular groups,” said Brian Scott-Quinn, the non-executive chairman of the ICMA Centre, part of Henley Business School at the University of Reading, England. “That creates a bifurcated market and is just plain wrong. Just because the banks had privileges in the past they think they should continue to have them, but if they don’t provide adequate liquidity anymore, then those benefits should disappear.”
The interdealer firms, which earn commission for every trade they match, enjoyed their best years before the financial crisis, and also had strong trading volumes immediately afterward as banks unwound unprofitable positions. Since then, growth has stalled.
* Includes revenue from some electronic services; ** Includes revenue from hybrid platforms such as iSwap; *** TP ICAP stops reporting separate revenue numbers for ICAP and Tullett
ICAP does have a trading portal specifically for investment firms and its parent has said a division that serves asset managers and hedge funds will help the company increase revenues.
The tension spilled over earlier this year.
In May, a senior high-yield bond trader at Credit Suisse Group AG in London refused to trade through ICAP after he believed he had been the victim of a copycat trade, according to people familiar with the matter. Within minutes of making a price in a bond of a European retailer on an ICAP platform, the Credit Suisse trader was told that a trader at a brokerage firm had sent a similar price for a comparable size of trade in the same security to its customers, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the information is private.
The trader’s boycott lasted six weeks until ICAP wrote to Credit Suisse, its biggest client for European junk bond trades, saying it will not allow brokers on its platform, the people said.
“This is an inaccurate description of events,” said a spokesman for Credit Suisse. “No such trade occurred. Our traders have not stopped using this particular platform at any point.”
The spokesman for TP ICAP, which was formed by Tullett Prebon Plc’s takeover of ICAP Plc’s voice-broking business at the end of 2016, declined to comment on the incident.
“It’s not a very pleasant time, whether you’re in a bank or a hedge fund,” said Derrick Herndon, who has run credit businesses in New York and London for Credit Suisse, Toronto-Dominion Bank and UBS Group AG. “Both sides are pointing at each other, but it’s a deeper issue than banks just don’t have market clout the way they used to.”
— With assistance by Will Hadfield
'Very Exciting!' President Trump Praises Kim Jong Un for Pledge to Denuclearize - NBC News
Sept. 19, 2018.
'Very Exciting!' President Trump Praises Kim Jong Un for Pledge to Denuclearize
Eli Meixler
President Trump expressed his support Wednesday after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un pledged to reduce his country's nuclear capabilities at a summit this week with southern counterpart, at which denuclearization is high on the agenda.
Kim agreed Wednesday to permanently dismantle his Nyongbyon nuclear facility pending reciprocal measures from the U.S., according to South Korean President Moon Jae In.
"Very exciting!" Trump said at the end of a pair of late-night tweets, which also touted the return of the remains of American Korean War casualties and an announced proposal for North and South Korea to jointly host the 2032 Summer Olympics.
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Kim Jong Un has agreed to allow Nuclear inspections, subject to final negotiations, and to permanently dismantle a test site and launch pad in the presence of international experts. In the meantime there will be no Rocket or Nuclear testing. Hero remains to continue being........
2:04 PM - Sep 19, 2018
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
....returned home to the United States. Also, North and South Korea will file a joint bid to host the 2032 Olympics. Very exciting!
2:11 PM - Sep 19, 2018
Kim and Moon are meeting in the North Korean capital for a three-day summit, their third this year, amid a diplomatic impasse between Pyongyang and Washington. On Wednesday, the Korean leaders signed a joint statement supporting a nuclear weapon-free peninsula to "eliminate all the danger of war," the Associated Press reports. In a rare gesture of transparency, Kim also agreed to allow international inspectors to monitor the closure of a missile engine test site and launch pad .
"We have agreed to make the Korean Peninsula a land of peace that is free from nuclear weapons and nuclear threat," Kim said at a joint press conference with Moon on Wednesday, according to AP.Kim has repeatedly stated a commitment to denuclearization, and has dismantled other facilities since he met with President Trump at a landmark summit in Singapore in June. But Washington has said that North Korea is still producing nuclear fissile material. As recently as July, the country was also making "rapid" infrastructure improvements at Nyongbyon, according to North Korea monitoring group 38 North.
'Least impressive sex I ever had': Stormy Daniels tells all about Trump in bombshell book - MSNBC News
'Least impressive sex I ever had': Stormy Daniels tells all about Trump in bombshell book
The book, titled "Full Disclosure," was obtained ahead of its Oct. 2 release by The Guardian newspaper.
by Adam Edelman / Sep.18.2018 / 11:41 PM ET
2018 Adult Video News Awards - Arrivals
Adult film actress/director Stormy Daniels attends the 2018 Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas.Gabe Ginsberg / Getty Images file
Adult film star Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an affair with President Donald Trump more than a decade ago and is suing the president, described sex with the future commander in chief as "the least impressive sex I’d ever had" in a new book.
The book, titled "Full Disclosure," was obtained ahead of its Oct. 2 release by The Guardian newspaper. NBC News has not obtained the book.
"It may have been the least impressive sex I'd ever had, but clearly, he didn't share that opinion," she wrote, according to The Guardian.
Daniels had lingering remorse over the experience for years, writing that any time she'd see Trump on television, she'd think: "I had sex with that, I’d say to myself. Eech."
The White House had no immediate comment about the new book.
Victory for Stormy Daniels as Trump, Cohen give up on hush deal
SEP.11.201802:51
After the tryst with Daniels, Trump promised to put her on his "The Apprentice" reality show, Daniels writes in the book, according to The Guardian, and even indicated he would fix the results in her favor to have her last on the show.
"We'll figure out a way to get you the challenges beforehand," Daniels quoted Trump has having told her. "And we can devise your technique."
"He was going to have me cheat, and it was 100 percent his idea," she wrote, according to The Guardian.
Trump can't use FEMA's wireless alerts to send personal messages — it's illegal
FEMA's 'Presidential Alert' test postponed as some Americans want to disconnect
Years later, when Trump would decide to run for president, Daniels repeatedly dismissed the idea he could win — until, of course, he eventually did.
"It will never happen, I would say," Daniels wrote. "He doesn’t even want to be president."
Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, also describes Trump’s sex organs in graphic detail.
Daniels has suggested she had a one-time sexual encounter with Trump in a hotel room. She alleged in a civil lawsuit that she and Trump had an "intimate relationship" that lasted from summer 2006 "well into the year 2007" and which included meetings in Lake Tahoe and at the Beverly Hills Hotel. The White House denies Trump had an affair with her.
But Trump's private attorney, Michael Cohen, admitted in February he had paid her $130,000 — which she says was to buy her silence over the "intimate relationship." NBC News reported in April that Daniels is cooperating with federal investigators as part of their criminal investigation into Cohen.
In May, Trump said Daniels was paid to stop "false and extortionist accusations" she made about a sexual encounter with him. Trump has forcefully denied the affair. Daniels has filed two lawsuits against Trump, one to get out of a nondisclosure agreement she signed in October 2016 ahead of the November presidential election in exchange for the $130,000, and another for defamation.
Christine Blasey Ford: Kavanaugh accuser 'faces death threats' - BBC News
Sept. 19, 2018.
Christine Blasey Ford: Kavanaugh accuser 'faces death threats'
Christine Blasey Ford says Brett Kavanaugh attacked her when he was a teenager
The woman who accuses US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of attempting to rape her will not testify to the Senate next week, her lawyer says.
Christine Blasey Ford's attorney told CNN her client has been "deflecting death threats and harassment".
Lawyer Lisa Banks said before her client goes to Congress, she wants an FBI investigation into Judge Kavanaugh.
The nominee, who denies the claim, has met officials at the White House for a second day.
The truth about false assault accusations
Prof Ford, a psychology lecturer in California, has accused Judge Kavanaugh of drunkenly trying to remove her clothing in 1982 when they were both teenagers in a Washington DC suburb.
She says he pinned her to a bed and clamped his hand over her mouth when she attempted to scream.
Judge Kavanaugh, 53, has called the allegation "completely false".
Why won't Prof Ford testify?
Prof Ford's legal team say they have written to the Senate Judiciary Committee declining its offer to testify.
Her lawyer told CNN on Tuesday night: "It's premature to talk about a hearing on Monday because she [Prof Ford] has been dealing with the threats, the harassment and the safety of her family and that's what she's been focused on for the last couple of days."
She said that since going public with her allegation in the Washington Post on Sunday, Prof Ford has been trying to work out where her family are going to sleep at night.
Why is the US top court so important?
Meet the Supremes - who are the justices?
The legal team's letter says that Prof Ford's family has been forced to move out of their home, her email has been hacked and she has been impersonated online.
The correspondence says "a full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a non-partisan manner, and that the Committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions".
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley later said that there was no reason to delay Prof Ford's testimony as the aim would be to establish "her personal knowledge and memory of events".
"Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr Ford tells the committee," he said in a statement.
What has the reaction been?
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, said that if Prof Ford did not appear to testify on Monday, "we are going to move on and vote [on the nominee for the Supreme Court] on Wednesday".
"They've had tons of time to do this," he said, adding: "This has been a drive-by shooting when it comes to Kavanaugh, I'll listen to the lady, but we're going to bring this to a close."
Senator Rob Portman, a Republican from Ohio, said the process was "very unfair" and that he did not blame Prof Ford, instead blaming "Democrats who misused this process".
Chuck Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, said he supported the call for an FBI investigation prior to the hearing.
In a statement he urged Senate Republicans and the White House to "drop their inexplicable opposition" to it and "allow all facts to come out".
Senator Mazie Hirono urged "the men in this country" to "do the right thing for a change"
Hawaii Democrat Mazie Hirono said "the men in this country" should "just shut up".
"Not only do women like Dr Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed," she told a press conference.
Separately, the FBI declined to comment after the letter was made public on Tuesday.
What has Trump said about Kavanaugh?
US President Donald Trump, who reportedly did not meet Mr Kavanaugh on Tuesday, expressed sympathy for his nominee.
"I feel so badly for him that he's going through this, to be honest with you," the Republican president told a news conference. "This is not a man that deserves this."
He added: "Hopefully the woman will come forward, state her case. He will state his case before representatives of the United States Senate. And then they will vote."
Mr Trump also appeared to suggest that the controversy was being exploited by Democrats as lawmakers looked to delay the Supreme Court vote.
"The Supreme Court is one of the main reasons I got elected President. I hope Republican voters, and others, are watching, and studying, the Democrats Playbook," he tweeted.
'One of the finest people that I've ever known'
Meanwhile Mark Judge, a friend of Judge Kavanaugh who Prof Ford says witnessed the alleged incident, has said he does not want to speak publicly about the matter.
"Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr Ford's letter," he is quoted as saying in a letter from his lawyer.
What is at stake?
Republicans control the Senate by only a narrow 51-49 margin, meaning any defections could scupper the Supreme Court nomination.
That would set back President Trump's efforts to install more conservatives on the Supreme Court and broader US judiciary.
If confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh, a conservative federal appeals court judge, would be expected to tilt the court's balance further to the right.
The ugly confirmation battle could shake up the forthcoming mid-term elections.
Democrats are hoping to wrest control of Congress from Mr Trump's fellow Republicans on 6 November, dealing a serious blow to the president's efforts to install more conservatives on the Supreme Court and broader US judiciary.
Christine Blasey Ford: Kavanaugh accuser 'faces death threats'
Christine Blasey Ford says Brett Kavanaugh attacked her when he was a teenager
The woman who accuses US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of attempting to rape her will not testify to the Senate next week, her lawyer says.
Christine Blasey Ford's attorney told CNN her client has been "deflecting death threats and harassment".
Lawyer Lisa Banks said before her client goes to Congress, she wants an FBI investigation into Judge Kavanaugh.
The nominee, who denies the claim, has met officials at the White House for a second day.
The truth about false assault accusations
Prof Ford, a psychology lecturer in California, has accused Judge Kavanaugh of drunkenly trying to remove her clothing in 1982 when they were both teenagers in a Washington DC suburb.
She says he pinned her to a bed and clamped his hand over her mouth when she attempted to scream.
Judge Kavanaugh, 53, has called the allegation "completely false".
Why won't Prof Ford testify?
Prof Ford's legal team say they have written to the Senate Judiciary Committee declining its offer to testify.
Her lawyer told CNN on Tuesday night: "It's premature to talk about a hearing on Monday because she [Prof Ford] has been dealing with the threats, the harassment and the safety of her family and that's what she's been focused on for the last couple of days."
She said that since going public with her allegation in the Washington Post on Sunday, Prof Ford has been trying to work out where her family are going to sleep at night.
Why is the US top court so important?
Meet the Supremes - who are the justices?
The legal team's letter says that Prof Ford's family has been forced to move out of their home, her email has been hacked and she has been impersonated online.
The correspondence says "a full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a non-partisan manner, and that the Committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions".
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley later said that there was no reason to delay Prof Ford's testimony as the aim would be to establish "her personal knowledge and memory of events".
"Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr Ford tells the committee," he said in a statement.
What has the reaction been?
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, said that if Prof Ford did not appear to testify on Monday, "we are going to move on and vote [on the nominee for the Supreme Court] on Wednesday".
"They've had tons of time to do this," he said, adding: "This has been a drive-by shooting when it comes to Kavanaugh, I'll listen to the lady, but we're going to bring this to a close."
Senator Rob Portman, a Republican from Ohio, said the process was "very unfair" and that he did not blame Prof Ford, instead blaming "Democrats who misused this process".
Chuck Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, said he supported the call for an FBI investigation prior to the hearing.
In a statement he urged Senate Republicans and the White House to "drop their inexplicable opposition" to it and "allow all facts to come out".
Senator Mazie Hirono urged "the men in this country" to "do the right thing for a change"
Hawaii Democrat Mazie Hirono said "the men in this country" should "just shut up".
"Not only do women like Dr Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed," she told a press conference.
Separately, the FBI declined to comment after the letter was made public on Tuesday.
What has Trump said about Kavanaugh?
US President Donald Trump, who reportedly did not meet Mr Kavanaugh on Tuesday, expressed sympathy for his nominee.
"I feel so badly for him that he's going through this, to be honest with you," the Republican president told a news conference. "This is not a man that deserves this."
He added: "Hopefully the woman will come forward, state her case. He will state his case before representatives of the United States Senate. And then they will vote."
Mr Trump also appeared to suggest that the controversy was being exploited by Democrats as lawmakers looked to delay the Supreme Court vote.
"The Supreme Court is one of the main reasons I got elected President. I hope Republican voters, and others, are watching, and studying, the Democrats Playbook," he tweeted.
'One of the finest people that I've ever known'
Meanwhile Mark Judge, a friend of Judge Kavanaugh who Prof Ford says witnessed the alleged incident, has said he does not want to speak publicly about the matter.
"Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr Ford's letter," he is quoted as saying in a letter from his lawyer.
What is at stake?
Republicans control the Senate by only a narrow 51-49 margin, meaning any defections could scupper the Supreme Court nomination.
That would set back President Trump's efforts to install more conservatives on the Supreme Court and broader US judiciary.
If confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh, a conservative federal appeals court judge, would be expected to tilt the court's balance further to the right.
The ugly confirmation battle could shake up the forthcoming mid-term elections.
Democrats are hoping to wrest control of Congress from Mr Trump's fellow Republicans on 6 November, dealing a serious blow to the president's efforts to install more conservatives on the Supreme Court and broader US judiciary.
North Korea agrees to shut missile site, says Moon - BBC News
Sept. 19, 2018.
North Korea agrees to shut missile site, says Moon
Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong-un signed what they say is 'a leap forward'
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has agreed to shut one of the country's main missile testing and launch sites, says the South's President Moon Jae-in.
After meeting in Pyongyang, the two leaders "agreed on a way to achieve denuclearisation," said Mr Moon.
The agreement was described by Mr Kim as a "leap forward" towards military peace on the peninsula.
Mr Kim also said he hoped to "visit Seoul in the near future" - he would be the first North Korean leader to do so.
Summit results: Denuclearisation
The main focus of the summit was the issue of denuclearisation. While the US and North Korea agreed in broad terms earlier this year to work towards that goal, negotiations have stalled.
Pyongyang has now sought to reconfirm its commitment.
The war that never officially ended
Mr Moon said Mr Kim had "agreed to permanently close the Tongchang-ri missile engine test site and missile launch facility" and, crucially, that this would be done "in the presence of experts from relevant nations".
Korea summit puts diplomacy back on track
The BBC's Seoul correspondent Laura Bicker said allowing independent inspectors to see the dismantling of the Tongchang-ri site was a major step forward.
She added that satellite images had suggested that Tongchang-ri was in the process of being destroyed, but that the declaration would allow inspectors to verify the process.
Tongchang-ri has been North Korea's main satellite launch facility since 2012, according to monitoring group 38 North.
It has also been used for testing engines for North Korean missiles capable of reaching the US.
Read more on North Korea's missile and nuclear programme
He said Mr Kim had also agreed to shut down the Yongbyon nuclear facility - where North Korea is believed to have produced the material used in its nuclear tests - but only if the US took some reciprocal action. The details of that were not specified.
North Korea blew up its main nuclear testing site at Punggye-ri shortly before Mr Kim's meeting with US President Donald Trump in June.
"The outcome is a big win for Moon Jae-in, who has managed to extract a series of positive headlines from Kim Jong-un related to denuclearisation," Ankit Panda, editor of The Diplomat, told the BBC.
"None of the concessions are truly costly to Kim and won't help move North Korea toward short-term disarmament, but provide a further basis for confidence building on which US-North Korea talks can move forward."
Summit results: North and South relations
The two countries also made advances on inter-Korean ties, announcing plans to link up their railways, allow more reunions for families separated by war and co-operate on health care.
Mr Moon invited the North Korean leader to Seoul, suggesting the visit should take place before the end of this year.
They will also seek to co-host the 2032 Summer Olympics.
How North Korea welcomed the South Korean leader
The South's defence minister and the head of the North Korean army also signed an agreement to reduce military tensions, establishing a buffer zone along the border to prevent accidental clashes.
The signing came mid-way through a three-day visit to Pyongyang by Mr Moon.
While it is the first trip to the North Korean capital in a decade by a leader from the South, it is Mr Moon's third meeting with Kim Jong-un since their historic summit in April.
Sanitizers, salutes and other Korea summit moments
Kim Jong-un: King of Pyongyang
Will historic Koreas summit lead to peace?
What does this mean for the US?
Efforts towards denuclearisation between the North and the US had recently hit a deadlock and this week's Pyongyang summit will bolster the South's role as a mediator.
Mr Trump was quick to tweet his applause for the Moon-Kim summit.
The US and North Korea held their own historic meeting in June when Mr Trump and Mr Kim agreed in broad terms to work towards denuclearisation.
Since then though, there's been little progress with no clear process nor timeline laid out.
The June Trump-Kim summit has so far yielded limited results
Most observers warn that so far the North has taken no meaningful steps to end its controversial nuclear weapons programme and this week's summit might not be enough to convince them otherwise.
The stories behind Korean family reunions
Imagine a North Korean family...
Six months' training for 10 minutes on parade
"For instance, the commitment to shutting down the Yongbyon complex is premised on reciprocal US measures, which raises difficulties," warns Mr Panda. "Washington will have to help move the needle here and it's unclear if the Trump administration can do that."
Mr Trump recently said that he and Mr Kim would "prove everyone wrong", after he received an invitation from the North Korean leader for a second summit. Both sides say they are working on making that meeting happen.
North Korea agrees to shut missile site, says Moon
Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong-un signed what they say is 'a leap forward'
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has agreed to shut one of the country's main missile testing and launch sites, says the South's President Moon Jae-in.
After meeting in Pyongyang, the two leaders "agreed on a way to achieve denuclearisation," said Mr Moon.
The agreement was described by Mr Kim as a "leap forward" towards military peace on the peninsula.
Mr Kim also said he hoped to "visit Seoul in the near future" - he would be the first North Korean leader to do so.
Summit results: Denuclearisation
The main focus of the summit was the issue of denuclearisation. While the US and North Korea agreed in broad terms earlier this year to work towards that goal, negotiations have stalled.
Pyongyang has now sought to reconfirm its commitment.
The war that never officially ended
Mr Moon said Mr Kim had "agreed to permanently close the Tongchang-ri missile engine test site and missile launch facility" and, crucially, that this would be done "in the presence of experts from relevant nations".
Korea summit puts diplomacy back on track
The BBC's Seoul correspondent Laura Bicker said allowing independent inspectors to see the dismantling of the Tongchang-ri site was a major step forward.
She added that satellite images had suggested that Tongchang-ri was in the process of being destroyed, but that the declaration would allow inspectors to verify the process.
Tongchang-ri has been North Korea's main satellite launch facility since 2012, according to monitoring group 38 North.
It has also been used for testing engines for North Korean missiles capable of reaching the US.
Read more on North Korea's missile and nuclear programme
He said Mr Kim had also agreed to shut down the Yongbyon nuclear facility - where North Korea is believed to have produced the material used in its nuclear tests - but only if the US took some reciprocal action. The details of that were not specified.
North Korea blew up its main nuclear testing site at Punggye-ri shortly before Mr Kim's meeting with US President Donald Trump in June.
"The outcome is a big win for Moon Jae-in, who has managed to extract a series of positive headlines from Kim Jong-un related to denuclearisation," Ankit Panda, editor of The Diplomat, told the BBC.
"None of the concessions are truly costly to Kim and won't help move North Korea toward short-term disarmament, but provide a further basis for confidence building on which US-North Korea talks can move forward."
Summit results: North and South relations
The two countries also made advances on inter-Korean ties, announcing plans to link up their railways, allow more reunions for families separated by war and co-operate on health care.
Mr Moon invited the North Korean leader to Seoul, suggesting the visit should take place before the end of this year.
They will also seek to co-host the 2032 Summer Olympics.
How North Korea welcomed the South Korean leader
The South's defence minister and the head of the North Korean army also signed an agreement to reduce military tensions, establishing a buffer zone along the border to prevent accidental clashes.
The signing came mid-way through a three-day visit to Pyongyang by Mr Moon.
While it is the first trip to the North Korean capital in a decade by a leader from the South, it is Mr Moon's third meeting with Kim Jong-un since their historic summit in April.
Sanitizers, salutes and other Korea summit moments
Kim Jong-un: King of Pyongyang
Will historic Koreas summit lead to peace?
What does this mean for the US?
Efforts towards denuclearisation between the North and the US had recently hit a deadlock and this week's Pyongyang summit will bolster the South's role as a mediator.
Mr Trump was quick to tweet his applause for the Moon-Kim summit.
The US and North Korea held their own historic meeting in June when Mr Trump and Mr Kim agreed in broad terms to work towards denuclearisation.
Since then though, there's been little progress with no clear process nor timeline laid out.
The June Trump-Kim summit has so far yielded limited results
Most observers warn that so far the North has taken no meaningful steps to end its controversial nuclear weapons programme and this week's summit might not be enough to convince them otherwise.
The stories behind Korean family reunions
Imagine a North Korean family...
Six months' training for 10 minutes on parade
"For instance, the commitment to shutting down the Yongbyon complex is premised on reciprocal US measures, which raises difficulties," warns Mr Panda. "Washington will have to help move the needle here and it's unclear if the Trump administration can do that."
Mr Trump recently said that he and Mr Kim would "prove everyone wrong", after he received an invitation from the North Korean leader for a second summit. Both sides say they are working on making that meeting happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
