Tag: Hillary Clinton

  • Ex-FBI director James Comey indicted on two charges as Trump pushes to prosecute political enemies

    Ex-FBI director James Comey indicted on two charges as Trump pushes to prosecute political enemies

    WASHINGTON, D.C. (TIP): James Comey, the former FBI director and one of Donald Trump’s most frequent targets, was indicted on Thursday on one count of making a false statement to Congress and one count of obstruction of a congressional proceeding, the latest move in the president’s retribution campaign against his political adversaries.

    The indictment, filed in federal district court in Alexandria, Virginia, shows Comey’s charges centered on whether he lied and misled lawmakers during testimony in September 2020 about the Russia investigation.

    While the precise details were not clear in the sparse, two-page indictment, it appeared to reference Comey’s testimony that he had never authorized someone at the FBI to leak to the news media about the Trump or Hillary Clinton investigations – a claim prosecutors alleged was false.

    “No one is above the law. Today’s indictment reflects this Department of Justice’s commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people,” Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, said in a statement on Thursday.

    The indictment followed Trump’s instruction to Bondi to “move now” to prosecute Comey and other officials he considers political foes, in an impatient and extraordinarily direct social media post trampling on the justice department’s tradition of independence.

    It also came less than a week after Lindsey Halligan was installed as the top federal prosecutor in the eastern district of Virginia, after Trump fired her predecessor, Erik Siebert, after he declined to bring charges against Comey over concerns there was insufficient evidence.

    Halligan, most recently a White House aide and former Trump lawyer who has no prosecutorial experience, was also presented with a memo earlier this week laying out why charges should not be brought. But the justice department still pushed it through, people familiar with the matter said.

    Responding to the indictment, hours after it was filed, Comey said in a video statement posted on Instagram that he was innocent and welcomed a trial.

    “My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn’t either,” Comey said.

    Referencing the farewell email his daughter, Maureen, sent after she was fired from her job as a federal prosecutor in New York, Comey said: “Somebody that I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool of a tyrant. And she’s right. But I’m not afraid. And I hope you’re not either.

    “I hope instead you are engaged. You are paying attention, and you will vote like your beloved country depends upon it. My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system and I’m innocent. So let’s have a trial. And keep the faith.” Prosecutors had also sought a third charge against Comey, but grand jurors rejected the request, court documents show.

    Ensconced at the White House, Trump celebrated the charges in a post on Truth Social, writing: “JUSTICE IN AMERICA! One of the worst human beings this Country has ever been exposed to is James Comey, the former Corrupt Head of the FBI.

    “Today he was indicted by a Grand Jury on two felony counts for various illegal and unlawful acts. He has been so bad for our Country, for so long, and is now at the beginning of being held responsible for his crimes against our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

    Comey was expected to surrender and have his initial appearance in federal district court on Friday morning, according to a person familiar with the matter. Comey is expected to be represented by Patrick Fitzgerald, a former US attorney for the northern district of Illinois.

    He faces up to five years in prison if convicted, but legal experts suggested the case may be difficult to prove.

    Many current and former justice department officials condemned the filing of charges on Thursday night, criticizing what they viewed as weak evidence for the case.

    “This is a sad day for the rule of law. Trump’s comments, along with the musical chairs at the US attorney’s office, make a mockery of prosecutorial discretion. The president has teed this case up for a dismissal on the grounds of selective prosecution,” said Barbara McQuade, a former US attorney for the eastern district of Michigan.

    Comey’s son-in-law, Troy Edwards, resigned from his job as a federal prosecutor in the US attorney’s office in Virginia minutes after the former FBI director was indicted. Edwards wrote in his resignation letter that he was quitting “to uphold my oath to the Constitution and the country”.

    Mark Warner, a Democratic senator from Virginia, condemned the charges.

    “Donald Trump has made clear that he intends to turn our justice system into a weapon for punishing and silencing his critics,” he said in a statement. “This kind of interference is a dangerous abuse of power. Our system depends on prosecutors making decisions based on evidence and the law, not on the personal grudges of a politician determined to settle scores.”

    In social media posts on Saturday, Trump claimed that Comey, Letitia James and a third political opponent, Democratic senator Adam Schiff, were “guilty as hell” and that his supporters were upset that “nothing has been done”.

    “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility,” Trump posted. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”

    Trump’s contempt for Comey stretches back to the early days of his first term, when according to Comey, Trump sought to secure a pledge of loyalty from the then FBI director, who refused. At the time, Comey was leading the criminal investigation into Russian meddling in the US election. Trump dismissed Comey in May 2017.

  • ITServe’s Synergy 2024, A Thrilling Tech Conference Planned In Las Vegas

    ITServe’s Synergy 2024, A Thrilling Tech Conference Planned In Las Vegas

    NEW YORK (TIP): “ITServe Alliance’s annual signature event, Synergy 2024 is a thrilling tech conference planned to be held at Caesars Palace, Las Vegas from October 29th and 30th, 2024,” Suresh Potluri, Director of Synergy 2024 announced. “At Synergy, you’ll get to network with peers, learn from experts, and discover new and exciting developments in the IT Industry. Don’t miss the chance to hear from inspiring speakers who will show us how to conquer the upcoming challenges and opportunities in information technology.” According to the Synergy Organizing Team, packed with educational and entertainment sessions, Synergy is a unique event that caters to one’s body, soul, and mind. “As you invest time to build your thought leadership, you can unwind from your daily stress at the breakout sessions. Synergy 2024 is a promising two-day event for the entire IT community in the US. The floor at the event has fun and entertainment packed for the participants. They can add more fun to their productive experience with an extended stay in Caesars Palace, Las Vegas.” At Synergy 2024, an esteemed panel of industry leaders and visionaries will share their invaluable insights and share their expertise on ways to navigate the rapidly evolving landscape of technology and business. Participants will hear from influential figures and leaders from various sectors, providing unique perspectives and actionable strategies for driving innovation and growth.

    “Synergy continues to add prominent speakers, valuable sponsorships, and help grow a community network of industry professionals across the country,” said Amar Varada, ITServe’s Governing Board Chair. “Participants at Synergy 2024 will have a platform for IT company heads to come together to hear industry leaders speak, engage in discussions with lawmakers, participate in interactive breakout sessions, and deliberate on the latest trends, challenges, and opportunities in the world of IT Staffing and Technology.”

    Past speakers at Synergy included President Bill Clinton, President George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, 67th United States Secretary of State, Nikki Haley, the first female governor of South Carolina, Steve Forbes, Chairman & Editor-in-Chief of Forbes Media, Sheila Bair, Former Chair of FDIC, Kevin O’leary, Venture Capitalist & Star of ABC’s Shark Tank, Zack Kass, Technology Futurist, Specialist in Generative AI Solutions, Yuvraj Singh, International Cricketer Entrepreneur & Philanthropist, Sadhguru J V, Founder of ISHA foundation, Jason McCann, Co-Founder & CEO Vari, and, Verne Harnish, Founder, Author & CEO Scaling Up.

    “Synergy 2024 is a unique venue for the collision of brilliance, a networking supernova, and a tech safari all rolled into one,” said Jagadeesh Mosali, National President of ITServe Alliance. “As you are aware, ITServe Alliance’s Synergy is the only one-of-a-kind conference delivering innovative strategies, unique insights, and proven tactics for success, exclusively for IT service companies and individuals.”

    Synergy 2024 will focus on developing strategic relationships with partner organizations, sponsors, and supporters, to work for a better technology environment by building greater understanding.  Breakout Sessions are other unique ways for every member to dive deep into specific topics and explore practical solutions to common challenges faced by executives in today’s competitive market, with interactive sessions tailored to your professional interests and expertise.

    With Panel Discussions that are vital to the ITServe members, who are entrepreneurs, Synergy 2024 will be packed with sessions on Startup Cube Panel, CIO/CTO Panel, Financial Panel, Workforce & Contingency, Staffing Panel, Contracts & Litigations Panel, Mergers & Acquisitions Panel (M&A), Immigration Panel & Federal Contracting.

    Networking and connecting with fellow CEOs and CxOs from leading organizations gives participants a platform to exchange ideas, forge new relationships, and uncover potential opportunities for collaboration and expansion in an environment designed to foster growth and success.

    At the dozens of Business Expo Booths, Synergy delegates can explore a dynamic marketplace featuring a diverse range of vendors and service providers, offering unparalleled opportunities for networking, collaboration, and strategic partnerships.

    It’s crucial to stay informed about financial trends, budgeting strategies, and navigating fund crises, especially when dealing with delayed payments. Being part of and attending a financial panel at Synergy is a great opportunity to learn from experts in the field.

    Understanding Mergers and Acquisitions tactics is essential for strategic growth, successful integrations, and maximizing business value. By attending our Mergers and Acquisitions panel, one will gain valuable insights from industry leaders.

    In addition, participants will have opportunities to discover cutting-edge solutions and innovative technologies from ITServe’s trusted partners, designed to optimize their business operations, enhance efficiency, and drive sustainable growth.

    Summarizing the mission of ITServe Alliance and Synergy 2024, Anju Vallbhaneni, President-Elect of ITServe said, “We believe in developing strategic relationships with our partner organizations to work for a better technology environment by building greater understanding. Come and join us on our journey. Let us be your voice when it comes to Information Technology.”

    Synergy 2024 will provide a platform for 3,000+ CXOs from hundreds of multi-national companies to come together to hear industry leaders speak, engage in discussions with lawmakers, participate in interactive breakout sessions, deliberate on the latest trends, challenges, and opportunities in the world of IT Staffing and Technology.

    Founded in 2010, ITServe Alliance is the largest association of Information Technology Services organizations functioning across the United States. Established to be the voice of all prestigious Information Technology companies functioning with similar interests across the United States, ITServe Alliance has evolved as a resourceful and respected platform to collaborate and initiate measures in the direction of protecting common interests and ensuring collective success.

    Over the years, ITServe Alliance has established a name for itself as the center point of information for its members, covering various topics ranging from immigration, technology, economy, and much more. ITServe Alliance now has 22 Chapters in several states across the United States, bringing the Synergy Conference to every part of this innovation country. “Want to deepen your knowledge in these critical areas? Purchase your pass at a reduced price of $1000 and join us at the event. Don’t miss out on this invaluable opportunity!”

    For more information, please visit: www.itserve.org

  • WHAT DOES THE FORMER FIRST LADY & US SENATOR SHARE WITH US?

    WHAT DOES THE FORMER FIRST LADY & US SENATOR SHARE WITH US?

    By Mabel Pais

    “Let’s keep fighting and let’s keep the faith. And let’s lift each other as we move forward on this journey.” – Hillary Rodham Clinton
    HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: First Lady, U.S. Senator, U.S. Secretary of State, presidential candidate, advocate, attorney – has spent five decades in public service. She now makes a stop on her Fall tour of the United States at the New Jersey Performing Arts Center (NJPAC) on Tuesday, September 17, 2024.

    HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    As First Lady of the United States, from 1993 to 2001, Hillary Clinton championed health care for all Americans and led successful bipartisan efforts to improve the adoption and foster care systems, reduce teen pregnancy, and create the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

    Hillary Clinton. (Credit: Annie Leibovitz (hillaryclintonlive.com)

    In 2000, Clinton made history as the first First Lady elected to the United States Senate, and the first woman elected to statewide office in New York.

    In 2007, she began her first historic campaign for president, winning 18 million votes and becoming the first woman to ever win a presidential primary or caucus state. In the 2008 general election, she campaigned for Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and in December, she was nominated by President-elect Obama to be Secretary of State.

    In 2016, Clinton made history again by becoming the first woman nominated for president by a major U.S. political party. As the Democratic candidate for president, she campaigned on a vision of America that is “stronger together” and an agenda to make our economy work for everyone, not just those at the top. She won the national popular vote, earning the support of nearly 66 million Americans.

    Since leaving civil service and electoral politics, Clinton has remained an active force for progress and human rights. In recent years, she has leant her decades of experience to nurturing the next generation of leaders.

    In 2023, Clinton went back to the classroom when she joined Columbia University as a co-founder of the Institute of Global Politics and Professor of Practice at the School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA). She teaches a course with Dean Keren Yarhi-Milo called Inside the Situation Room, which engages young scholars with insights from diverse academic fields and the direct experience of high level diplomats, journalists, and other experts.

    Her commitment to the stories we tell ourselves about who we are as Americans and what kind of future we want for our children and our grandchildren extends to her work as an author, podcast host, and television and Broadway producer.

    Clinton is the author of ten best-selling books, including her groundbreaking book on children, ‘It Takes A Village’ (1996); ‘Dear Socks, Dear Buddy’ (1998); ‘An Invitation to the White House’ (2000); her memoirs, ‘Living History’ (2003), ‘Hard Choices’ (2014), and ‘What Happened’ (2017); a picture book edition of ‘It Takes a Village’ (2017); ‘The Book of Gutsy Women’ (2019) and ‘Grandma’s Gardens’ (2020), in collaboration with Chelsea Clinton; and her political thriller, ‘State of Terror’ (2021), with Louise Penny. Her podcast, ‘You and Me Both’, features candid, in-depth, and sometimes hilarious conversations with actors, activists, and other people who have unique perspectives on the challenges and joys of modern life. Clinton is the founder of HiddenLight Productions, a global studio dedicated to bringing the stories of inspiring individuals and movements to TV, film, and streaming. The studio’s projects include ‘Gutsy’, a television adaptation of ‘The Book of Gutsy Women’, in which Hillary and Chelsea Clinton interview remarkable women in all walks of life.

    In 2024, Clinton produced her first Broadway show, ‘SUFFS’, a love letter to the complicated women who fought for the right to vote and for a future they would never see but knew was possible. The musical was nominated for six Tony Awards, including Best Musical, and won two Tony Awards for Best Book of a Musical and Best Original Score.

    Learn more about Hillary Clinton at hillaryclinton.com.

    “I’m so excited to add 10 more cities to my Fall tour. I hope you can join me for wide-ranging conversations that go behind the scenes and include never-before told stories,” says Secretary Clinton. “We’ll discuss the state of our politics and creating the future we want for our children and grandchildren and, most of all, have some fun while we’re at it!”

    PROGRAM

    At each event, Secretary Clinton and a moderator will take the audience on a journey of unvarnished exchanges on politics, democracy, the threats we face, as well as friendship, aging, marriage, and how we can all work together to shape a future to be proud of.

    The ‘New York Times’ best-selling author and GRAMMY-award winner’s new book, ‘Something Lost, Something Gained: Reflections on Life, Love, and Liberty’ will be released by Simon & Schuster on September 17th, 2024.

    TICKETS & MORE INFORMATION

    To see Hillary Clinton, visit NJPAC.org or the NJPAC Box Office or call 888.GO.NJPAC (888.466.5722).

    For more information about presales, tour dates and to purchase VIP packages and tickets, visit hillaryclintonlive.com.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    SETTLE IN WITH WORLD-RENOWNED RATIONALIST DAWKINS

    Richard Dawkins. (Credit: Courtesy, NJPAC.)
    • By Mabel Pais

    Experience an unforgettable evening by familiarizing yourself with PROFESSOR RICHARD DAWKINS, one of the world’s world-renowned truth-teller, respected evolutionary biologist, best-selling author, and secularist intellectual, as he brings his highly anticipated tour to the New Jersey Performing Arts Center (NJPAC) on Friday, September 13, 2024 at 7 pm.

    He is celebrated globally for his honest critique of religion and tradition and his push for critical thinking, renowned for his unapologetic advocacy of science and reason, and the separation of church and state (religion and science).

    From 1995 to 2008 Richard Dawkins was the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society and of the Royal Society of Literature. In 2013, his around-the-world speaking tour was the focus of the documentary ‘The Unbelievers’ which also features appearances by Woody Allen, Stephen Colbert, Cameron Diaz, Ian McEwan, Ricky Gervais, Stephen Hawking, Eddie Izzard, Bill Pullman, and Sarah Silverman.

    He is an internationally best-selling author. Among his books are ‘The Ancestor’s Tale’, ‘The Selfish Gene’, ‘The Blind Watchmaker, ‘Climbing Mount Improbable’, ‘Unweaving the Rainbow’, ‘A Devil’s Chaplain’, ‘The God Delusion’, ‘The Greatest Show on Earth’ and ‘The Magic of Reality’.

    Dawkins is celebrated for his groundbreaking work as ‘Unweaving The Rainbow’, ‘The Selfish Gene’ and ‘The God Delusion’, captivating millions with his passion for scientific inquiry. His two-part autobiography: Part 1 ‘An Appetite for Wonder,’ and ‘A Brief Candle in the Dark’ were released in 2013 and 2015, respectively. Learn more at richarddawkins.net.

    Praise for the upcoming ‘The Genetic Book of the Dead’:

    “Overflowing with the beauty of nature, the beauty of language, and the beauty of ideas.” – Steven Pinker, author of Rationality and Enlightenment Now

    “Dazzling in originality and scope, with beautiful illustrations, this is a wonderful celebration of the power of natural selection. Richard Dawkins reveals with brilliant clarity the imprint on organisms of their evolutionary past.”

    – Nick Davies, author of ‘Cuckoo: Cheating By Nature’

    “Once again, Richard Dawkins asks us to look at the living world in a totally novel way: Every organism carries, in its genes, a record of the past environments in which its ancestors survived. This brilliant new way of interpreting nature opens our eyes to both the past and the future.”

    – John R. Krebs, author of ‘Food: A Very Short Introduction’ and coauthor, ‘An Introduction to Behavioral Ecology’

    “Written with typical verve and panache, Richard Dawkins’s ‘The Genetic Book of the Dead’ makes a brilliant contribution to the public understanding of evolution using our most up-to-date understanding of genetics. It will enthrall, surprise, and challenge you. Read it!”

    – Jerry A. Coyne, author of ‘Why Evolution is True’ and ‘Faith Versus Fact’

    “This book is a summation of the ideas of the author who brought us ‘memes’ and ‘selfish genes.’ Richard Dawkins’s lucid prose will change the way you think about your evolutionary past.”

    – David Haig, author of ‘From Darwin to Derrida: Selfish Genes, Social Selves, and the Meanings of Life’

    “The ingenuity of evolution is infinite, a fact that fascinates Richard Dawkins as much as it fascinated Charles Darwin. Inside each organism he finds rich palimpsests chronicling the history of life itself.”

    – Matt Ridley, author of The Evolution of Everything and How Innovation Works

    “The deployment of the conceit of genes looking backward in time is clever and well done. A piece of vivid popular science.”

    – Stephen Stearns, coauthor of ‘Evolution: An Introduction’

    PROGRAM

    Dawkins aims to connect with audiences in unscripted conversations touching on topics from science to religion, life on earth and beyond. With his trademark honesty and wit, Dawkins promises an evening filled with wisdom and insight.

    Don’t miss the opportunity to be part of this enlightening experience and hear firsthand about Dawkins’ upcoming book promoted on tour: ‘The Genetic Book of the Dead’ delves into the transformative potential of DNA in our understanding of evolution to be released on September 17, 2024.

    TICKETS

    Tickets for Richard Dawkins may be purchased by visiting NJPAC.org or the NJPAC Box Office or

    calling 888.GO.NJPAC (888.466.5722).

    The New Jersey Performing Arts Center (NJPAC)

    NJPAC located in downtown Newark, New Jersey, is the most diverse performing arts center in the country, and the anchor cultural institution for both the city of Newark and the state of New Jersey. It is an artistic, cultural, educational and civic center where great performances and events enhance and transform lives every day. NJPAC brings communities together, providing access to all and showcasing the state’s and the world’s best artists, while acting as a leading catalyst in the revitalization of its home city. Through its extensive Arts Education programs, NJPAC is shaping the next generation of artists and arts enthusiasts. NJPAC has attracted more than 11 million visitors (including more than two million children) since opening its doors in 1997, and nurtures meaningful and lasting relationships with each of its constituents. Visit njpac.org or call 888.GO.NJPAC (888.466.5722) for more information.

    Follow NJPAC Online:

    Website: njpac.org

    Twitter: @NJPAC

    Instagram: @NJPAC

    Hashtag: #NJPAC

    Facebook: facebook.com/NJPAC

    YouTube: NJPACtv

    Follow NJPAC’s Standing in Solidarity Series Online:

    Website: njpac.org/takeastand

    Hashtag: #NJPACTakeAStand

    Youtube: Standing in Solidarity playlist

    Mabel Pais writes on Social Issues, The Arts and Entertainment, Spirituality, Cuisine, Health & Wellness, Business, and Education.

  • Indian American Neera Tanden named as Biden’s domestic policy adviser

    Indian American Neera Tanden named as Biden’s domestic policy adviser

    WASHINGTON, D.C. (TIP)– President Joe Biden announced on Friday, May 5, that Indian American policy expert Neera Tanden will serve as his new domestic policy adviser in place of Susan Rice, who plans to leave the administration later this month.
    Tanden, 53, has spent the last year-and-a-half as senior adviser and staff secretary in the White House, after her initial nomination to run the Office of Management and Budget faltered in the face of Senate opposition.
    Daughter of an immigrant single mother “from India who was left to make it on her own in America with two young children after her divorce” from her father, Tanden will be the first Asian-American to lead any of the three major White House policy councils in history. “While growing up, Neera relied on some of the critical programs that she will oversee as Domestic Policy Advisor,” Biden noted in a statement announcing the move. “I know those insights will serve my Administration and the American people well.”
    In addition, the White House announced that Stef Feldman, a longtime Biden aide dating back to the Obama administration, will replace Tanden in the role of staff secretary.
    “For over two years, Susan Rice has helped craft and implement my domestic policy agenda and our country owes a debt of gratitude for her history-making public service,” Biden said.
    “I am pleased to announce that Neera Tanden will continue to drive the formulation and implementation of my domestic policy, from economic mobility and racial equity to health care, immigration, and education.
    “As Senior Advisor and Staff Secretary, Neera oversaw decision-making processes across my domestic, economic and national security teams,” Biden said.
    “She has 25 years of experience in public policy, has served three Presidents, and led one of the largest think tanks in the country for nearly a decade,” he noted.
    She was a key architect of the Affordable Care Act and helped drive key domestic policies that became part of my agenda, including clean energy subsidies and sensible gun reform.
    “While growing up, Neera relied on some of the critical programs that she will oversee as Domestic Policy Advisor, and I know those insights will serve my Administration and the American people well. I look forward to continuing to work closely with Neera in her new role,” Biden said.
    Tanden served in both the Obama and Clinton administrations, as well as presidential campaigns and think tanks. Most recently, Tanden was the President and CEO of the Center for American Progress and the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
    Tanden previously served as senior advisor for health reform at the Department of Health and Human Services, working on President Obama’s health reform team in the White House.
    Prior to that, she was the director of domestic policy for the Obama-Biden presidential campaign, and served as policy director for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
    Tanden served as senior advisor to the Chancellor of the New York City Schools and also served as Associate Director for Domestic Policy in the Clinton White House and Senior Policy Advisor to the First Lady.
    Tanden received her Bachelor of Science from UCLA and her Juris Doctor degree from Yale Law School.

  • President-elect Joe Biden has won Arizona, NBC News projects

    NEW YORK (TIP): Arizona’s  11 Electoral College votes bring Biden’s lead to 290-217 and put further pressure on President Donald Trump, who has yet to concede the election.NBC News projected Biden the overall winner on Saturday, November 7. Arizona hasn’t voted for a Democrat for president since 1996. In 2016, Trump beat Hillary Clinton there. The race was called on the ninth day of counting after Election Day. This leaves only North Carolina and Georgia as states that have not yet been called. They are both still rated as “too close to call.”

  • US Election 2020- What the Polls Say

    US Election 2020- What the Polls Say

    Results may not be available on November 3

    Validating and counting of ballots may delay the results

    By Ven Parameswaran

    US Election 2020 is being described as an unusual election dominated by a disruptive  COVID-19 . The raging pandemic made the traditional campaigning in the form of huge public meetings nearly impossible. Novel ways to reach out to the voters were discovered, adding them to the list of radio, television and  print media. Pandemic, notwithstanding, it is believed this election may have the highest percentage of voting in a hundred years- a record. It surely speaks of the enthusiasm and involvement of the American people in what appears to be “mother of all elections”.

    The Indian Panorama has been during the last couple of weeks, bringing to the readers opinions of well informed and scholarly analysts of US election. They kept readers informed about  the various trends and turns in the fortune of both the Republicans and the Democrats. Four days to the  final day of polling now, and we decided to bring to the readers the wisdom of pollsters. Let readers form their own impression of what the end result could be. -EDITOR

    Major Polls predict Biden Win. However, Trafalgar Poll predicts Trump will be re-elected

    Gallup Poll reported that it asked the question “Are you better off today than four years ago?” and 56% answered “YES”.

     

    The Trafalgar Group Poll of Georgia claims that  it is the only poll that correctly predicted that Trump would win 2016 against Hillary Clinton.   It was able to do it by closely polling the battleground States of Michigan and Wisconsin.  It is again predicting that Trump will be reelected defeating Joe Biden, former Vice President.

                                              BIDEN               TRUMP

    National                              49.4                   49.6

    Nevada                                49.4                   47.1

    Florida                                 46.9                   49.6

    Michigan                             46.6                    49.1

    Minnesota                          48.0                     44.8

    Wisconsin                            47.5                     47.1

    Pennsylvania                       48.4                      47.6

    I am giving below the statistics of all other major polls to enable the readers to predict the election.

    Biden                Trump             Advantage

    REAL CLEAR POLITICS AVERAGE

    51.3                    43.5               Biden +7.8

    CNN

     54                      42                   Biden+12

    NYT/Siena

     50                      41                   Biden+9

    NBC/WSJ    

     53                       42                 Biden+11

    ABC/Wash Post  

     55                       43                   Biden+12

    Fox News

    53                       43                   Biden+10

    IBD/TIPP (Raghavan Mayur)   

     51                       44                    Biden+7

    Reuters/Ipsos

     52                        42                   Biden+10

    USA Today/Suffolk

     52                        44                   Biden+8

    The margin of error for all these polls range from 2 to 3.6%.     RCP Average mentioned above is  based on 30 different polls.    I have given the statistics of major polls only.

    RAGHAVAN MAYUR, DIRECTOR, INVESTORS BUSINESS DAILY (IBD) claims he also predicted that Trump would be the winner. For reasons not known to me, the mainstream media failed to inform the public about IBD or Trafalgar Polls.   Raghavan Mayur has the potential to become most successful and outstanding in market research and polling.

    GALLUP POLL:

    The Gallup Poll is a very independent poll not affiliated with any major print or TV medium.  Although the Gallup did not predict the 2016 election correctly, it has had a better batting record than all other polls.  The Gallup poll asked the voters in a survey : ARE YOU BETTER OFF TODAY THAN FOUR YEARS AGO ? (this question was asked by President Reagan during his debate)   56% of  AMERICANS SAID THEY ARE BETTER OFF.     If so, even though President’s job approval is in mid 40’s, Gallup survey could have an impact on the voters.

    2020 U.S. Presidential Election is the most important historically speaking.  Because of Coronavirus the Mail-In Voting was allowed.  As of October 29, 2020   82 million have already voted.  On an average, because of early physical voting and mail in voting, 10 million a day vote.  At this rate by the election day on Tuesday, November 3rd, 120 million would have voted.   In 2016, I think 130 million voted.    The turnout has been heaviest so far.  On the election day next week one would expect massive turnout to vote physically and I estimate at least another 50 million.  Thus, it is possible in all 170 million eligible voters would have voted.  I have been in the USA for the past 66 years and have not seen such a heavy turnout.

    It is mentioned in the media that the Republicans generally prefer to vote physically.   If so, majority of voters on the Election Day would be Republicans.

    Because more than 50% have already voted, there is no need to poll the LIKELY VOTERS.  In the past, the poll on LIKELY VOTERS would give some kind  of indication for  whom they are going to vote.  In as much as majority has already voted, it is possible to find out who voted for whom.  It is, therefore, possible that we may be able to know who has won even before the date of the election, November 3rd.  I am sure on the election day, the pollsters and the TV networks will conduct Exit poll as usual. If the majority of voters on the Election Day is Republicans, the Exit polls will be misleading.

    BATTLEGROUND STATES WILL ULTIMATELY DECIDE WHO HAS WON THE ELECTION:

    No Republican has won the Presidency without winning Ohio and Florida.   Based on the polling available today it is possible Trump could win these states.  He won Ohio by 8 points in 2016 and has been leading in the polls.   The Latinos are the largest minority, not the Blacks.  There is a large Latino population in Florida, Texas and Arizona.   It has been reported that there is a big turnout of Latinos in Florida and Arizona.   If so, Trump is most likely to win these States.

    Michael Moore(Democrat),  movie director from Hollywood living in Detroit, Michigan, predicted that Trump would win in 2016.  This morning, he is again predicting Trump would be winning Michigan and the election.   Third quarter GDP grew by 33%.  Auto companies in Michigan have been working three shifts  manufacturing cars, trucks, and other vehicles to capacity.  The economists have pointed out that this contributed significantly to the phenomenal GDP growth.   The media mentioned that majority of Michigan autoworkers were likely to vote for Trump.

    Trump is most likely to win Pennsylvania because Biden’s position on oil and gas industry announced during the second Presidential debate has disappointed the voters.  Oil and gas industry is a major source of employment in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico.   It is mentioned that Trump would gain because jobs are more important than party loyalties.   It is therefore possible and probable that Trump would carry Pennsylvania by a razor thin margin as in 2016 (he gained by 44000 votes).

    If Trump wins Florida, Georgia and North Carolina, and Ohio, he needs to win only Michigan or Pennsylvania or Wisconsin to capture 270 electoral votes, assuming he wins Arizona.  In 2016 he won by 306 electoral votes.

     

    IMPOSSIBLE TO PREDICT THIS ELECTION

    I must conclude by saying that it is impossible to predict this election because as in 2016, it is going to be very close in the battleground states of FL, NC, MI, WI, MN, PA, AZ.   Just because Trafalgar was right in 2016, we cannot go by that.   But, I have more faith in what the Americans answered to the Gallup poll: “WE ARE BETTER OFF TODAY THAN FOUR YEARS AGO.”    I am also awaiting the latest poll from Gallup before the election.  The Gallup poll has been the most reliable indicator of Presidential election for several years.

    VALIDATING AND COUNTING THE BALLOTS:

    This is going to be laborious in spite of modern technology.   One has to verify the Signatures from the Mail-in and Absentee ballots.  Many states require that the mails containing the ballots must be date stamped by the post office as of  Nov.3 or before.   But some states are allowing one week’s time to receive the ballots.  If so, there is scope to change the ballots after the election creating room for fraud.  President Trump has already raised this issue.

    Republicans have majority in the legislatures of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, though their governors are Democrats.  If there are discrepancies, the final arbiter is the Legislature.   The legislature has the authority to decide the outcome of the election.    In 2000, the Supreme Court decided George W Bush won the election against Al Gore in Florida by a margin of a very small number of votes.

    Hillary Clinton has stated publicly that Vice President Joe Biden should never concede to Trump under any circumstances.  If so, the matter may go finally to the Supreme Court if either party challenges.   Therefore, more important than the election is the validating and counting of the ballots.    Normally, American voters know who has won on the election night.  I do not think it is going to be possible this year because the election in battleground states will be very close and razor thin.    Usually, the Associated Press takes the lead in announcing the results.  What can they do this year if they have no information as to who has won.

    Let us all pray that Americans will demonstrate respect for law and refrain from holding  demonstrations and riots on the streets.

    (Ven Parameswaran immigrated to the USA in 1954.  He is Chairman, Asian American Republican Committee (founded 1988).  Lives in Scarsdale, NY. Email: vpwaren@gmail.com)

     

  • US Election 2020

    US Election 2020

     By Ven Parameswaran 

    Biden wins, according to polls sponsored by the mainstream media; Trafalgar poll predicts Trump will win

    There are only 12 days to the Presidential election on November 3, 2020. Everyone is interested in knowing who has better chances to win – President Trump or former Vice President Biden. This discussion and speculation will keep on going till the election. All the TV networks including Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN and the mainstream media including NYT and Washington Post and the polls sponsored by them have been predicting Biden will win by a comfortable margin. How can one believe them? They predicted in 2016 that Hillary Clinton would win. But Trump defeated Clinton by 306 electoral votes, though Clinton won the popular vote by 2%.
    Therefore, the decision will be made by the voters in battleground states of Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. In 2016, Trump’s major victory against Clinton was in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Michigan. He won with a narrow margin of 77,000 votes combined from these four states. According to my calculations Trump has good chances to win New Hampshire, Nevada, and Minnesota this year.
    The upstart Trafalgar does not see 2020 the same way everyone else does. Trafalgar’s strategist Robert Cahaly was born in Georgia and got involved in politics going door-to-door as a kid. He started a political consulting firm with some others in the late 1990s. Around 2008, he says, they realized that the polling they were getting was not very good, so they started doing their own. He says they got good, accurate results in the races they were working.
    In the 2016 primaries, they started putting out some of their own polls. “Our polls ended up being the best ones in South Carolina and Georgia, “ Cahaly says. “So we started studying what it was that made those so different.”
    Then there was the breakthrough in the 2016 general election. “We ended up having an incredible year,” he says. “I mean, we got Pennsylvania right. We got Michigan right. We had the best poll in five of the battleground states in 2016. And I actually predicted 306 to 232 on the electoral college. And we went from doing a little bit of polling on the side to that (being) our primary business in about 24 hours. And since then, that is what we have been doing.”
    As a general matter, he discounts national polls. First, because the race for the presidency is won state by state, not on the basis of the national vote. Second, because all the methodological difficulties involved in getting a balanced, representative sample in a state poll of 1,000 people are magnified in a national survey. It is easily skewable at that point, and you start making assumptions.
    So how does he see the 2020 race? Fundamentally, as a motivation race, rather than a persuasion race, with perhaps 1.5 per cent, at most, of the electorate UNDECIDED in battleground states.
    The likeliest Trump electoral path to victory involves winning the battlegrounds of North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, and either Michigan or Pennsylvania among the former Blue Wall states (assuming he does not lose states such as Iowa or Ohio).
    THIS IS CAHALY’S BREAKDOWN: He believes Trump will win North Carolina and Florida and discount’s Biden’s chances in Georgia because the Republican-base vote is too big there (the same is true in Texas).
    As for Arizona, “I think Trump has the lead,” Cahaly says. “I think Republican Senator Martha McSally has some ground to make up. I see her about 5 points behind Trump, but I think Trump will probably win the state. And win it by a couple of points or more. And if he wins it big enough, McSally has a shot.”
    Trump is not there yet in Pennsylvania, according to Cahaly. “Right now, we have got him down in Pennsylvania,” he says, “I think if it were held today, the Undecides would break toward Trump and there would be some hidden vote.
    In Michigan, Trafalgar has Trump ahead. “I think he will win Michigan, “ Cahaly says, citing fear of the Democratic economic agenda.
    Overall, Cahaly sees another Trump win. “If it all happened right now,” he maintains, “my best guess would be an Electoral College victory in the high to 270s, low 280s.”
    THERE IT IS. AMONG POLLSTERS, YOU HEARD IT FROM ROBERT CAHALY FIRST, AND PERHAPS EXCLUSIVELY—A POSITION HE HAS BEEN IN BEFORE.
    I must point out that the second Presidential debate scheduled for 22nd October can have an impact.
    Do not forget Trump has been most unpredictable. President Obama said Trump won’t run, won’t be nominated and cannot win against Hillary Clinton. Nobody expected Trump would defeat nine veteran governors and 5 senators in the Primaries. Trump proved everyone wrong by defeating the most popular Hillary Clinton. There are more women voters than men voters.
    Trump is generating more enthusiasm than Biden. The working class of America cannot forget Trump brought the unemployment to 3.4%, a 50-year record. Four organizations have nominated Trump for Nobel Peace Prize based on foreign policy achievements, especially peace in the Middle East.

    THE GALLUP POLL ASKED THE AMERICANS:

    Are you better off today than four years ago? 56% said they are better off. This is the most favorable poll for Trump. The question was coined by President Ronald Reagan during the Presidential debate.

    (Ven Parameswaran, Chairman, Asian American Republican Committee (founded 1988), lives in Scarsdale, NY. He can be reached at vpwaren@gmail.com)

  • Hillary Clinton calls Trump a “creep” in her new book

    Hillary Clinton calls Trump a “creep” in her new book

    Clinton says What Happened is full of “moments from the campaign that I wish I could go back and do over,” like the time a 70-year-old man who’d bragged about sexually assaulting women insisted on shadowing her onstage despite the fact that she had the floor. She breaks it down Zack Morris-style

    WASHINGTON (TIP): Hillary Clinton’s essay collection, titled What Happened, will be out on September 12, but MSNBC is already dishing on the Trump-related selections.

    The folks at Morning Joe have exclusive excerpts from the book, which were doled out throughout the broadcast, including a bit from the audiobook version in which Clinton calls Trump a “creep” for stalking her around the stage during one of the 2016 debates. Yes, that’s Clinton’s own voice telling viewers that her “skin crawled” when Trump was lurking behind her and “literally breathing down [her] neck.”

    Clinton says What Happened is full of “moments from the campaign that I wish I could go back and do over,” like the time a 70-year-old man who’d bragged about sexually assaulting women insisted on shadowing her onstage despite the fact that she had the floor. She breaks it down Zack Morris-style:

    It was one of those moments where you wish you could hit pause and ask everyone watching, ‘Well, what would you do?’ Do you stay calm, keep smiling and carry on as if he weren’t repeatedly invading your space? Or do you turn, look him in the eye and say, loudly and clearly, ‘Back up you creep.’

    After a “lifetime of dealing with difficult men trying to throw me off,” Clinton ultimately kept her composure and successfully ignored the mingling scents of Mystic Tan and entitlement. But she does seem to regret not calling Trump out sooner for these intimidation tactics that are known all too well to women, writing “Maybe I have over-learned the lesson of staying calm, biting my tongue, digging my fingernails into a clenched fist, smiling all the while, determined to present a composed face to the world.”

    Trump hasn’t weighed in on this meeting between two of his “enemies,” but that’s presumably because he’s still trying to figure out if he’s going to be “dynamic” today or “somber.” If it’s the latter, we’re only hours away from an all-caps tirade and dubious retweets.

     

  • Lies, Plain and Simple : James Comey

    Lies, Plain and Simple : James Comey

    “We are under Siege”: President Trump Trump’s personal counsel accuses Comey of leaking “classified information”
    I.S. Saluja

    WASHINGTON (TIP): In the Atlantic season of hurricanes, one political hurricane could turn out to be historic- the Comey testimony. In his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, June 8, former FBI Director James Comey affirmed his belief that President Trump fired him “because of the Russia investigation.” He did not accuse the president of obstructing justice, leaving that question up to Robert Mueller, the appointed special counsel. In response, Trump’s personal lawyer accused Comey-inaccurately though-of leaking “classified information”, referring to the memos Comey had drafted regarding his conversations with the president.

    Ousted FBI director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, June 8, and didn’t pull any punches when discussing President Trump. Here are five takeaways from his blockbuster testimony.

    “Lies, plain and simple”: Throughout his testimony, Comey accused Mr. Trump of misleading Americans about the nature of his tenure at the Bureau and his  firing in May. “The administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the FBI, by saying the organization was poorly led,” Comey said at the onset of his testimony.

    “Those were lies, plain and simple.” Mr. Trump and his allies have criticized Comey’s tenure numerous times since his firing. The president even reportedly called Comey a “real nut job” during his meeting with Russian diplomats. Last month, Deputy White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that Comey had “lost the confidence” of the FBI’s rank-and-file agents, which Comey, among others, dispute.

    Why he was fired: Comey told the committee that he does “take him at his word” on one thing — that he was terminated over the Russia investigation. Comey said the “shifting explanations” for his ouster “confused” and increasingly, “concerned” him, as the White House’s official explanation for his firing contradicted that of the president’s. Comey said he couldn’t be sure of why the president fired him, but that he believes the president’s public comments.

    After firing Comey, Mr. Trump told NBC’s Lester Holt he thought of the thought of “made-up” story of ties between Russia and the Trump campaign when he fired Comey, and he told Russian diplomats that firing Comey relieved “great pressure” on him from the FBI’s Russia probe.

    “I take the president at his word that I was fired because of the Russia investigation,” Comey said in the hearing. And he went further, suggesting that the president hoped to “change” the way the Russia probe was being conducted. “I was fired in some way to change the way the Russia investigation was being conducted,” Comey said. “That is a big deal. On top of that, the Russia investigation itself is vital because of the threat. And if any American were part of that, that is a very big deal.”

    Comey leaked: How did the existence of Comey’s memos make it to the press? He leaked them. Comey says he believes the memos were his personal property and written in his capacity as a private citizen, although he has now turned them over to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. In fact, Comey says he hoped that by sharing what he had written in the memos with the news media, he could help trigger the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    Comey, however, did not leak the memos to the press himself. Nor did he rely on his friend Benjamin Wittes, a legal blogger who frequently teases new revelations in the Russia investigation with his Twitter account. Instead, Comey said that he turned to a “good friend” who teaches at Columbia Law School to share what he had written with the memos. That friend, CBS News’ Andres Triay reports, is Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia.

    “Lordy, I hope there are tapes” : Mr. Trump tweeted after firing Comey last month that the ex-FBI chief “better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!” Comey says this tweet inspired him to leak the contents of his memos to the press, because he felt he “needed to get that out into the public square.”

    “Lordy, I hope there are tapes,” Comey said during a back-and-forth with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, to laughter from the crowd. He later said that if Mr. Trump had indeed recorded any of their conversations that he hoped they would be released. He also disclosed that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has his memos.

    Loretta Lynch’s strange request: Comey said his reasoning behind his much-criticized July 2016 announcement that the FBI would not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton over her private email server had a lot to do with then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch holding a private meeting with former President Bill Clinton on a Phoenix, Arizona tarmac.

    But that wasn’t the only reason he decided to make the announcement. “Probably the only other consideration that I guess I can talk about in open setting is that at one point the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me, but that was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly,” Comey said.

    Trump is not under investigation — or, rather, he wasn’t: As Comey said in his written statement before the hearing, Comey did in fact inform Mr. Trump three times that he was not personally under investigation. Mr. Trump, Comey said, was frustrated that the FBI did not make this public, and asked Comey to make it so several times. But Comey had serious reservations about letting it be known that Mr. Trump wasn’t under investigation, among them that if that information were to be made public, the FBI would then have to announce that Mr. Trump was under investigation if that ever became the case.

    Of course, whether Mr. Trump is under investigation now is impossible to know, since Comey was fired on May 9, and the Russia investigation may have expanded since then. Who all are the guys on Intelligence Committee who questioned James Comey?

    Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina: The chairman of the committee, which he joined in 2007, Mr. Burr embraced President Trump during the campaign. But he has earned praise from his peers in both parties in recent weeks for the seriousness with which he has taken his role in leading the Senate’s investigation.

    Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia: Mr. Warner, the highest-ranking Democrat on the committee, has thrived in the spotlight that the investigation brings. He has in the past expressed presidential ambitions and has praised Mr. Burr, whom he calls a friend, for his leadership of the committee.

    Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho: Mr. Risch was elected to the Senate in 2009 and has been a member of the committee since then. He is one of Mr. Trump’s strongest supporters in Congress and has expressed significant concern about leaks to the news media. He is a former governor of Idaho.

    Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California: Ms. Feinstein, who was once the head of the committee, has in the past criticized Mr. Comey for his actions in the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server. But she expressed concern after he was fired in May and said then that she believed he should “absolutely” testify before the other committee on which she sits, the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida: A candidate for president in 2016, Mr. Rubio joined the Intelligence Committee in 2011. Mr. Rubio has been willing to criticize Mr. Trump, his former campaign rival, and has been dismissive of the president’s complaints that the Russia investigation is a “witch hunt.”

    “We are nation of laws, and we are going to follow those laws,” Mr. Rubio said recently. Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon: Mr. Wyden, who has been on the panel since 2001, has been a strong critic of the Trump administration and had early on called for Mr. Comey to appear in front of the committee.

    Susan Collins, Republican of Maine: Ms. Collins, who has been on the committee since 2013, is known as one of the more moderate Republicans now serving in the Senate. She has been tougher on the president than many colleagues in her party. “I really want to know the truth no matter who is implicated, no matter where the evidence leads,” she told The Times last month.

    Martin Heinrich, Democrat of New Mexico: Mr. Heinrich joined the committee when he arrived in the Senate in 2013. He pushed the F.B.I.’s acting director, Andrew McCabe, to assert that Mr. Comey still enjoyed “broad support” among the agency’s rank and file.

    Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri: Mr. Blunt, along with Ms. Collins, has been a strong supporter of Congress’s investigation into Russia’s actions in the 2016 presidential election. A former acting house majority leader, he has been on the panel twice, leaving after 2012 and rejoining in 2015.

    Angus King, Independent of Maine (Caucuses with Democrats): Mr. King, a former governor of Maine, has been on the committee since he joined the senate in 2013. One of the most steadfast members of the committee, he caused a stir on Wednesday when he pressed Mr. McCabe and other intelligence officials on why they could not elaborate on earlier conversations they had with Mr. Comey.

    James Lankford, Republican of Oklahoma: Mr. Lankford, who was once a Baptist youth minister, joined the committee in 2015. He has insisted on the seriousness of its investigation into Russia’s alleged interference and has said that he hopes that Mr. Comey’s hearing will “hopefully end speculation and lead us to facts.”

    Joe Manchin, Democrat of West Virginia: Mr. Manchin, a moderate Democrat and a former governor of West Virginia, is known for crossing the aisle. He joined the Senate in 2011 and was assigned to the committee this year. He told the news media that Mr. Comey, shortly before his firing, had sought more resources for the Russia investigation.

    Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas: A former member of the U.S. Army and the youngest U.S. senator, Mr. Cotton has expressed skepticism of Mr. Comey’s accounts of his interactions with Mr. Trump. He joined the committee in 2015.

    Kamala Harris, Democrat of California: Ms. Harris was ferocious in her calls for a special prosecutor to supervise the F.B.I.’s Russia investigation. Often named as a potential presidential candidate, Ms. Harris, a former attorney general of California, was assigned to the committee this year when she joined the Senate. She has expressed impatience with the Senate’s probe, saying that she thinks it needs to be sped up.

    John Cornyn, Republican of Texas: Mr. Cornyn, the majority whip, only recently joined the panel. He is one of Mr. Trump’s stronger allies in Congress and was reportedly being considered to replace Mr. Comey before taking himself out of the running last month.

    Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island, and John McCain, Republican of Arizona, also questioned Mr. Comey on Thursday. As the leaders of the Armed Services Committee, they are “ex officio” members of the Intelligence Committee, as are the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, and the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer.

     

  • Former FBI chief Robert Mueller to probe Russia-Trump links

    Former FBI chief Robert Mueller to probe Russia-Trump links

    Trump decries special counsel’s appointment as ‘single greatest witch-hunt’ in US history

    WASHINGTON (TIP): Former FBI director Robert Mueller has been appointed as special counsel to investigate alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US election and possible collusion between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Moscow.

    The decision by deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein to appoint Mueller, 72, as special counsel came on Wednesday, May 17, following a week of turmoil for the White House after Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, who had been leading a federal probe into the matter.

    Rosenstein said he had taken the decision “to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election,” including  “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.”

    President Donald Trump on Thursday, May18, decried the appointment of a special counsel to lead the Russia probe as “the single greatest witch-hunt” in US history, hours after he said he looked forward to a thorough investigation.

    In the face of rising pressure from Capitol Hill, the US Justice Department named former FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday as special counsel to investigate alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US election and possible collusion between Trump’s campaign and Moscow.

    Trump said in a statement on Wednesday night that “a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know – there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity.” In a pair of Twitter posts on Thursday morning, Trump made clear he was unhappy with the latest development to roil his administration. “With all of the illegal acts that took place in the Clinton campaign & Obama Administration, there was never a special councel appointed!” Trump wrote, misspelling the word counsel as he referred to former President Barack Obama and former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. “This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!”

    The comments mirrored a speech by Trump on Wednesday, before Mueller’s appointment was announced, in which he said no politician in history “has been treated worse or more unfairly.”

    Considering the unique circumstances of this matter, Rosenstsein said a special counsel is necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome. “Special Counsel Mueller will have all appropriate resources to conduct a thorough and complete investigation, and I am confident that he will follow the facts, apply the law and reach a just result,” he added.

    Mueller served as FBI director for 12 years after his nomination by President George W Bush in 2001. Cutting across party lines, top American lawmakers welcomed Mueller’s appointment for the investigation.

    “The appointment of former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel for the Russia investigation is a positive development and will provide some certainty for the American people that the investigation will proceed fairly and free of political influence,” Senator Richard Burr said and Mark Warner, chairman and ranking member of Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said.

    Democratic Senator from Minnesota Al Franken said appointing Mueller is an important step that will help restore the public trust and result in a thorough and comprehensive investigation.

    Mueller, a no-nonsense man Known by some as “Bobby Three Sticks” because of his full name – Robert Mueller III, the former FBI director is famous for his no-nonsense style and independence in high-profile government investigations.

  • Hillary Clinton launches new political action group

    Hillary Clinton launches new political action group

    WASHINGTON (TIP): Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has launched a new political action organisation to fight against US President Donald Trump’s agenda and raise funds for five prominent progressive groups.

    “I believe more fiercely than ever that citizen engagement at every level is central to a strong and vibrant democracy,” Clinton said announcing the launch of her group ‘Onward Together’. “More than ever, I believe citizen engagement is vital to our democracy. I’m so inspired by everyone stepping up to organise and lead,” the former Secretary of State, said to her supporters as she urged them to contribute to the “remarkable” spirit of political activism.

    The announcement comes as Clinton, 69, works to find a new role in an evolving political landscape.

    The new group’s website said it aimed to advance progressive values and reminded visitors that Clinton had won nearly 66 million votes in November’s showdown with Trump. (PTI)

  • Why the Special Counsel may be Good News for Republicans and Bad News for Trump

    Why the Special Counsel may be Good News for Republicans and Bad News for Trump

    By Perry Bacon Jr.

     

    “The Mueller appointment and the surrounding
    controversy around Trump and Russia remains as
    much a political issue as a legal one”, says the author.

     

    The appointment of ex-FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel overseeing an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election – and potential Russian connections to President Trump and his allies – is another surprising development after a week full of them. Consider: Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, who was investigating the potential Russia-Trump ties, only to now have Comey’s predecessor at the FBI take over the investigation. And Trump’s deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, who was being mocked by Democrats for his role in Comey’s firing, has now made an appointment that is being praised by Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s attorney general. The president, whose aides were advocating that the Russia investigation end soon, must now watch as Mueller quits his law firm job to devote himself full time to this assignment.

    So, what does this all mean? We won’t ultimately know for some time. But the Mueller appointment and the surrounding controversy around Trump and Russia remains as much a political issue as a legal one. So, let’s look at how this affects the relevant political players.

    Why this is good for Trump:

    Although the simple case is that Mueller’s appointment is not welcome news for Trump – the White House was surprised by the announcement – it does have some plausible benefits for the president, especially in the near term. The Russia investigation had been dogging the Trump administration, and his firing of Comey had turned into a debacle.

    Trump can now say there is an independent investigation going on, by someone he did not personally appoint and who is not beholden to his party. And Mueller has very strong credentials. The president and his team, in theory, can turn the focus to governing, while deferring questions about the investigation. And maybe Comey, who appears to have notes of every conversation he has had with the president, will share them with Mueller and not The New York Times. (That said, as of late Wednesday, Trump had not yet reacted to Mueller’s appointment – a poorly worded Twitter rant could mitigate any short-term benefit for Trump.)

    It’s also possible Mueller will interpret his mandate as limited to Russia and the election. It’s not clear Mueller would be investigating, for example, the details of Comey’s firing. That would be to Trump’s benefit.

    Most importantly, Mueller can exonerate the president. If this is a high risk development for Trump, it also comes with a big reward if Trump hasn’t done anything seriously wrong.

    Why this is bad for Trump:

    Mueller’s appointment ensures that the Russia controversy won’t just go away – at least not anytime soon. And he could gravely threaten Trump’s presidency if he finds clear, improper connections between the president’s campaign and Russian officials. There was a reason that Republicans on Capitol Hill and the Trump administration were trying to stop the appointment of a special counsel. Prosecutors with broad authority to investigate can cause major problems. Just ask Bill Clinton.

    Trump could in theory order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. But that would be exactly what Richard Nixon did, ordering his Justice Department to dump the special prosecutor investigating the president.

    Why this is good for congressional Republicans:

    Republican members were being repeatedly asked about the Trump investigation. Like Trump, they can now defer to Mueller’s probe. This will make them very happy. And in the long run, Mueller helps them avoid the awkward circumstance of investigating their own president. A damning report will make it easier to call for Trump’s resignation, if strong evidence emerges. Alternatively, a report that absolves Trump could take the Russia issue off the table without Republicans looking like they’d engaged in a partisan cover-up.

    More importantly, Republicans now have more room to get back to their policy goals, such as tax reform and Obamacare repeal. Mueller’s investigation is likely to take months. While that unfolds, Trump can sign into law bills passed by Republicans in the House and the Senate.

    Why this is bad for congressional Republicans:

    We’re not going to do fake balance here. This may or may not end up as good news for Trump – but it’s almost certainly good news for congressional Republicans.

    The one problem?

    Mueller is only investigating the Russia issue. It’s likely Trump will do something else controversial – in the past two weeks alone, he allegedly shared highly classified intelligence with the Russians, and he fired Comey in a clumsy way that created all kinds of political problems. Republicans will still have to answer for Trump’s other controversial moves.

    Why this is good for Democrats:

    Just reread the “bad news for Trump” paragraph from above. An investigation of the 2016 election, Trump and his allies could turn up damaging information. A report written by Mueller will have credibility. It’s far more likely that Mueller, as opposed to GOP-led congressional committees, will release information damaging to the president. And the timing of the investigation could be good for Democrats, keeping Russia in the news through the midterm year, even if it results in a slowdown in headlines now.

    But we should not ignore real-world impacts or lose sight of the big picture. Democrats strongly disagree with Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan on policy, including on sweeping issues currently on the congressional docket such as health care and taxes. In the eyes of many Democrats, Trump and the potential laws he might sign could damage the country for years to come. A process that could (in the long run) lead to Trump’s removal from office is a major step for liberals.

    Why this is bad for Democrats:

    In the short term, they may have lost an issue. Polls showed an overwhelming majority of Americans (78 percent, according to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey) wanted some kind of investigation of Trump’s alleged ties to Russia from outside of Congress. Democrats could have pounded Trump and Republicans on their lack of accountability every day till next year’s midterms.

    Mueller has a reputation for independence, like Comey. How he approaches this investigation is unpredictable, and that has risks for Democrats. (Ask Hillary Clinton.) And because Democrats have effusively praised Mueller’s appointment, they’ll have trouble criticizing him later on – or re-litigating the Russia issue – if he exonerates Trump.

    What would have been more predictable?

    A House Judiciary Committee investigation in 2019 led by Democratic Chairman John Conyers, being cheered on by Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Make no mistake: If Democrats had won control of Congress next year and Trump had blocked a special counsel up until then, impeachment would have been on the table. Now, Democrats have to wait and see what Mueller concludes.

    Why this is good for the public. By all accounts, Mueller seems to be respected by all sides.

    The author is a senior writer for FiveThirtyEight. (Source: Five ThirtyEight)

     

  • Trump asked FBI director three times if he was target of investigations

    Trump asked FBI director three times if he was target of investigations

    Trump asked FBI director three times if he was target of investigations

    WASHINGTON (TIP): Donald Trump said May 11 he asked his now-fired FBI director on three occasions whether he was the target of ongoing investigations, stoking allegations of presidential interference.

    The US president also acknowledged that Russia was on his mind when he made the decision to sack James Comey, who had been heading a probe into suspected Russian influence in the 2016 election.

    “When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story,” he said in an interview with NBC, appearing to link Comey’s firing with the investigation.

    Trump said he had asked Comey if he was the subject of counter-intelligence probes — twice in conversations over the phone and once over a White House dinner.

    “I actually asked him, yes. I said, ‘If it’s possible would you let me know, am I under investigation?’”

    “He said, ‘You are not under investigation,’” Trump recounted, repeating an assertion made when the White House announced Comey’s firing Tuesday.

    “All I can tell you is, well I know what, I know that I’m not under investigation. Me. Personally. I’m not talking about campaigns. I’m not talking about anything else. I’m not under investigation.”

    Trump’s comments to NBC raised questions about whether he had acted inappropriately and whether Comey had broken government guidelines. US presidents are normally at pains to avoid any suggestion of interference or even commenting on ongoing investigations. The FBI typically does not confirm their existence.

    Noted legal scholar Laurence Tribe told AFP that if Comey did indeed answer Trump’s question, it would violate Department of Justice rules and “would be unthinkably unethical and unprofessional in this situation.”

    Trump also said that at the dinner, he and Comey discussed whether the US top cop would stay in his role and continue his ten-year term.

    Asking such a question “would come close to bribery… or at least obstruction of justice, which Comey would’ve had to be an idiot to fall for by offering the assurance sought,” Tribe said.

    The White House rejected the suggestion the exchange was inappropriate. “I don’t see it as a conflict of interest,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.

    In the interview, Trump insisted that he always intended to fire Comey, undercutting the initial White House explanation that he acted on the recommendation of top justice officials who criticized the FBI chief’s handling of a probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails.

    I was going to fire him regardless of recommendations,” said the president. “He’s a showboat, he’s a grandstander.” Opponents have claimed that Comey’s shock sacking was a bid to stall an FBI investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election, which is also looking into possible collusion between the Kremlin and Trump’s team. Trump’s interview was released on the same day the interim head of the FBI told the US Congress that Comey’s sacking would not derail the Russia investigation. “There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date,” acting director Andrew McCabe told the Senate Intelligence Committee, in a hearing that capped two days of high drama provoked by the dismissal.

    “You cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing,” he said. “All of the agents involved in the investigation are still in their positions.” Trump told NBC that had Russia interfered in the 2016 election, it would have been “horrible.” He repeated denials of links between his campaign and Moscow.

    “There’s no collusion between me, my campaign and the Russians,” he said. While Trump said the outgoing FBI director had left the agency in “turmoil,” McCabe rejected any suggestion that Comey had lost the support of the rank and file. “Director Comey enjoyed broad support within the FBI and still does today,” he told the committee. Echoing a widely-held view in opposition ranks, the senior Democrat on the Senate committee, John Warner, called the timing of Comey’s dismissal “especially troubling.” (PTI)

     

  • Why Did Trump Fire Comey?

    Why Did Trump Fire Comey?

    Why Did Trump Fire Comey?

     

    By Perry Bacon Jr.

    President Trump’s decision to fire FBI Director James Comey on Tuesday, May 10, raises one hugely important question: Did the president dump Comey for mishandling the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email, as Trump and his team have said? Or was that simply a pretense to fire an independent-minded director who was investigating ties between Trump’s campaign and the Russians? On the one hand, there’s a strong case that Comey mishandled the Clinton email investigation. In July 2016, Comey publicly scolded the former secretary of state even as he said there were no grounds for criminal charges against her. He sent a letter to Congress on the eve of the presidential election announcing that the investigation had effectively been reopened against the. advice of Department of Justice officials, at a time when it may have affected the election results. And then last week, at a congressional hearing, Comey inaccurately described part of that email investigation. Democrats have been attacking Comey for months. Trump now says he disapproves of Comey for the same reasons Clinton has. But the case for skepticism about the Trump administration’s proffered motives for this move are strong, too. First, Comey’s alleged sins, according to the Trump administration, happened months ago, particularly holding the press conference in which he listed Clinton’s mistakes but did not charge her. If Trump disapproved of them so strongly, he could have dismissed theFBI director much sooner.

    Second, Comey and his department have been investigating ties between the Russian government and the Trump camp for months. The investigation seems serious. Trump has now fired a man who was a major potential threat to his presidency.

    So, the cynical view of Tuesday’s move is that the news of Comey’s latest blunder and Democrats’ constant attacks on the FBI director made it easy for Trump to both fire Comey and potentially blunt criticism of the move as politically motivated. How could Democrats criticize the firing of a man who they have been complaining about for months?

    Pretty easily, it turns out. The early reaction from Democrats suggests that whatever concerns they had about Comey are outweighed by worries about Trump. Bob Casey, the Democratic senator from Pennsylvania, called Trump’s move “Nixonian.” Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer said, “If we don’t get a special prosecutor, every American will rightfully suspect that the decision to fire #Comey was part of a cover-up,” in a Twitter message.

     

  • Trump dumps FBI chief

    Trump dumps FBI chief

    Trump dumps FBI chief: A shadow cast over US Presidency

    Just when the world was getting used to the idea that perhaps the weight and responsibility of the Oval Office had sobered up Donald Trump, the American President has defied common sense and political reasonableness and summarily fired the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The agency has presumably earned the presidential ire because the Director, James Comey, is reportedly pressing ahead with an investigation into the allegations of possible Russian involvement in the Trump campaign. Ironically it is the same Director who was accused only a few days ago by Mr Trump’s democratic opponent, Mrs Hillary Clinton, of costing her the election by insisting publicly that the agency had not stopped looking into her controversial emails. Director Comey has apparently paid the price for being a good, competent professional in these times of all consuming partisanship.

    Since the days of celebrated J Edgar Hoover, the FBI has had an iconic place in the popular American imagination. For the average American, the FBI remains a professional police organization dedicated to the cause of justice and fairness and which does not bend itself to the political preferences or personalities of the day. It zealously guards its autonomy and remains mindful of its professional reputation. There is every reason to believe that the White House consiglieri were not pleased that Director Comey remained so inattentive to President Trump’s political vulnerability. It is the most widely entertained hope in Washington that the FBI probe into the Russian role would lead all the way to members of the first family.

    President Trump has obviously shot himself in the foot. His decision to fire the FBI Director probably emanates from his authoritarian political persona, which remains unwilling to submit easily to the constraints of constitutional authority. The American President is a very powerful office but he is not a dictator. This single action will instigate hostility and opposition from all democratic voices, who do not condone the idea of an American President acting dictatorially. From now onward, Trump will preside over a barricaded White House, engaged in high-noon battles every afternoon.

    (The Tribune, India)

  • Trump Fires FBI Director Comey

    Trump Fires FBI Director Comey: Claims he is not under FBI investigation

    Democrats see a “Russiagate”: US Presidency under a Cloud

    US President Donald Trumpsays he is not under investigation, even as acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe on Thursday, May 11, told Congress the Russian probe is “highly significant” and will continue, media reports said. Trump told NBC News it was his decision alone to sack Comey, who was leading an inquiry into alleged Russian meddling in the US election and possible collusion between Trump campaign officials and Moscow.

    Trump has dismissed the probe as a “charade”, a claim directly contradicted by Comey’s successor, the BBC said in its report. In his first interview since firing the FBI Director, Trump told NBC News on Thursday he had asked Comey whether he was under investigation.”I said, if it’s possible would you let me know, ‘Am I under investigation?’ He said: ‘You are not under investigation.’” “I know I’m not under investigation,” Trump told the interviewer, repeating a claim he made in his Tuesday’s letter of dismissal to Comey.

    The President also appeared to undercut the initial White House explanation that he fired Comey on the recommendation of top justice officials, the BBC reported. “He’s (Comey) a showboat. He’s a grandstander. The FBI has been in turmoil. I was going to fire Comey. My decision,” Trump said. “I was going to fire regardless of recommendation.” “There’s no collusion between me and my campaign and the Russians,” Trump added. Trump, who tweeted a few days back that the Russia-Trump collusion allegations were a “total hoax”, on Thursday denied he wanted the FBI inquiry dropped. The White House has depicted the Russia inquiry as “probably one of the smallest things” that the FBI has “got going on their plate”.

    But acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe said on Thursday that it was “a highly significant investigation”. In testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee, McCabe also cast doubt on White House claims that Comey had lost the confidence of his staff. McCabe said he believed the Federal Bureau of Investigation had sufficient funding to conduct the probe. The anger behind Donald Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey on Tuesday had been building for months, but a turning point came when Comey refused to preview for top Trump aides his planned testimony to a Senate panel, White House officials said.

    Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had wanted a heads-up from Comey about what he would say at a May 3 hearing about his  handling of an investigation into former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. When Comey refused, Trump and his aides considered that an act of insubordination and it was one of the catalysts to Trump’s decision this week to fire the FBI director, the officials said. “It gave the impression that he was no longer capable of carrying out his duties,” one official said. Previews of congressional testimony to superiors are generally considered courteous.

    Comey, who testified for four hours before the Senate Judiciary Committee, said it made him feel “mildly nauseous” that his decision to make public his reopening of a probe into Clinton’s handling of classified information might have affected the outcome of the November 8 presidential election. But he said he had no regrets and would make the same decision again. Trump’s sudden firing of Comey shocked Washington and plunged Trump deeper into a controversy over his campaign’s alleged ties with Russia that has dogged the early days of his presidency.

    Democrats accused the Republican President of firing Comey to try to undermine the FBI’s probe into Russia’s alleged efforts to meddle in the 2016 election and possible collusion with members of the Trump campaign, and demanded an independent investigation. Some of Trump’s fellow Republicans called his dismissal of Comey troubling. The Trump administration said on Tuesday that Comey was fired because of his handling of the Clinton email probe. Before he axed Comey, Trump had publicly expressed frustration with the FBI and congressional probes into the Russia matter. Moscow has denied meddling in the election and the Trump administration denies allegations of collusion with Russia.

    A former Trump adviser said Trump was also angry because Comey had never offered a public exoneration of Trump in the FBI probe into contacts between the Russian ambassador to Washington, Sergei Kislyak, and Trump campaign advisers last year. According to this former adviser, Comey’s Senate testimony on the Clinton emails likely reinforced in Trump’s mind that “Comey was against him.” “He regretted what he did to Hillary but not what he did to Trump,” the former Trump adviser said of Comey. Clinton has said the Comey decision to announce the renewed inquiry days before the election was a likely factor in her loss to Trump.

    Aides said Trump moved quickly after receiving a recommendation on Monday to terminate Comey from Rosenstein, who began reviewing the situation at the FBI shortly after taking office two weeks ago. Trump’s move was so sudden that his White House staff, accustomed to his impromptu style, was caught off guard. Stunned aides scrambled to put together a plan to explain what happened. White House spokesman Sean Spicer ended up briefing reporters about the move in the dark on Tuesday night near a patch of bushes steps away from the West Wing. – Reuters

    ‘I have come to terms with my sacking’

    FBI chief James Comey on Thursday told his colleagues that the US President had the right to sack him for any reason “or for no reason at all” and that he had come to terms with it In a farewell letter to his colleagues, Comey said he does not plan to dwell on the decision of the President to fire him or the “way it was executed.” “It is done, and I will be fine, although I will miss you and the mission deeply,” Comey said a day after he was unceremoniously removed as top sleuth. Comey was in the third year of his 10-year term, when he was dismissed. (Source IANS/ NBC)

     

  • Trump election: Request for Wisconsin vote recount sent

    Trump election: Request for Wisconsin vote recount sent

    NEW YORK (TIP): The election commission in Wisconsin has received a request for a recount of the votes in the state narrowly won by Donald Trump.

    The request has been filed by Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.

    Dr Stein has also pledged to file vote recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

    A win by Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin alone would not overturn Mr. Trump’s lead – it provides only 10 votes in the crucial electoral college that gave him victory in the 8 November election.

    But wins in Wisconsin, Michigan (16 electoral votes) and Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes) would have clinched the presidency for the Democrat.

    In a tweet, the Wisconsin Elections Commission said: “The Commission has received the Stein and Del La Fuente recount petitions.”

    It added that details would be released shortly. Meanwhile, Dr Stein tweeted that the recount would begin next week. Friday was the deadline for the request.

    Dr Stein’s campaign needs to raise millions of dollars to cover the fees for the vote recount in all three states. Dr Jill’s website says nearly $5.3m  has already been raised toward a $7m target. It says this is enough to fund the recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

    Voting rights lawyers who urged candidates to request recounts, John Bonifaz and J Alex Halderman, have said the results need to be closely analyzed. The fact that the results in the three states was different from what polls predicted was “probably not” down to hacking, Mr Halderman said. Concerns over possible Russian interference had been expressed in the run-up to the vote.

    “The only way to know whether a cyber-attack changed the result is to closely examine the available physical evidence,” he wrote. Pennsylvania’s deadline is Monday, November 28 and Michigan’s is Wednesday, November 30.

    US officials have said there was no evidence of election tampering in the three states where Republican candidate Donald Trump had razor-thin victories over his Democratic rival. Mr Trump won 290 electoral votes in the November election, while Mrs. Clinton had 232 votes.

    Michigan is yet to declare results. Mr Trump’s camp has made no public comments on the recounts issue.

  • “Never Ever Give Up” says Hillary Clinton at a charity gala in Washington D.C. on November 16

    “Never Ever Give Up” says Hillary Clinton at a charity gala in Washington D.C. on November 16

    WASHINGTON DC (TIP): Hillary Clinton, in her first public speech since last week’s crushing presidential loss, admitted making the appearance “wasn’t the easiest”.

    Clinton was speaking at the Children’s Defense Fund’s “Beat The Odds” Gala on November 16 night. “I will admit, coming here tonight wasn’t the easiest thing for me,” Clinton said. “There have been a few times this past week where all I wanted to do was curl up with a good book and our dogs and never leave the house again.” Nevertheless, she attempted to inspire her audience and emphasized a line of Martin Luther King Jr. that is oft quoted by President Barack Obama throughout her speech: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

    Her speech was part reflection, part pledge to remain strong in the face of a Trump administration. “We have work to do, and for the sake of our children and our families and our country, I ask you to stay engaged, stay engaged on every level,” Clinton said. “We need you. America needs you, your energy, your ambition, your talent. That is how we get through this.”

     

     

  • Clinton Couldn’t Win Over White Women: But they split along educational lines

    Clinton Couldn’t Win Over White Women: But they split along educational lines

    Suffragette white. Hillary Clinton wore it in the biggest moments of her campaign: when she clinched the Democratic primary, when she accepted her party’s nomination, when she made her final debate appearance. The subtle sartorial symbolism was paired with the more explicit campaign message of Clinton as a tireless striver for women and families. Throughout these many months, the Clinton team made it clear that they believed her historic candidacy had the potential to sway portions of the electorate, most especially women voters. They were counting in no small part on the support of sisterhood. But Clinton’s stunning loss Tuesday night showed that issues of culture and class mattered more to many American women than their gender. The sisterhood, as real sisterhood tends to be, turned out to be riddled with complications.

    Preliminary exit poll results show that while she won women by 12 points overall (Trump won men by the same margin, a historic gender gap),1 Clinton lost the votes of white women overall and struggled to win women voters without a college education in states that could have propelled her to victory. I wrote Tuesday night about Clinton’s collapse in the Midwest -she saw Ohio, Wisconsin and probably Michigan slip away, all states President Obama won in 2008 and 2012 – and this appears to be in part because of her performance among voters who don’t have a college degree, including women. In Michigan, Trump won those women along with white men, their support for him drowning out white, college-educated women’s votes for Clinton. She won that demographic by 10 points, but these women account for only two in 10 Michigan voters.

    In Iowa, a state Obama also won in 2008 and 2012, the class-tinged tale was much the same. White women without a college degree account for just over a quarter of voters in the state, and while Obama won them by 17 percentage points in 2012, Clinton and Trump split their support. Trump won the state by 10 percentage points. Although Clinton didn’t outright lose women, their relatively anemic support for her in key states played a role in her Electoral College demise. Preliminary exit polls Tuesday showed that her loss in Florida was driven, in part, by her poor performance among women in the state. She won them with only a 4-point margin, compared with 16 points in Colorado; 13 in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania; 11 in Michigan and Georgia; 10 in Wisconsin; and 8 in North Carolina.

    While Democrats were banking on the hope that Trump’s crass comments and myriad allegations of sexual harassment would turn off women, there were glimmers of the coalition of women supporters that we saw forming last month after the release of the “Access Hollywood tape” in which he made lewd comments about groping women. At the time, a Morning Consult poll found that Trump had nearly equal support among Republican men and women, and numbers showed that the Republican faithful – men and women – were supporting their nominee at rates similar to what we’ve seen in past presidential elections. In other words, they were treating Trump like a run-of-the-mill Republican nominee; Republicans, men and women, wanted to see their guy win. The issues raised by Trump’s conduct toward women did not seem to drive women to the polls in unusual numbers. Overall turnout among women was only 1 percentage point higher than in 2012.

    (Source: Five Thirty-Eight: Clare Malone is a senior political writer for FiveThirtyEight. @claremalone)

  • Donald Trump Proposes 35 Percent Tax on Companies Outsourcing Production

    Donald Trump Proposes 35 Percent Tax on Companies Outsourcing Production

    Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said Nov. 5 that he will impose a 35 percent tax on U.S. companies that lay off workers while outsourcing their production to other countries.

    Trump revealed his proposal at separate rallies in Tampa, Florida, and Wilmington, North Carolina, states he must win in order to be elected Nov. 8 against Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, EFE news reported.

    The real-estate magnate said in Tampa that he will stop America’s prosperity from being stolen and will do it fast — because if a company lays off its workers and goes to some other country, and then ships its products back to the U.S., he’ll make it pay a 35 percent tax, a message he repeated in North Carolina.

    Trump has based his campaign on a protectionist pitch against trade treaties like the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership because they take jobs away from the United States, he said.

    The candidate has promised to restore manufacturing jobs that have been lost because of technological innovations and globalization, but have given way to other kinds of employment.

    Trump has said the cited trade agreements do the United States no good and must be renegotiated in order to benefit Americans.

    At the same time, he promised tax policies that, he said, will bring jobs back to the United States, beginning with a cut in corporate taxes from 35 percent to 15 percent.

  • Trump’s “Hidden Votes” Surface to make him the 45th President of USA; Hillary Gracefully Concedes

    Trump’s “Hidden Votes” Surface to make him the 45th President of USA; Hillary Gracefully Concedes

    NEW YORK (TIP): Upsetting all polls predicting victory of Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, in early hours of Wednesday, November 9, won the Presidential elections with a wide lead over his Democratic opponent. Trump reached the winning 270 mark (276) with Hillary sitting at 218. “Unbelievable” is what a pollster exclaimed when Trump pocketed State after States, including battleground Ohio which has 18 electoral votes, Florida which has 29 electoral votes and the Blue Pennsylvania which has 20 electoral votes. Not only that this election saw Trump adding to the number of Red States, it has also witnessed the Red becoming redder.

    At a point when Trump had already got 254 electoral votes in his kitty and Hillary was trailing at 214 with the results of Pennsylvania, then a close one but pointing to a Trump victory, yet to come in, it became clear that Trump will be the 45th President of the US. At that point, Trump was leading in quite a few States where counting was in progress.  It was at this point of time that Hillary Clinton called Trump to concede the election.  Shortly afterwards, Trump made his victory speech to a jubilant gathering at the Hilton in Manhattan, with the Vice President elect Mike Pence on his right and his youngest son Barron Trump on his left.

    Trump was conciliatory in his 15-minute speech. “To all Republicans, Democrats and Independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people. It’s time”, he said.

    Trump pledged to “every citizen of our land, that I will be president for all Americans. This is so important to me. Working together, we will begin the urgent task of rebuilding our nation.”

    Referring to economy and relations with nations in the world, he said: “We have a great economic plan. We will double our growth and have the strongest economy anywhere in the world. At the same time, we will get along with any other nations willing to get along with us. We expect to have great relationships.”

    Getting on to making America great again, Trump said: “Nothing we want for our future is beyond our reach. America will no longer settle for anything less than the best. We must reclaim our country’s destiny.”

    Read also: Meet the President -elect of the United States of America

  • FBI clears Clinton in the 2nd inquiry of private email server

    FBI clears Clinton in the 2nd inquiry of private email server

    Less than 48 hours before election day, in an election season which was marred by controversies, Nine days after throwing the presidential race into turmoil, FBI Director James Comey once more cleared Hillary Clinton of criminal wrongdoing on Sunday, Nov 6, for using a private email server as secretary of State.

    The verdict left Democrats still fuming over what party leaders saw as improper political meddling, which caused polls to tighten across the country.

    “During that process, we have reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of State,” Comey wrote. “Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.”

    This follows a similar letter sent to the Congress on July 28 in which he said that the FBI has reopened the investigation following discovery of some pertinent emails related to the Clinton investigation on the laptop of Huma

    Abedin, a close aide of the former Secretary of State, which was shared by Abedin’s estranged husband Anthony Weiner.

    “Since my letter (of October 28), the FBI investigation team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation,” Comey said. It was reported that there were 650,000 emails on that laptop.

    “During that process, we reviewed all the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was the Secretary of State,” Comey said.

    The FBI’s letter was welcomed by the Clinton campaign, which saw its popularity graph sharply dropping down in the aftermath of the October 28 letter.

    “We were always confident nothing would cause the July decision to be revisited. Now Director Comey has confirmed it,” tweeted Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon.

    “We are glad to see that he has found, as we were confident that he would, that he had confirmed the conclusions he reached in July and we are glad that this matter is resolved,” Jennifer Palmieri, Clinton’s communications director, told reporters.

    fbi-2ndletter

    fbi-2ndletterpg2

  • Salman Khan, Rishi Kapoor Support Hillary Clinton.. How will you Vote?

    Salman Khan, Rishi Kapoor Support Hillary Clinton.. How will you Vote?

    Results of the much-awaited Presidential polls of the United States will be announced on November 8 and celebrities, including actors Salman Khan and Rishi Kapoor, have voiced their support for Democratic Presidential Candidate #HillaryClinton.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Hillary Clinton has been fighting her sole scandal, the private email use for official purposes during her tenure as Secretary for State for the Obama government, but the sheer size of it keeps it from fading from public eye. As recent as 10 days back, FBI reopened examination into the emails.

    WHILE FBI HAS GIVEN THE GO-AHEAD, WILL THE PUBLIC FEEL THE SAME?

    Donald Trump on the other hand has been hit by a steady wave of scandals, majority of which are based on his brazen comments.

  • Republican Hindu Coalition and Donald Trump perfect a Campaign of Misinformation and Hate

    Republican Hindu Coalition and Donald Trump perfect a Campaign of Misinformation and Hate

    As I watched the latest Republican Hindu Coalition TV advertisements on some Indian channels, usually viewed by Indian Americans for India news, I was shocked how the name of Prime Minister Narendra Modi was being dragged in to the US Presidential election.

    The RHC TV ad on Aaj Tak and India Today showed repeatedly the photograph of Narendra Modi with a list of accusations against Hillary Clinton. It gave one the impression that Prime Minister Modi was listing the accusations and appealing to US voters to vote for Republican Donald Trump, with the catch line “Ab ki baar Trump Sarkar”, echoing the slogan in India during the 2012 general elections: “Ab ki baar Modi Sarkar”.

    It is hard to believe that Mr. Modi was not aware of the RHC TV campaign, with his vigilant diplomatic staff and intelligence agencies network which report every single event, incident and development to Delhi. His silence only indicates his approval. As they say in Sanskrit: Maunam sammati lakshanam – silence means assent/ approval.

    This suspicion grows when one looks at the credentials of RHC Chairman Shalabh Kumar, better known as Shally Kumar who has touted his proximity with Narendra Modi for a long time. He is believed to have been a member of RSS, a Hindu organization. Readers will recall he was keen to organize a reception for Modi in New York but at that time, Modi chose to entrust the job to another favorite of his from Chicago, and a rival of Shally Kumar- Bharat Barai. Though Shally Kumar had to lick the ground then he continued to look for an opportunity to create his impression on Modi that he was a good organizer. He visited India at regular intervals meeting RSS leaders and, reportedly, PM Modi. During the last one year, his visits multiplied. He is reported to have intensified during this period his activities, obviously, with a view to gaining RSS and Modi support for RHC proposal to back Donald Trump, a Republican.

    Again, one gets the impression that RSS and Hindu organizations in India are supportive of RHC ‘s open “HINDU” support to Trump when no RSS or Hindu leader objects to the use of the name “HINDU”. The fact, however, is Shally Kumar does not represent all Hindus. Nor do RSS and Hindu organizations in India. Is RHC not involving Hindus in an undesirable controversy? Is RHC not guilty of bringing a bad name to entire Hindu American community by indulging in misinformation and a hate campaign?

    Both PM Narendra Modi and RSS leaders in India owe an apology to Indian Americans and, to Hillary Clinton, for allowing RHC to spread misinformation and hate, using Modi’s pictures in the election campaign advertisements and, in the name of Hindus.  The RHC campaign is loaded with diplomatic ramifications and likely to impact adversely US India relations after Hillary takes over as President on January 20, 2017.

    Have a look at how Shally Kumar is maligning Hindus who have always stood for truth and propriety. Read the Hindu holy books and you would find Hindus have always been on the side of righteousness. Just recently Hindus the world over celebrated the victory of good over evil in the form of Dussehra and Diwali festivals.

    One, Hillary is anti-India. Two, Hillary is anti-Modi. Three, Hillary is a friend of Pakistan. She gave military aid to Pakistan against India. Clinton Foundation, (indirectly, Hillary), funded terrorists.

    The misinformation and the hate campaign of RHC includes a tirade against Hillary’s aide, Huma Abedin who is described as a possible “Saudi spy” and “a lesbian lover of Hillary Clinton”. RHC worked hard to spread the canard even as their master Trump continued with his lies. This election will be best known for the lies of RHC and Donald Trump, the Republican candidate who inspired many journalists to count the number of lies he came out with on a day. I remember reading an article which listed 28 lies of Trump on a single day.

    Poor Trump. He was taken in by Shally Kumar’s claims of a great Hindu support. He might have been impressed with the number of people who gathered at the RHC rally. He probably never knew that people were there not so much for him as for the entertainment that was promised them. He probably failed to realize that here was a crowd and not the voters. And he was surely taken in by Shally Kumar’s assurances that all Hindus will vote for him just as he was taken in, in his infamous lewd comments against women on tapes about which Melania had explained in defense of her husband that he was “egged on”. Trump may have been told that “Ab ki baar Trump Sarkar” is a Vedic Mantra, the recitation of which could make him President of America just as the slogan “ab ki baar Modi Sarkar” had brought Modi to power. Is the Republican Presidential candidate so gullible? If yes, how can Americans trust him with nuclear weapons?

    I pity Trump. All thorough the campaign, he has been promising the Sun, the Moon, the stars without ever laying bare before Americans how he was going to achieve them. On top, there was ample manifestation of hate, something, which is alien to American way of life. Americans are so welcoming, so loving. And here is a man so full of hate for all kinds of people- Latinos, Muslims, so on, so forth.

    A welcoming America never spoke of throwing millions out of the country. And here he is who says it would be one of his first tasks to throw millions out. America has been building bridges with the world. Here is a Trump who will build wall along Mexico border and claims the more the Democrats oppose his plan “the higher the wall goes”. No trade pacts. China is looting America. Outsourcing is hurting American labor. Immigrants have taken away jobs of “white” Americans. Muslims are a threat to USA. Jews, and this one is indirect, have fleeced and bled America when the latest Trump campaign TV advertisement displayed the pictures of three top Jewish personalities-Janet Yellen, who chairs the Federal Reserve, the progressive financier George Soros and the Goldman Sachs chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein.

    Trump claims he will go after the Wall Street bosses and yet opposes raise in taxes on the rich. And then he claims the minimum wage is high enough to warrant a wage increase.  How is Trump pro people?  How can Americans have a president who is so indifferent to their lot?

    I think there is no end to the subject. One can go on and on. But let me now return to RHC.

    Birds of the same feather flock together. No doubt then that Trump and RHC are partners in a misinformation and hate campaign.

    I sanguinely hope Indian Americans, and the Hindus Shalli Kumar is targeting, would see through the designs of RHC and consider truth and truth alone on the day of the election.

     

  • Race Matters in US

    Race Matters in US

    “Even with Trump’s supporters being 90 per cent white, he was trailing Hillary Clinton because of the demographic diversity in the US. Sadly, the damage he has done to the psyche of both the whites who believed in his delusory “movement” to restore America to its roots, and the minorities he relentlessly denigrated, will outlast him. Meanwhile, the terror of racism lives on, stronger and emboldened than before”, says the author.

    The history of the United States is founded on the backs of African slaves purchased and brought to its shores to work in the most abject conditions under white ownership to make colonies more habitable. Human beings were bought and sold like cattle and treated worse than the animals. George Washington, the first President of an independent America, promised to make liberty, equality and justice the bedrock of the nation, but had African slaves working for him. It has been a terrible legacy that America has tried to shake off.

    Slavery was subsequently abolished and affirmative action put in place with the rights of blacks and other minorities acknowledged and legitimatized through changes in political and social policy. With the awful past buried, America was ready to move on. With the whites in overwhelming majority, the post-war industrial boom and jobs aplenty, whites sat content at the top of the pyramid. For the middles class upwardly mobile majority, the blacks had been given their rights, and could shape their lives as they pleased as long as they did not encroach on the privileged status of the whites. Matters of race went largely underground. However, racism may have been submerged under a thriving economy but social divisions based on race solidified and were marked by frequent sordid incidents of white against black crime, usually in the Confederate Southern States, where white power still reigned supreme. Since there was no economic insecurity, there was no immediate threat from any minority and the country hummed along, creating millions of jobs in manufacturing, and helping Americans realize their dream that if you work hard, you will always have a job, and the future will be secure. The awareness of race was very much in place, but was not perceived as a political, economic or social threat.

    Several factors upended that dream scenario. Waves of immigration from Asia, Mexico and Africa began to change the demographic map. America entered its post-industrial era, where millions of jobs evaporated with the demise of heavy industry and the shift of manufacturing overseas. Previously thriving white dominated swathes became ghost towns, occupied by disaffected jobless poorly educated factory workers. While the new immigrants strived to succeed in their new home, the disillusioned native population became increasingly resentful at the government, at the entitlement policies towards the blacks, the Latinos and other minorities who all began to turn to alcohol and drugs to soothe their discontent.

    The Recession of 2008 further exacerbated a situation already teetering on the edge. Middle class whites now began to lose their jobs and fell behind, losing their homes, their security and watching their American Dream shatter with no hope of resuscitation. The recession affected everyone, particularly the minorities already living on the edge but the white majority, facing an unimaginable dire future, needed to assign blame. Consequently, all ignorant white fingers pointed to the immigrants who had stolen their jobs. Furthermore, anger and resentment began to simmer against blacks who they had always believed were intellectually and culturally inferior. Latinos were blamed for swooping the low-paying service jobs, accepting lower wages while the Asians who looked different and appeared to be a cultural and social anomaly, became a formidable threat.

    This stupendous rise in the non-white population was unstoppable and now poised to change the political landscape of the country. In came the first black President of the United States, Barack Obama with an overwhelming support from the non-white and educated white population. With his election in 2008, the white elite declared the death of racism, while the uneducated blue-collar whites deepened their resolve to blame the “other” for all their ills. The working class was historically a Democratic stronghold, but the election of a black President was intolerable and presaged the death of white supremacy. This seething racism was legitimized by the conservative media which thrived on projecting Obama as anti-American, a Muslim, a wolf in black clothing, someone to be despised, overturned at the earliest.

    The demographic constitution of America had now gone through a sea change. For the first time in the history of the country, children under five are a non-white majority, and it is rightly projected that by 2050 whites will be a minority. In fact, no race or ethnicity will be in majority; the country is moving towards a diverse plurality which is radically reshaping the entire political, socio economic and cultural landscape irreversibly and for the better. But it has also been a catastrophic blow to the demographic hegemony of the whites. To see themselves as an underclass of under educated, in the throes of drugs and alcohol, equalizes them with the blacks who have lived like that for generations. The picture is frightfully real and one that they would do anything to reverse. Contemporary America abounds with the violence of racism. The time, therefore, was ripe for a Presidential candidate like Donald Trump, a blustering bigot to successfully tap into this simmering racial hatred breeding in a bed of economic and social impoverishment, and turn it onto a campaign to restore American greatness to where and how it was when the whites were dominant and color of the skin determined status in life. He gave voice to racism that had been palpably felt but not overtly expressed. He brought differences of race, class and ethnicity to the forefront of the political narrative and underpinned his entire pitch on the divisions. It was the whites against the “other”; the anger was unleashed, and his populist, nativist, demagoguery struck a powerful chord with the disgruntled whites who began to dream of a country they once knew. Racism was once again legitimized and the country riven by serious divisions.

    Even with Trump’s supporters being 90 per cent white, he was trailing Hillary Clinton because of the demographic diversity in the US. Sadly, the damage he has done to the psyche of both the whites who believed in his delusory “movement” to restore America to its roots, and the minorities he relentlessly denigrated, will outlast him. Meanwhile, the terror of racism lives on, stronger and emboldened than before.

    (The author is a Professor in the Department of English & Cultural Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh)