Page: 6

Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard told Fox News on Wednesday evening that the Trump administration was “directly undermining” its own attempts to get North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons by pursuing “regime change” in countries like Venezuela and Iran.

The Hawaii congresswoman told “Special Report with Bret Baier” that it has been “impossible for Kim Jong Un to believe them [the administration] when they tell him, ‘Don’t worry. Get rid of your nuclear weapons. We’re not going to come after you.’ … This is not something that can happen overnight, but it begins with ending our regime change wars in other countries [and] ending our regime change efforts as we are seeing in these countries like Venezuela and Iran.”

Gabbard spoke to Fox News shortly after North Korea announced that it had test-fired a “new-type tactical guided weapon.” The totalitarian country has not tested a ballistic missile since November 2017 and U.S. officials told Fox News that Wednesday’s exercise likely was a “short-range” test of a small guided weapon.


“We must be willing to meet with those who may be potential adversaries or adversaries in the pursuit of peace and security,” Gabbard said.

“However, this administration is undermining their own efforts by … making it so they’ve got no credibility as they are trying to barter and negotiate with North Korea and get them to denuclearize.”


Gabbard also addressed criticisms of her past visits to Syria, where she has met with that country’s president. When asked by host Bret Baier if she considers Bashar al-Assad to be a war criminal, Gabbard answered: “What’s more important than the question that you’re asking right now is to focus on the costs of this regime change war on our country [and] the trillions of dollars that we’ve spent on waging a regime change war that has undermined our national security, strengthening terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda … Let’s focus on the costs and the consequences of these regime change wars and work for the interests of our country.”

When asked if she agreed with the intelligence community’s conclusion that Assad’s forces gassed civilians opposed to his rule, Gabbard answered: “What I have said, and I have said this numerous times, is that the Assad government, the Syrian government …  terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and other jihadist groups in Syria have unfortunately used these chemical weapons in this war that’s currently being waged.”

Source: Fox News Politics

Former Watergate Assistant Special Prosecutor Jon Sale said Tuesday that Attorney General William Barr will do whatever “the law requires” to keep sensitive information private on the heels of Thursday’s Mueller report release.

“I think Barr will put his head down, do what the law requires. Grand jury material has to be redacted. Doesn’t matter what anybody in the Congress says,” Sale said on “Your World with Neil Cavuto.”


“But you anticipate as much as half of it? That seems like a lot but it could be,” Cavuto asked Sale.

“It’s not a matter of quantity. The question is whether or not Mueller can actually tell his findings and Barr still do his job,” Sale responded.

Barr is set to hold a news conference Thursday morning, during which he’ll discuss the long-awaited release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on his Russia election meddling inquiry, the Justice Department announced Wednesday.

Barr released a four-page summary last month, which stated that the special counsel found no proof of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential election.

Democrats have demanded the full, unredacted report and are expected to issue a subpoena.

Sale says the request is destined for the courts, and Barr is “duty-bound” to resist a subpoena and would not negotiate grand jury material.


“There was a case decided one week ago in which the court of appeals in the District of Columbia held that the court does not have inherent authority in the public interests of whatever reasons to release grand jury material.”

Sale added, “So, I think people are just going to have to accept the court ruling.”

Fox News’ Paulina Dedaj contributed to this report.

Source: Fox News Politics

President Trump’s job approval stands at 45 percent, while 51 percent of voters disapprove, according to a new Fox News Poll.  And that is almost exactly where it was last month, 46-51 percent, before Special Counsel Robert Mueller completed his Russia probe March 22.

That makes sense given two-thirds of voters (65 percent) say Mueller’s investigation has not changed how they feel about Trump.  One in ten (10 percent) say they feel better about the president, while nearly two in ten (17 percent) feel worse.


The Justice Department will release a redacted version of Mueller’s report Thursday.  Attorney General William Barr released his summary March 24.  Congressional Democrats want the full report released, as do 80 percent of voters according to a Fox News Poll conducted March 17-20.

But don’t expect the release of Mueller’s report to put the issue to rest.  The poll finds 35 percent of voters think the Russia investigation proves there was no collision, while 64 percent disagree or have no opinion.

In addition, 57 percent think it is at least somewhat likely U.S. intelligence agencies broke the law when they started investigating the Trump campaign in the first place: 22 percent think it is “extremely” likely, 12 percent “very” likely, 23 percent “somewhat” likely. A third, 35 percent, think it is “not at all” likely that there were illegalities in the investigation.

Meanwhile, 33 percent of voters are “not at all” confident the government can prevent Russia or others from hacking into U.S. election systems in future elections.  Less than a quarter (22 percent) are “extremely” or “very” confident.


Mueller receives a better net favorable score than Barr or Trump.  He’s at +12 points (42 favorable vs. 30 unfavorable).  Barr, who nearly half of voters can’t rate, is in negative territory by just one point (26-27), while Donald Trump is underwater by 9 (44-53).

Among Republicans, 87 percent have a favorable opinion of Trump and 44 percent like Barr.

Thirty-one percent of Republicans and 54 percent of Democrats view Mueller positively.

Overall, voters view both Russian President Vladimir Putin and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange negatively.  Putin receives a net -65 (9 favorable vs. 74 unfavorable), and Assange -25 (16-41).  Some 43 percent have never heard of or can’t rate Assange.


Recently Trump tweeted about comments Rep. Ilhan Omar made about the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  Omar is a Democrat from Minnesota and one of the first Muslim women in the House.  Democrats view Omar more positively than negatively by 10 points.  Among Republicans, she has a net negative score by 43 points.  Half of all voters, 50 percent, don’t know enough about the congresswoman to have an opinion.

Trump is losing his on-going feud with the late Arizona Sen. John McCain:  by a 51-27 percent margin, more voters admire McCain than Trump.

Conducted April 14-16, 2019 under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company (R), this Fox News Poll includes interviews with 1,005 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide who spoke with live interviewers on both landlines and cellphones.  The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.

Source: Fox News Politics

Immigration is a top priority for Republicans, but there are divisions within the party on some recent policy proposals. For example, Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says President Trump’s idea of closing the southern border to pressure Mexico to stop the flow of migrants would have a “potentially catastrophic economic impact” on the country.  Yet the latest Fox News Poll finds 75 percent of Republicans think shutting the border is a good idea.

Overall, by a 12-point margin, voters say closing the border is a bad idea (41 good vs. 53 bad), and by a 24-point spread they believe immigration helps rather than hurts the country (48-24 percent).


When asked the most important issue facing the country, 21 percent of voters cite immigration and 10 percent the economy.  Those are the only issues garnering double-digit mentions.  Health care (9 percent), climate change (6 percent) and race relations (5 percent) round out the top five.

Republicans’ views are pushing immigration to the top spot, as 38 percent say it is the most important problem, followed by the economy at 10 percent.  Only 7 percent of Democrats prioritize immigration, as their top issues are health care (13 percent) and climate change (11 percent).

A third of voters (33 percent) have a favorable view of sanctuary cities, while nearly half, 45 percent, view them negatively.

The president says he is considering putting illegal immigrants in sanctuary cities.

On the administration’s treatment of illegal immigrants, 41 percent say it is being “too tough,” while 25 percent say “not tough enough,” and 27 percent say it is “about right.”

The largest portion of voters, 43 percent, believes the administration is “too tough” in dealing with migrants seeking asylum, while 17 percent say it is “not tough enough” and 32 percent say “about right.”

Republicans, though, feel differently: almost half feel Trump is “not tough enough” on illegal immigrants (46 percent) and striking the right balance with asylum seekers (55 percent).

On voters’ second priority, the economy, 44 percent say it is in excellent or good shape.  That’s up 11 points from 33 percent at the 100-day mark of the Trump administration (April 2017).

Still, there is work to do.  A majority, 54 percent, thinks the economy is in negative condition.

“There are massive rifts with certain groups feeling much better about the economy than others,” says Democratic Pollster Chris Anderson, who conducts the Fox News Poll with Republican Daron Shaw.

“Men, whites, high-income voters and, most notably, Republicans, are very positive on the economy, while on the other side, women, non-whites, lower-income households, Democrats, and independents are negative.”


In addition, a growing number are dissatisfied with how things are going in the country:  58 percent are unhappy, up from 55 percent last April and 53 percent two years ago (April 2017).

About equal numbers think the economy will get better (27 percent) during the next year as expect it will get worse (25 percent).  The highest share, 42 percent, think it will stay the same.

Conducted April 14-16, 2019 under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company (R), this Fox News Poll includes interviews with 1,005 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide who spoke with live interviewers on both landlines and cellphones.  The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.

Source: Fox News Politics

Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume said Wednesday that given “obvious” facts at the southern border, Democratic politicians could no longer deny that the U.S. was dealing with a crisis.

“It’s pretty simple,” Hume told “The Daily Briefing” host Dana Perino. “The facts have become so clear and so obvious that there’s really no way to deny that there’s a crisis down there.”

Perino showed a clip from 2020 candidate Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who admonished people not to deny a crisis existed at the border. “Nations should have borders. Borders should be respected,” he asserted during a campaign event in Iowa.

Hume’s comments came as both an influx of migrants and a complicated legal situation put the administration in a tough spot as it worked to determine what to do with detained migrants after the law required their release from custody.


In what Hume described as a “nice piece of politics,” President Trump proposed transferring detained migrants to sanctuary cities. “I don’t think he ever seriously intended to do that,” Hume said.

“It doesn’t really make any law enforcement sense to do that,” he added, “because if they go to sanctuary cities, they can leave and go elsewhere.” Hume indicated that Trump’s proposal showed the left’s hypocrisy on sanctuary cities, which Democrats have touted as a welcome environment for illlegal immigrants.


Congressional Democrats blasted the proposal as “a bizarre and unlawful attempt to score political points.” Trump has long warned he would shut down border crossings and reportedly told Kevin McAleenan, Homeland Security’s new acting director, to do just that with the alleged promise of a future pardon if he faced prosecution.

The reported deal, not confirmed by Fox News, created an uproar in Congress, where House Judiciary Democrats demanded McAleenan provide more information on the exchange. Both Trump and DHS have denied any inappropriate conversations between the president and McAleenan.

Source: Fox News Politics

Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have each missed more than one-fifth of the Senate’s votes so far this year as they campaign for president, according to an Associated Press analysis of congressional data.

With 16 missed votes of the 77 that the Republican-controlled Senate has held in 2019, Harris and Booker far outpace the number missed by their fellow senators also vying for the Democratic presidential nomination. Sen. Bernie Sanders has missed seven votes so far this year, while Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Amy Klobuchar have each missed three and Sen. Elizabeth Warren has missed one vote, AP found.

Seeking the presidency as a sitting member of Congress requires a logistical juggling act that often results in candidates taking hits for missed votes as the pace of campaign season picks up to a whirlwind. Perhaps the most notable recent example is Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who took hits for his missed votes from his rivals — including future President Donald Trump — during the 2016 GOP presidential primary.


“When you’re a governor or businessman, you can run for president and still do your day job. But when you’re a senator or congressman and run for president, you’re not voting, which is the single most important part of your job,” said Alex Conant, a veteran Republican strategist and Rubio’s communications director in 2016. “So I think there’s an inherent conflict that people (who) aren’t in that position are going to try to exploit.”

That doesn’t mean, however, that jabbing at presidential candidates for missed votes is effective. While Rubio’s absenteeism drew criticism from Trump and the Democrat seeking to take his Senate seat in 2016, he still easily won re-election to the Senate.

And Rubio had missed considerably more votes at a similar point in 2015 than Harris and Booker have during 2019′s Senate session so far: The Republican was absent from 25 of the first 77 votes of that year, according to AP’s tally. That is 56% more votes than Harris and Booker missed.


Texas Sen. Ted Cruz also took heat for missed votes from his opponent last year, former congressman turned Democratic presidential hopeful Beto O’Rourke, and still came out ahead.

Democratic strategist Jesse Lehrich, a former aide to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign who’s not currently affiliated with any presidential candidate, predicted his party’s presidential candidates would avoid making missed votes an issue in a primary that’s stayed largely free of infighting thus far.

“Given the positive tenor on the Democratic side of the campaign thus far, I just can’t imagine any candidate trying to disingenuously weaponize it in this primary,” Lehrich said. “If someone did, I think it would backfire.”

Harris and Booker tallied the bulk of their missed votes this month, including the confirmation of Trump’s nominee to lead the Interior Department , David Bernhardt — when the Democratic duo had separately scheduled campaign travel to Iowa. Harris entered a statement in the Congressional Record making clear that she would have voted no on advancing Bernhardt to a final vote.

But none of the Democratic senators running in 2020 have missed votes where their presence would have affected the outcome, as Lehrich noted.


“I’d be shocked if any 2020 Democratic candidate missed a key vote where the outcome was actually up in the air,” he said.

On that point, Conant offered some bipartisan consensus: “I never ran into a voter in Iowa or New Hampshire who was concerned that Rubio was missing votes,” recalled the Republican, now a partner at the firm Firehouse Strategies. “Voters understand that when you’re running for president, missing votes comes with the job. The one exception, I think, is if you miss a vote of national significance where your vote could be decisive.”

Source: Fox News Politics

Former Deputy Chief of Staff for George W. Bush Karl Rove said Wednesday House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s claim that “everything is at stake” in the 2020 election  was “over the top.”

Pelosi, D-Calif., told CNN Tuesday, “Everything is at stake in this election. The Constitution of the United States, with the president who is trying to usurp the power of the legislative branch of government, the environment in which we live.”

“A little bit over the top. Almost semi-hysterical,” Rove, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for George W. Bush from 2005 until 2007, said on “America’s Newsroom” Wednesday in response to Pelosi’s remarks the day before. “You know, The Constitution is at stake, the role of Congress is at stake, our very environment is at stake and it (looks) a little bit sort of unhinged.”


He added, “On the other hand, it plays into the environment (in) which we find ourselves. Democrats do have a little bit of leeway in saying things are really, really bad even if they sound a little over the top.”

Rove then cited statistics saying, “If you take a look at the Real Clear Politics average of all recent polls, 37.7 percent think the country is going in the right direction and 56.1 (percent) think the country is seriously off on the wrong track.”

He added, “That’s sort of the same dynamic that people had in 2016 when they wanted change and the Democrats are trying to position themselves as the party of change for the 2020 presidential election.”

On “America’s Newsroom,” Rove, a Fox News contributor, also weighed in on Thursday’s release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s much-anticipated Russia report.


Last month, Mueller submitted his almost 400-page report to the Justice Department for review by the attorney general and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. In a letter to Congress, Attorney General Bill Barr relayed some of the primary findings of the report, stating the special counsel found no evidence of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians during the 2016 presidential election.

Barr said he identified four areas of the report that he believed should be redacted, including grand jury material and information the intelligence community believes would reveal intelligence sources and methods.

“We don’t know how much is going to be redacted but let’s be clear, no matter how little the redaction is, short of no redactions at all, this is going to be the opening of the next chapter in which the Democrats on the Hill are going to say ‘you know what? We’re not going to agree that there’s no collusion and we’re certainly not going to agree there is no obstruction unless you totally give us an unredacted version of the Mueller report,” Rove said.


“So this is merely the beginning of act two. We had act one. It lasted two years. Donald Trump was guilty of collusion with the Russians. That got blown up. Now we’re going to be turning to the obstruction issue and unless and until they (Democrats) have what they want, which is (a) totally unredacted version, you can count on the Democrats continuing to raise questions about it.”

He added, “I think the American people are getting tired of all of this and this isn’t a constructive way for the Democrats to move.”

Source: Fox News Politics

Attorney General William Barr is set to hold a news conference Thursday morning where he will discuss the long-awaited release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report — and certain members of Congress will be able to see the report “without certain redactions” after its public release, the Justice Department announced Wednesday.

Barr will be joined by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at 9:30 a.m. where they are expected to discuss the release of the report, officials said.

The disclosure of a version of the report without “certain redactions” came in a filing late Wednesday in the Roger Stone prosecution. The DOJ said it would publicly redact sections related to Stone’s case which is ongoing. Stone, a longtime confidant of the president, is awaiting trial on charges including false statements and obstruction.


A summary of the report released by Barr last month stated that the special counsel found no proof of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential election.

It remains unclear what the full report holds, including what Mueller may have found on allegations of obstruction of justice. Barr wrote in his summary that evidence was “not sufficient to establish” certainty that President Trump committed obstruction.

Anticipating further accusations, a source close to Trump’s legal team confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday that the president’s lawyers have been preparing a counter-report to object any obstruction of justice claims.

It is not likely that Trump will be subject to any prosecution as a result of the details of the report but it is likely to contain unflattering details about his efforts to influence the Russia probe, including the firing of former FBI Director James Comey.

Mueller’s investigation also included scrutiny of Trump’s alleged pressure on Comey to end an investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn, his public dismay over former Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recusal from the Russia investigation and Trump’s alleged role in drafting an explanation about a meeting his oldest son took at Trump Tower with a Kremlin-connected lawyer.

Details of that meeting are also expected to emerge.

The report has been slated to be released to the public Thursday with redactions. Fox News confirmed that the report would be made available to all Congressional committees sometime around noon, after Barr’s press conference.

The DOJ did not say which members of Congress would receive the version of the report without certain redactions but remaining lawmakers would be provided the same redacted report as the public – likely prompting Democrats to issue a subpoena for the full report.

They are expected to point to any negative portrayal of the president as a reason to release the full report as it could signal that Barr was attempting to shield Trump and his family from prosecution.

Barr has said he is withholding grand jury and classified information as well as portions relating to ongoing investigations and the privacy or reputation of uncharged “peripheral” people. But, how liberally he interprets those categories is yet to be seen.


Mueller brought charges against 34 people – including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Flynn and his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.

He also found evidence to confirm a consolidated effort by the Russian government to influence the 2016 presidential election, according to Barr’s findings.

Fox News’ Brooke Singman, Jake Gibson, William Mears and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source: Fox News Politics

New York University journalism professor Talia Lavin once again grabbed headlines when she took hefty jabs at leading figures in the conservative movement.

Lavin, who will teach a course called “Reporting on the Far Right,” called former Navy SEAL and newly-elected Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, “captain s—head” on Friday. She was deriding Crenshaw for discussing criticism he received after blasting Rep. Ilhan Omar’s, D-Minn., controversial comments about the attacks on September 11.

“[T]he real victim, captain s—head, speaks,” Lavin tweeted above a video of Crenshaw and his comments on the backlash. In an archived version of that Twitter thread, Lavin seemed to double down amid criticism and called Crenshaw “lieutenant commander s—-head.”

“[O]h [I] see the right-wing pearl clutchers are here. [S]orry, it’s my right to criticize a political hack who was also once a troop,” she tweeted.

Crenshaw was just one of many to criticize Omar after she referred to the events on 9/11 as “some people did something.”

“First Member of Congress to ever describe terrorists who killed thousands of Americans on 9/11 as ‘some people who did something,'” he tweeted. “Unbelievable.”


Lavin also took aim at conservative author Ben Shapiro in an op-ed published Monday after Shapiro and others reacted to the devastating fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in France. Lavin appeared to tie Shapiro’s reaction to both the manifesto produced by New Zealand shooter Brenton Tarrant, as well as to right-wing nationalist Richard Spencer, whom she called a “professional racist.”

“[F]ast-talking far-right pundit Ben Shapiro called Notre Dame a “monument to Western civilization” and “Judeo-Christian heritage.” Given the already-raging rumors about potential Muslim involvement, these tweets evoked the specter of a war between Islam and the West that is already part of numerous far-right narratives; it was also a central thread in the manifesto of Brenton Tarrant, the alleged Christchurch, New Zealand, shooter[…]Richard Spencer, professional racist and coiner of the term “alt-right,” openly advocated for such warfare, stating (and misspelling) his hopes that the fire would “spur the White man into action — to sieze power in his countries, in Europe, in the world,” and declaring such an insurgence a “glorious purpose.”

— Talia Lavin, The Washington Post

Shapiro quickly rebutted her comments, calling them the “sheerest form of disgusting bulls***.” “I blamed no one for the Notre Dame fire, since it was an accident by all available evidence, and imputing malicious intent to me is simply gross,” he added.

Lavin caused an uproar last year when she suggested another Marine veteran and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) promoted Nazi symbolism. She later apologized and resigned from her position as a writer with The New Yorker.


“To Justin Gaertner, I apologize, sincerely: all I saw in you was the photo ICE tweeted, and not the human being depicted inside it,” Lavin tweeted. “It was uncharitable, and the hasty deletion doesn’t change that. I’m sorry and I have voluntarily resigned after three years at the New Yorker.”

Source: Fox News Politics

John Yoo, former deputy assistant attorney general to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, has defended Attorney General William Barr’s authority to overrule immigration judges in his recent decision regarding asylum seekers.

Barr ruled on Tuesday that asylum seekers coming to the United States will no longer have a chance to be released from custody on bail, and will remain in detention centers until hearings to determine the legitimacy of their claims. Yoo, now a law professor at UC-Berkeley, argued during an appearance on “The Daily Briefing With Dana Perino” on Wednesday that Barr’s ruling was “correct on the merits.”

“I think the attorney general’s critics are overblowing what this is,” Yoo said. “This is not part of some grand scheme against immigrants coming into the United States. It’s a very narrow thing the attorney general has done. He has the power to overrule immigration judges. Immigration judges have been making mistakes — they’ve been allowing bail to be granted to people seeking asylum who are caught past the border.”

He went on to discuss the difference between migrants arriving at the border to seek asylum, and those attempting to enter and remain as citizens.

“It may not actually apply to that many people,” he continued. “I’d be very surprised to see a court overturn it.”

Those fleeing areas of Central America, Yoo said, often don’t see their asylum claims approved because they don’t meet the legal threshold to qualify under United States law.



“Asylum seekers have to show what they call a well-founded fear of persecution back in their home countries,” he said. “The problem for all these people coming from Central America, they’re fleeing for economic reasons. They’re not fleeing because the government is persecuting them.”

Apart from economic purposes, many people are fleeing Central America due to gang violence, which Yoo said still isn’t likely to secure asylum status. U.S. courts typically recognize such activity as “private violence,” and only grant asylum to those being persecuted by the government, such as religious minorities or political dissidents.


“Central American migrants don’t fit in that category,” Yoo continued. “That’s why I think Attorney General Barr is correct.”

A number of prominent figures have come to Barr’s defense, including Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who told “America’s Newsroom” hosts on Wednesday that keeping asylum seekers in custody until their hearings is “what has to be done.”

Source: Fox News Politics

[There are no radio stations in the database]
%d bloggers like this: