I/III. [Respecting liars in uniform, now or once upon a time, is a "nationalist" obligation. Does it sound too familiar?
《The only reason Kelly’s lies were exposed was because journalists did their job and looked at the veracity of what a powerful person said. That’s what a free press does. But the Trump administration thinks that should stop. When a reporter asked Sanders Friday why Trump tweeted about Wilson again, the press secretary criticized reporters for continuing to talk about this story. She said reporters should have let Kelly have the final word and dropped the matter.》] http://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/white-house-john-kelly-journalists_us_59ea5a55e4b0958c46820942 White House: It's 'Highly Inappropriate' For Journalists To Criticize A General "If you want to get into a debate with a four-star Marine general, I think that is something highly inappropriate." 21/10/2017 3:23 AM IST | Updated 9 hours ago Amanda Terkel Washington Bureau Chief, HuffPost WASHINGTON ― White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters Friday that it would be “highly inappropriate” for them to question chief of staff John Kelly because he served in the military as a general. “If you want to go after Gen. Kelly, that is up to you,” she said. “If you want to get into a debate with a four-star Marine general, I think that is something highly inappropriate.” The controversy arose over Kelly’s appearance at the press podium on Thursday, when he went after Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.). Wilson said she heard President Donald Trump’s condolence call to the widow of Sgt. La David Johnson, who died in a combat operation in Niger. Wilson was appalled at what Trump said: that Johnson “must’ve known what he signed up for” when he enlisted in the military. The White House, including Trump, tried to cast Wilson as a liar. Follow Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump Democrat Congresswoman totally fabricated what I said to the wife of a soldier who died in action (and I have proof). Sad! 4:55 PM - Oct 18, 2017 79,469 79,469 Replies 25,183 25,183 Retweets 97,285 97,285 likes Twitter Ads info and privacy Johnson’s mother, however, backed the congresswoman up and said, “President Trump did disrespect my son and my daughter and also me and my husband.” The White House then shifted tactics, saying the congresswoman ― who is a close friend of the family ― shouldn’t have been listening in on the call anyway. Kelly then went after her as a publicity hound. To illustrate his point, he recounted an event in April 2015, when he went to the dedication of an FBI field office in Miami, which was being named after two agents who had died on the job: And a congresswoman stood up, and in a long tradition of empty barrels making the most noise, stood up there in all of that and talked about how she was instrumental in getting the funding for that building, and how she took care of her constituents because she got the money, and she just called up President Obama, and on that phone call, he gave the money, the $20 million, to build the building, and she sat down. And we were stunned, stunned that she’d done it. Even for someone that is that empty a barrel, we were stunned. Kelly, either intentionally or not, fabricated what happened. His story is simply not true, as video from the event later showed. Wilson did not brag about getting money for the building (because she wasn’t in Congress when the funds were allocated), and she didn’t make the event all about herself. The only reason Kelly’s lies were exposed was because journalists did their job and looked at the veracity of what a powerful person said. That’s what a free press does. But the Trump administration thinks that should stop. When a reporter asked Sanders Friday why Trump tweeted about Wilson again, the press secretary criticized reporters for continuing to talk about this story. She said reporters should have let Kelly have the final word and dropped the matter. “Just to finish on the rest of your question of why the president felt the need to respond, it’s because it should have ended yesterday after General Kelly’s comments. But it didn’t,” she said. “It continued, and it’s still continuing today. It’s still the bulk of the coverage on most every TV you turn on and most every newspaper that you open up today.” Kelly is a retired four-star Marine general. But that fact is irrelevant to whether journalists are allowed to question and criticize him. The military does not run the country. But under Trump ― who never served in the military ― generals have been given increased control and the military has taken a more central role. Early on, Trump decided to nominate retired Gen. Jim Mattis for the role of defense secretary. Traditionally, presidents choose civilians for that position. Mattis had to receive a waiver to be confirmed because he retired less than seven years ago. Trump also considered having a showy display of military might during his inaugural parade. With Kelly serving as chief of staff, that trend continues. At Thursday’s press briefing, Kelly asked journalists if any of them knew anyone who had died serving in combat. If they did, they were entitled to ask him a question. “Is anyone here a Gold Star parent or sibling? Does anyone here know a Gold Star parent or sibling? OK. You get the question,” he said pointing to a man who indicated he did. As New Yorker writer Masha Gessen wrote Friday, “This was a new twist on the Trump Administration’s technique of shunning and shaming unfriendly members of the news media, except this time, it was framed explicitly in terms of national loyalty. As if on cue, the first reporter allowed to speak inserted the phrase ‘Semper Fi’—a literal loyalty oath—into his question.” “It stuns me that a member of Congress would have listened in on that conversation, absolutely stuns me. And I thought at least that was sacred,” Kelly added on Thursday, essentially saying that a civilian shouldn’t have the right to even hear a conversation dealing with military matters because in Trump’s America, she isn’t worthy. UPDATE, 8:50 p.m. ― Sanders attempted to clarify her remarks in a statement Friday evening. View image on Twitter Follow Matt Hoye ✔@mattyhoyeCNN @jeffzeleny just obtained statement from @PressSec clarifying her remarks earlier on questioning Gen Kelly.. 4:39 AM - Oct 21, 2017 45 45 Replies 12 12 Retweets 22 22 likes II/III. https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/10/19/51-gop-senators-just-voted-cut-15-trillion-medicare-and-medicaid-give-super-rich-and?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=socialnetwork Published on Thursday, October 19, 2017 byCommon Dreams 51 GOP Senators Just Voted To Cut $1.5 Trillion from Medicare and Medicaid To Give Super-Rich and Corporations a Tax Cut The Republican budget, declared Sen. Sanders after its passage, "is not a bad bill. It's a horrific bill." byJon Queally, staff writer Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, center, with fellow Republican leadership on Capitol Hill. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, center, with fellow Republican leadership on Capitol Hill. (Photo: Reuters/Gary Cameron) Along strict party lines, the Republican-controlled Senate on Thursday night voted to pass a sweeping budget measure—one criticized as both "despicable" and "horrific" for providing massive giveaways to corporations and the super-rich while eviscerating funding for social programs, healthcare, education, and affordable housing. "Another dark deed done: GOP passes obscene budget to slash Medicare/Medicaid & explode the deficit – all in the name of tax cuts for the 1%." —Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon)The measure passed by 51-49 vote, with only one Republican, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, joining every Democrat and the chamber's two Independents who voted against it. Its approval now paves that way for massive tax giveaways to the wealthy and corporations envisioned by President Donald Trump and the GOP in both the House and the Senate. "51 Republican Senators just voted to cut Medicaid by $1 trillion and Medicare by $500 billion so that millionaires and corporations can get a tax cut. It's immoral and despicable," said TJ Helmstetter, a spokesperson for Americans for Tax Fairness, in a statement immediately following the vote. Though the budget resolution itself is nonbinding, MoveOn.org's Ben Wikler notes how the Senate passage on Thursday represents the "starting gun for what might be the most consequential legislative fight of the Trump era: the looting of the U.S. treasury to reward billionaire GOP donors and mega-corporations, at the expense of the rest of us." And with the Senate resolution now in place, a reconciliation process can begin with Republicans in the House, meaning the GOP can "shoot for a tax bill without a single Democratic vote." In the wake of its passage, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who earlier this week called the proposal "Robin Hood in reverse" for taking from the poor to give to the rich— said the "Republicans' budget is not a bad bill. It's a horrific bill." Sanders was far from alone in his outrage. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) called the vote a "dark deed" and urged people nationwide to stand up and fight back against what the budget represents: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), also vocal in her warnings ahead of the vote, condemned the budget put forth by her Republican colleagues as "garbage". Here, for the record, is the full roll call of the vote: Snipped III. ["If you want to negotiate with (North Korean leader) Kim Jong Un, and your goal is to avoid war and try to be able to have a diplomatic resolution, the worst thing you can do is first threaten to destroy his country in the United Nations," Kerry said. He was speaking in a private lecture delivered at Geneva's Graduate Institute.] https://in.reuters.com/article/iran-nuclear-kerry/ending-iran-nuclear-deal-would-worsen-north-korea-situation-kerry-idINKBN1CO339 OCTOBER 20, 2017 / 2:40 AM / A DAY AGO Ending Iran nuclear deal would worsen North Korea situation: Kerry Stephanie Nebehay 3 MIN READ GENEVA (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump risks driving Iran towards nuclear proliferation and worsening a standoff with North Korea if Washington ends a nuclear deal with Tehran, former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said late on Thursday. FILE PHOTO: John Kerry speaks with the media after attending the Mideast peace conference in Paris, France, January 15, 2017 . REUTERS/Alex Brandon/Pool Kerry, who negotiated the 2015 deal between Iran and world powers, was speaking a week after Trump refused to certify that Tehran was in compliance with it, amid growing tensions with Pyongyang over its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. “If you want to negotiate with (North Korean leader) Kim Jong Un, and your goal is to avoid war and try to be able to have a diplomatic resolution, the worst thing you can do is first threaten to destroy his country in the United Nations,” Kerry said. He was speaking in a private lecture delivered at Geneva’s Graduate Institute. “And secondly, screw around with the deal that has already been made because the message is, don’t make a deal with the United States, they won’t keep their word,” he said. The nuclear deal places Iran under tough restraints, including inspections, round-the-clock surveillance and tracking every ounce of uranium produced, Kerry said. “We would notice an uptick in their enrichment, like that,” he said, snapping his fingers. “And nobody that I know of with common sense can understand what the virtue is in accelerating a confrontation with the possibility that they might decide they want to break out and make it (a nuclear bomb) now instead of 10 or 15 or 25 years from now.” Kerry, a former Senator who headed the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Swiss media that Trump’s leaving the Iranian deal’s fate to Congress was “very dangerous” and opened the door to “party politics”. Congress cannot unilaterally renegotiate a multilateral accord, the Geneva daily Le Temps quoted him as saying. “It is possible that Congress would make an unreasonable decision that would put Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a very complicated political situation that could force him to retaliate. It’s a slippery slope.” Khamenei said on Wednesday that Tehran would stick to its accord as long as the other signatories respected it, but would “shred” the deal if Washington pulled out, state TV reported. If Iran violated the accord, U.N. sanctions would snap back into place, Kerry told the audience. “Moreover, at that point in time folks, we have a year of break-up. We have all the time that we need in the world to be able to bomb their facilities into submission.” Ending the deal could lead to Iran hiding fissile production facilities “deep in a mountain where we have no insight”. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
