Skip to content
A senior North Korea official on Monday urged the United States to behave as if it seriously wants peace.
In his short speech to the general assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), a global organization based in Geneva, Ri Jong Hyok said, “Now is the high time to put an end to the U.S. anachronistic anti-DPRK hostile policy and its futile moves of sanctions and pressure.”
“The United States should properly understand our position and come out in a manner of sincere and serious attitude for positively contributing to maintaining peace and stability on the Korean peninsula,” Ri, a member of the Supreme People’s Assembly and director of the National Reunification Institute, added.
He has previously said (pdf) the United States’ decades-long nuclear threats were the sole driving factor behind his country’s development of nuclear weapons, and asserted Monday that his country wants to build a “just and peaceful new world, free from aggression and war.”
The statements come just days after President Donald Trump announced that war hawk John Bolton—who recently argued that, absent Korean reunification, “unpalatable military options” are the only way to respond to North Korea—was his pick to replace H.R. McMaster as national security adviser.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
The White House announced earlier this month that Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will sit down for in-person talks—a positive development peace groups attributed to diplomacy from the South. But according to Bolton, the talks are just an excuse for Pyongyang to further develop its nuclear arsenal.
Speaking Sunday to New York-based radio show “The Cats Roundtable,” Bolton said that “preparations are already underway” for the talks, “but I think we have to look at what North Korea’s motivation is here.”
“They’ve got a fairly limited number of things that they need to do in North Korea to make their nuclear warheads actually deliverable on targets in the United States, so they want to try to slow roll the negotiations to buy more time,” he argued.
Although the “normal route here is months and months of preparation, that would simply play into the North Korean playbook. And I think the sooner we have the meeting and have a very straightforward discussion—Is North Korea going to give up its nuclear weapons? How are we going to do it? How are we going to take it out of the country?—not a theoretical discussion about these issues but very concretely, How they are going to denuclearize North Korea? The sooner we get to it and cut through the chase, the better,” Bolton said.
The American public, however, is widely supportive of the historic summit. According to a new AP-NORC poll, nearly half—48 percent—of Americans are in favor of Trump taking part in direct negotiations with Kim, while just 29 percent oppose the plan.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
In a positive step to address the failed war on drugs, the Senate’s top Democrat, Chuck Schumer of New York, announced Friday that he will soon put forth legislation to effectively decriminalize marijuana at the federal level, calling it “the right thing to do for America.”
“The time has come to decriminalize marijuana,” stated Schumer. “My thinking—as well as the general population’s views—on the issue has evolved, and so I believe there’s no better time than the present to get this done. It’s simply the right thing to do.”
“When I first came to Congress in 1981, only 1 in 4 Americans believed marijuana should be made legal. Today, that number has climbed to nearly two thirds, a record high,” he writes at Medium.
The Drug Policy Alliance gave the announcement cautious praise, writing on Twitter: “We’re glad to see @SenSchumer come around and finally support federal marijuana reform! Looking forward to seeing more details about his bill, but it sounds like he wants to de-schedule marijuana & completely remove it from the Controlled Substances Act.”
Schumer first announced the move Thursday—the day before the drug’s unofficial holiday—to VICE News. The legislation is expected within the next week, the news outlet reported.
The key change Schumer’s legislation would effect is removing marijuana from the list of “Schedule 1” drugs, where it sits alongside heroin and LSD. In a Twitter thread, the senator outlines the other changes it would bring about:
Schumer’s formal announcement comes a day after Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) announced he became the third co-sponsor of the Marijuana Justice Act, introduced by Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.). Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Kirsten Gilibrand (N.Y.) are already co-sponsors, and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced a companion bill in the House. Lee argued the legislation was especially pressing given the Trump administration’s “doubling down on unjust marijuana criminalization policies.”
Like Schumer’s expected legislation, Booker’s bill would take marijuana off the list of scheduled substances. Booker’s would also establish a $500 million fund to annually reinvest in communities most impacted by the war on drugs, incentivize states to legalize marijuana, and expunge federal marijuana use and possession crimes.
In a CNN op-ed on Friday, Drug Policy Alliance staffers Jolene Forman and Suchitra Rajagopalan argue that now is the time to “look beyond just legalizing” marijuana and make sure legislation recognizes the disproportionate impact marijuana criminalization has had on non-white communities.
“Marijuana legalization isn’t—and shouldn’t be—simply about greater access to marijuana,” they write. “We must center the people who have been most harmed by decades of racialized drug policies. If we don’t, marijuana legalization won’t fulfill its potential to repair the devastation that mass criminalization has wrought on black and brown communities.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
In the eyes of D.C. media elites, jokes about murderous drone strikes and a war that killed over a million Iraqis fall well within the boundaries of civility, but humor that targets the powerful is completely unacceptable.
That was the message many journalists and critics took from the White House Correspondents’ Association’s (WHCA) “pathetic” statement Sunday night apologizing for the performance of comedian Michelle Wolf, who pilloried the incompetence of Democrats, railed against the lies of the Trump administration, and spoke uncomfortable truths about the corporate media’s complicity in the president’s ascent to power.
Click Here: Rugby league Jerseys
“Pathetic to see WHCA cave in and attack the comedian they hired to roast an administration led by a guy who bragged about sexual assault, talked about shooting Muslims with bullets dipped in pig blood, and attacked the free press on a daily basis.”
—Christian Christensen
According to WHCA—which positions itself as a defender of free speech—Wolf’s 20-minute routine amounted to an intolerable breach of civil discourse, which apparently prohibits criticism that might offend those in positions of immense power and influence, like White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
“Last night’s program was meant to offer a unifying message about our common commitment to a vigorous and free press while honoring civility, great reporting, and scholarship winners, not to divide people,” the WHCA said in a statement posted to Twitter Sunday night, following a full day of constant outrage and hand-wringing about Wolf’s performance from prominent access journalists. “Unfortunately, the entertainer’s monologue was not in the spirit of that mission.”
WHCA’s statement was immediately decried as an “embarrassment” that demonstrates the organization is more interested in facilitating “chumminess” between the White House and the media than a “vigorous and free press.”
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
While Wolf’s attacks on the barrage of lies Sanders unleashes on an almost daily basis were viewed as scandalous by many of those being lied to, perhaps the most scathing component of Wolf’s performance was her attack on the corporate media outlets, who she accused of using Trump to bolster their bottom lines.
“He couldn’t sell steaks or vodka or water or college or ties or Eric. But he has helped you,” Wolf said. “He’s helped you sell your papers and your books and your TV. You helped create this monster and now you’re profiting off of him.”
“It’s not a coincidence that the two speeches that most offended the delicate D.C. press corps—Colbert’s in 2006 and Michelle Wolf’s—contained scathing and wholly accurate mockery of the press itself,” The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald noted in a tweet on Monday. “Their anger at mean insults towards politicians is also real but secondary.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Claiming the president has “absolute immunity” from legal action both in his official capacity and as a private individual, lawyers representing Donald Trump called on a federal court to toss out a lawsuit accusing him of violating the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause by accepting payments from foreign governments at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.
Click Here: Rugby league Jerseys
Norm Eisen, former White House ethics official and chair of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, said that if the court accepts Trump’s argument, it would effectively mean the president “is beyond the reach of the law.”
Filed by the attorneys general of Maryland and the District of Columbia in June, the suit accuses Trump of committing “unprecedented constitutional violations” by refusing to “disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers.”
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
As the Associated Press notes,
In his court filing, Trump lawyer William Consovoy argued the Maryland-D.C. suit “has the potential to divert the president’s attention from his official duties. The Supreme Court has concluded that the costs to the nation of allowing such suits to distract the president from his official duties outweigh any countervailing interests.”
As AP reports, Consovoy also “argued that federal officials can only be targeted for accepting unconstitutional payments in their official government function and not as private citizens. But in the case of the president, Consovoy added, Trump is also ‘absolutely immune’ from legal action in his official capacity.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
A new proposal by the Trump administration sends a clear message to immigrants—low-income individuals and families need not apply for permanent residence.
A draft proposal leaked to the Washington Post states that immigrants with visas who are applying for green cards could be passed over if they use Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, and other forms of government assistance—even if they are parents using those benefits for their children.
According to the draft proposal (emphasis added):
Tying permanent residence in the U.S. to an immigrant’s current or future wealth is “extremely hardhearted,” said Wendy Parmet of the Center for Health Policy and Law at Northeastern University.
“The administration, in the draft, talks about self-sufficiency,” Parmet told the Post. “But we don’t expect that of [babies]” who are born in the United States.
The proposed rule is reminiscent of a late 19th century law barring immigrants who were thought to be a “burden” or “public charge” to the government. In 1999, immigration officials made clear that government benefits can be used by immigrants—but under the Trump rule, families and individuals applying for green cards would have to “establish that they are not likely at any time to become a public charge.”
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
In order to prove they won’t need to use benefits like Medicaid and SNAP benefits, the draft states, immigrants would have the option of posting a $10,000 bond—unfeasible for many immigrant families.
Click Here: Cardiff Blues Store
“We’re talking about middle-class and working families. This could really put parents in an impossible situation—between seeking health assistance for their children and obtaining a permanent legal status in the U.S.,” Madison Hardee of the Center for Law and Social Policy said.
The rule would likely have an impact on public health in addition to individuals and families who avoid applying for benefits—including people with urgent medical needs.
Marnobia Juarez, whose husband is applying for a green card, told the Post of cancer treatment she received in Maryland at no cost thanks to a state-funded program. Under the proposal, a spouse’s use of benefits could be taken into account on a green card application.
“I’m alive thanks to this program,” Juarez said. “You don’t play with life, and they are playing with life.”
In a letter to the Office of Management and Budget, Gov. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) wrote in April that “the proposal disrupts settled law by making unprecedented changes to longstanding immigration policies…It would allow the federal government to discriminate” against lower-income families.
“This will undoubtedly lead to people across the U.S. going hungry, not accessing needed medical care, losing economic self-sufficiency, and even becoming homeless,” continued Inslee.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
The government watchdog group that has previously sued President Donald Trump over alleged ethics violations sharpened its focus this week on a billion-dollar development project involving the Trump Organization that is being partially financed by the Chinese government—calling it a clear violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.
Norm Eisen, board chair of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), warned the president, “See you in court” over reports of Trump’s latest constitutional violation.
A billion-dollar resort project being developed in Indonesia by the president’s business empire, the Trump Organization, is to receive $500 million from the Chinese government. The president’s company has been involved in the project since 2015, according to the South China Morning Post.
After winning the 2016 election, Trump refused to fully divest from his real estate business, choosing instead to place the company in the control of his two eldest sons. He still receives reports on the organization’s holdings and business dealings, and is able to withdraw funds from Trump Organization accounts at any time.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Trump’s continued involvement with his business empire has resulted in multiple violations of the Emoluments Clause, argues CREW. The group has sued him for illegally taking payments from foreign heads of state as well as state governors, as many international and American politicians have stayed at Trump’s hotels, dined at his restaurants, and held events at his resorts since he became president.
“Diplomats openly claim that they patronize the President’s hotels to curry favor with him as President—a blatant violation on any reading,” wrote CREW last year in its response to the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
On Monday, the White House Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah refused to answer questions on the subject or explain the administration’s position on the deal during a press briefing when Los Angeles Times reporter Noah Bierman asked pointedly about Trump’s involvement in a major project funded largely by the Chinese government—and how one could argue that the project does not violate the emoluments clause.
Click Here: Cardiff Blues Store
Shah dodged the question, suggesting that the Trump Organization is entirely separate from Trump’s presidency.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Resolved “to make the whole country a no-go area” for Donald Trump, the Stop the War Coalition on Wednesday announced a line-up of events across Britain to shore up opposition in the lead-up to the U.S. president’s visit to the U.K. this summer.
“Our protest is an opportunity for millions to say, ‘enough is enough’.”
—Shaista Aziz, Stop Trump CoalitionThe “series of rallies and meetings around the country,” said Stop the War Coalition convenor Lindsey German, will make “the case for peace and against war.”
“Opposition to war means opposition to Trump,” she added, but “there are many reasons to oppose Donald Trump’s visit to Britain.” The president’s arrival in London is set for July 13, when tens of thousands of protesters have vowed to take to the streets.
Beyond the damage he is doing in his own country—including the administration’s attack on women’s rights and its xenophobic and racist obsession with building a border wall—Trump’s critics in the U.K. say it is his horrible foreign policy that’s pushing the world to the brink. The Stop the War Coalition cites the legitimization of Israel’s illegal actions by moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, withdrawing from the historic Iran nuclear deal, and fomenting further disaster in Afghanistan that’s pushing the world to the brink.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
“There will be huge demonstrations when he visits,” German said, and “this will send a signal to him and to our government that people in this country are no longer willing to support a foreign policy which is making the world a more dangerous place.”
Click here to see the dates and places for the rallies scheduled for June and early July.
Click Here: Cheap Chiefs Rugby Jersey 2019
The culminating action is set to take place on July 13, when the Stop Trump Coalition and Stand Up to Trump coalition have joined forces under the banner Together Against Trump.
According to Shaista Aziz of the Stop Trump Coalition, “This won’t just be a movement against the President’s visit—it will become a movement against racism, anti-migrant bigotry, sexism, transphobia, and far right politics in the U.K..”
“Our protest,” she declared, “is an opportunity for millions to say, ‘enough is enough’.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
With Medicare for All reaching record levels of support among both members of Congress and the American public—where support for single-payer is spreading “like wildfire”—policy platforms demanding that the U.S. ditch its wasteful and deeply immoral for-profit system in favor of guaranteed healthcare for every American are also proving to be winners in Democratic primary fights across the country.
In red and blue states alike, candidates backing Medicare for All have emerged victorious in Democratic primary battles where, in some cases, their opponents had the backing of the party establishment.
“In Nebraska’s 2nd district, Kara Eastman, who supports ‘Medicare for All,’ beat a former congressman backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee,” Axios‘s Caitlin Owens reported on Tuesday. “Two ‘Medicare for All’ backers, Scott Wallace and Susan Wild, won House primaries in Pennsylvania. Gina Ortiz Jones, competing to unseat GOP Rep. Will Hurd in Texas’s 23rd district, ‘supports a single-payer system,’ per her campaign website.”
Over the next few months, candidates who support Medicare for All “are also running in Minnesota, New Jersey, Iowa, New York, Maine, and Washington state,” Owens added.
This growing support for single-payer among Democratic congressional candidates come amid an upsurge of activism at the grassroots level from nurses, doctors, progressive activists, and democratic socialists.
Further demonstrating the American public’s hunger for a system that guarantees healthcare as a right regardless of one’s ability to pay, a town hall hosted by Sanders and other Medicare for All advocates earlier this year drew 1.6 million viewers despite a complete blackout by the corporate media.
Click Here: los jaguares argentina
“It ain’t gonna be on CBS. It ain’t gonna be on NBC. What astounds me is we already have a pretty good majority of the American people who already believe in universal healthcare, believe that it is the government’s responsibility to make sure that health care is a right,” Sanders said. “And we have reached that stage with media not talking about the issue at all.”
“Together we will successfully move the United States to a Medicare-for-All, single-payer healthcare system and guarantee healthcare to all,” Sanders concluded.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Immigrants who joined the U.S. Army through a program promising U.S. citizenship have been abruptly discharged—likely ruining their chances of naturalization and potentially putting them at risk for deportation.
At least 40 people who joined the Army in recent years through the Military Accessions Vital to National Interest (MAVNI) program, begun in 2008, have been thrown out of the service or been given reason to doubt the safety of their military status in recent days. Many have been given no reason for their discharge, while others have been told that “personal links to relatives living abroad led them to be labeled as security risks,” according to the Huffington Post.
MAVNI has recruited tens of thousands of immigrants with special medical or language skills to fill numerous positions the Army was unable to fill with U.S.-born recruits.
In order to obtain the “expedited naturalization” promised by the program, the program stipulates that recruits must be “honorably discharged.” According to lawyers for the recruits, who spoke to the Associated Press, the dozens of people who have been turned away from the Army in recent days have been given an “uncategorized discharge.”
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
The Trump administration’s policies cracking down on undocumented immigration have drawn outrage, with hundreds of thousands of Americans protesting his “zero tolerance” policy and practice of separating families at the U.S.-Mexico border last weekend.
With grave concern over the administration’s treatment of undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers already abundant, new attacks on naturalized citizens and those who have been promised future pathways to citizenship are drawing increasing levels of alarm.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: Golf special
Tottenham have completed the signing of left-back Sergio Reguilon from Real Madrid.
The 23-year-old has signed a contract until 2025 and moves for an undisclosed fee but with a £27.5million buy-back clause.
Having come through the youth system at Real, Reguilon went on to make 22 appearances for the first team and won his first cap for Spain earlier this month.
https://twitter.com/SpursOfficial/status/1307361686022754305