Datasets:

Faith1712
/

Allsides_political_bias_proper

text stringlengths 306 1.26M	label int64 0 2
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., speaks during a luncheon at the National Press Club in Washington in August. Patrick Semansky/AP hide caption toggle caption Patrick Semansky/AP Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., speaks during a luncheon at the National Press Club in Washington in August. Patrick Semansky/AP Updated at 11:10 a.m. ET Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, a Baltimore attorney and civil rights advocate who served in Maryland's legislature before representing the state in the U.S. House, where he took on a lead role in investigating President Trump, has died. He was 68. Cummings, the head of the powerful House Committee on Oversight and Reform, died early Thursday at Johns Hopkins Hospital from complications related to longstanding health challenges, according to The Associated Press. "He worked until his last breath because he believed our democracy was the highest and best expression of our collective humanity and that our nation's diversity was our promise, not our problem," said Cummings' wife, Maryland Democratic Party Chair Maya Rockeymoore Cummings. It's been an honor to walk by his side on this incredible journey. I loved him deeply and will miss him dearly." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Cummings "my brother in Baltimore" as she spoke about him on Thursday. "In the Congress, Elijah was considered a north star," Pelosi said. "He was a leader of towering character and integrity." She added, "He lived the American dream, and he wanted it for everyone else." President Trump issued a statement via Twitter saying: "My warmest condolences to the family and many friends of Congressman Elijah Cummings. I got to see first hand the strength, passion and wisdom of this highly respected political leader. His work and voice on so many fronts will be very hard, if not impossible, to replace!" Former President Barack Obama issued his own statement saying, "Michelle and I are heartbroken over the passing of our friend, Elijah Cummings. "As Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, he showed us all not only the importance of checks and balances within our democracy, but also the necessity of good people stewarding it," Obama said. The 12-term congressman had failed to return from an unspecified medical procedure and missed two legislative roll call votes on Tuesday, the first day after a two-week recess, according to The Baltimore Sun. In a statement on Sept. 30, Cummings said his doctors expected him to be able to return to Washington "when the House comes back into session in two weeks." It said he'd be in "constant communication" with his staff and congressional colleagues while he was away. Cummings was among the three Democratic committee chairmen who signed a letter last month that accompanied a congressional subpoena of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has declined to testify in the ongoing impeachment inquiry of the president. According to an official biography of Cummings, the Baltimore native attended Howard University, where he obtained a bachelor's degree in political science and served as student government president. He later obtained a law degree from the University of Maryland School of Law. He served for 13 years in Maryland's House of Delegates before winning his congressional seat in 1996. "Congressman Cummings has dedicated his life of service to uplifting and empowering the people he is sworn to represent," his official biography says. "He began his career of public service in the Maryland House of Delegates, where he served for 14 years and became the first African American in Maryland history to be named Speaker Pro Tem," it says. "Since 1996, Congressman Cummings has proudly represented Maryland's 7th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives." Cummings was born and raised in Baltimore and lived there his entire life in what he described as the "inner inner city." He was one of seven children of parents who worked as sharecroppers before moving to the city in the 1940s, according to the Sun. Discussing Cummings' connection with his constituents in Baltimore, Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, tells NPR's Noel King, "he really was a moral force in the community." "People trusted him in the unrest after Freddie Gray was killed — it was Elijah Cummings who could walk into the crowd and be recognized and have people respond to him," Ifill says. "And so I think what the country has seen of him over the last year is a reflection of what many of us here in Baltimore have known for the 20 years of his leadership. A man of tremendous, tremendous integrity." As a prominent Democratic lawmaker, Cummings frequently found himself on the receiving end of Trump's Twitter account. In an infamous series of tweets in July, the president referred to Cummings' Baltimore district as "rat and rodent infested" and suggested that the congressman seldom goes there. Elijah Cummings spends all of his time trying to hurt innocent people through “Oversight.” He does NOTHING for his very poor, very dangerous and very badly run district! Take a look.... #BlacksForTrump2020 https://t.co/seNVESZUht— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 27, 2019 "Mr. President, I go home to my district daily," Cummings fired back in a letter to Trump. "Each morning, I wake up, and I go and fight for my neighbors." Referring to investigations of the president, which he perceived as the true impetus for the derogatory remarks, Cummings said in the letter that it is "my constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the Executive Branch. But it is my moral duty to fight for my constituents." Despite the president's remarks, Cummings continued to reach out to the White House and called on government officials to stop making "hateful, incendiary comments" that divide and distract. Mr. President, we can address this together. Two years ago, I went to the White House to ask you to endorse my bill to let the government negotiate directly for lower drug prices.— Elijah E. Cummings (@RepCummings) July 27, 2019 When Democrats took the House in the 2018 election, political pundits had predicted that Cummings' chairmanship of the Oversight Committee would be a "nightmare" for Trump. "Are we going to be the nightmare? he mused in an interview with the Sun. "It's in the eye of the beholder." NPR's Casey Noenickx contributed to this report.	1
President Barack Obama narrowly won re-election, overcoming public doubts about his performance on the economy—doubts that challenger Mitt Romney appeared well-positioned to exploit.For Mr. Obama, the victory sets up a test of whether he can forge a productive second term in a divided political system. A review of how President Obama won re-election, including where the balance of power sits in Washington. Photo: Reuters. The U.S. Presidential election was watched closely around the world, perhaps no more so than in Europe. WSJ London Bureau Chief Bruce Orwall joins the News Hub with European-focused foreign policy questions facing Barack Obama. Photo: Getty Images. WSJ Economics Reporter Brian Blackstone joins the News Hub from Germany to discuss the impact of the Presidential election on European financial issues. Photo: Getty Images. WSJ Beijing Bureau Chief Andrew Browne joins the News Hub to discuss Asian reaction to the U.S. presidential election. Photo: Getty Images. Election watchers and Obama supporters in Times Square, Boston, Washington, D.C., and Iowa react to news that the president has won a second term. Via #WorldStream. See More Video on #WorldStream For Republicans, it raises uncomfortable questions: What went wrong, and how did Democrats manage to blunt Mr. Romney's seemingly big advantage on what was easily the top issue for voters in the 2012 race? Early analysis based on polls and other research by Democrats close to the Obama re-election effort suggests that Mr. Obama found multiple ways to chip away at the public's confidence in Mr. Romney, as well as his conservative policy prescriptions. That multifront effort succeeded in raising enough doubt about Mr. Romney—and sufficiently reinforcing Mr. Obama's own message—to allow the president to gain re-election. Some top Republicans agreed they need to rethink how they present their economic message. "We need to do a better job of making our economic case" in coming elections, GOP strategist Karl Rove said on Fox News on Wednesday morning. Mr. Rove said one reason Democrats succeeded was that they turned the presidential election into a tactical fight largely defined by negative attacks. Mr. Rove noted that while Mr. Romney appeared to score well with voters in a number of categories, including his leadership and vision, Mr. Obama by the end held a lopsided advantage on the question of which candidate cares about people like them. Democrats succeeded in defining Mr. Romney as "a rich guy who didn't care about them," Mr. Rove said. Mr. Obama also was aided by a well-executed turnout effort, one that was all the more successful because of demographic shifts that are placing more electoral power in the hands of minority voters, who tended to support Mr. Obama by large margins. His victory makes Mr. Obama the first president since Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940 to succeed with a higher unemployment rate on Election Day than on his inauguration day four years earlier. U.S. unemployment now stands at 7.9%, compared with 7.8% when Mr. Obama took office. A poll completed this week by Democratic pollster Geoff Garin—and funded by an independent group supporting Mr. Obama—suggested that the Obama campaign succeeded in part by persuading voters that Mr. Romney's economic policies would be bad for people like themselves. "Only 38% of voters say that if Mitt Romney is elected president his economic policies will be good for people like them," the analysis says. "By comparison, 44% say President Obama's policies will be good for people like them." While a large majority of voters said they were dissatisfied with the economy, relatively few blamed Mr. Obama, pointing their fingers instead at Wall Street and the administration of former President George W. Bush. A narrow majority of voters said they believed the country was making progress economically, and those voters tended to side with Mr. Obama. The Obama campaign also succeeded in undermining voter perceptions of Mr. Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, the private-equity firm he founded. "In the final round of swing state polling…voters agreed by 17 points that 'as a businessman, (Romney's) priority was making millions for himself and his investors, regardless of the impact on jobs and the employees,' " according to the Garin analysis. After winning a second term, President Barack Obama ends his victory speech with his vision for the country during his speech. Photo: Getty Images. More In his victory speech, Mr. Obama said he now looks forward to "sitting down with Gov. Romney to talk about where we can work together to move this country forward." John Mack, the former Morgan Stanley chief executive, suggested on Wednesday that after all the campaign-season criticism of business, Mr. Obama should enlist Mr. Romney's help in mending fences, particularly given the economy's ongoing problems. "I would love to see the president reach out and ask Mitt Romney to get involved in some way to work with the business community," Mr. Mack said on Bloomberg TV. "If we could make some moves like that where we could work together…I think it's a huge positive." In retaining the presidency, Mr. Obama, 51 years old, defeated the 65-year-old former Massachusetts governor, who had been seeking the office for six years. "We may have battled fiercely, but it's only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future," the president said in a victory speech that came after 1:30 a.m. Eastern time. He said he would meet with Mr. Romney in the coming weeks to discuss various issues confronting the country. "I so wish that I had been able to fulfill your hopes to lead the country in a different direction, but the nation chose another leader," Mr. Romney said in his concession speech. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), who has been one of the president's primary adversaries in Congress, extended Mr. Obama a hand—with an admonition—in a statement issued early Wednesday. "The American people did two things: they gave President Obama a second chance to fix the problems that even he admits he failed to solve during his first four years in office, and they preserved Republican control of the House of Representatives," he said. He made clear that Republicans are expecting the next four years to be different from the past four years. "To the extent he wants to move to the political center…we'll be there to meet him half way. That begins by proposing a way for both parties to work together in avoiding the 'fiscal cliff' without harming a weak and fragile economy, and when that is behind us work with us to reform the tax code and our broken entitlement system," he said. President Obama gathers with his wife, Michelle, left, and daughters Sasha and Malia, right, during his election night victory rally in Chicago. Reuters Propelling Mr. Obama to victory was the unique coalition he forged four years ago, one that reflects the changing nature of the U.S. electorate—notably, the diminished influence of white Americans and the rising clout of Latino voters. Greeting Mr. Obama will be a divided Congress. Democrats retained their Senate majority, while Republicans looked set to keep control of the House of Representatives. After the election, Washington remained aligned exactly as it was Tuesday morning, despite $6 billion in spending and 1.2 million political ads in the presidential race alone. Americans handed Mr. Obama the job of navigating conflicting impulses in both Washington and the nation, a partisan divide the president has previously struggled to master. Despite Mr. Romney's focus on the economy, pitching himself as a onetime businessman capable of fixing what ails the U.S., he couldn't overcome missteps and attacks from Democrats over his work as a private-equity executive. At stake were two starkly different visions of the role of government and the recipe for economic revival. Mr. Romney called for reducing taxes and scaling back regulations, which he said would trigger economic growth. Mr. Obama laid out a model of public investment in alternative energy and education, along with tax increases on wealthier families to help cut deficits. He has also voiced plans to pursue a revamp of U.S. immigration laws. The president's re-election campaign was light on details of his second-term agenda, in contrast to the ambitious list he brought to the office in 2008. Mr. Obama sealed his victory with wins in swing states including Ohio, Colorado and Virginia. He was running neck and neck in Florida. The contest showed how dramatically the U.S. has changed in recent years. According to exit polls, Mr. Romney won 60% of the white vote. Mr. Obama won 38%, five points fewer than his 2008 showing. Not since Walter Mondale, who was swept aside by Ronald Reagan in the 1984 presidential race, has a Democrat recorded a smaller share of the white vote. Casting Ballots in 2012Decision Day in America Voters headed to the polls Tuesday in a presidential contest defined by its intensity and razor-thin margins. Readers' Election PhotosView Election Day through the lenses of Journal readers, and share your photos with us on Twitter and Instagram with #WSJvote. More Photos Mr. Obama will have little time to savor his victory. Looming almost immediately is the so-called fiscal cliff, a series of tax increase and spending cuts that come into force Jan. 1 and that could unravel the economy's fragile gains unless the president and congressional leaders engineer a compromise. The U.S. will also hit its borrowing limit in coming months, raising the prospect of a battle like the one last year that led to a downgrade of the U.S. debt rating. Mr. Obama hopes to broker a far-reaching agreement, the kind of "grand bargain" that eluded him last year, which would include raising taxes on wealthier Americans. Republicans have said they would oppose any tax increase. The White House is already working to convene a meeting between the president and congressional leaders. A key player will be Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Mr. Romney's running mate and a student of fiscal matters, who retained his House seat. Mr. Obama notched a victory in a political climate that seemed ripe for his defeat. Polls showed more than half the population believed the U.S. was on the wrong track and that the government performed too many functions best done by the private sector—attitudes that would seem to benefit Republicans. Mr. Obama was favored to win for most of the campaign, but the race narrowed in the final month after he turned in a lackluster performance in the first of three presidential debates. Presidential historian Nick Ragone joins the News Hub to discuss Mitt Romney's loss and challenges the Republicans face. (Photo: Getty Images) Mr. Romney closed the gap in the polls, raising the possibility that the nation's first African-American president might be voted from office at the end of a single term. Mr. Obama prevailed through an aggressive and well-funded campaign. He championed middle-class interests while depicting Mr. Romney as an uncaring businessman whose economic policies would favor the wealthiest Americans. The campaign's tone was coarse. Mr. Obama largely jettisoned the hopeful message of his 2008 campaign, convinced that to win he needed to paint Mr. Romney as an unpalatable alternative. Mr. Obama's rise to power might have been dismissed as a fluke had he not secured a second term. His biography is nothing like that of recent predecessors. Mr. Obama was raised by a single mother and his grandparents. His father was from Kenya and his mother's family from Kansas. Mr. Obama spent most of his childhood in Hawaii, where he attended a prestigious private school. After graduating from Columbia University, he attended Harvard Law School, becoming the first African-American editor of the Harvard Law Review. He eventually moved to Chicago, where he became a community organizer and met his wife, first lady Michelle Obama. His political resumé is short. He served in the Illinois state Senate until 2004, when he captivated the nation with a keynote address at the Democratic National Convention. He was elected to the U.S. Senate that same year and hadn't served a full term before he won the White House in 2008. His first term included passage of the health-care law, the financial-regulation bill and a series of interventions to save the banking system from the worst downturn since the Great Depression. After the midterm elections in 2010, Republicans took charge of the House and Mr. Obama was forced to curb his ambitions. The president has predicted that he would have better results in a second term. David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser, said any ill will from the election would quickly vanish. Mr. Obama has said he would push several pieces of unfinished business left over the first term. He wants to pass an immigration overhaul that would provide a path to legal status for the 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally. Republicans might conclude it is in their interest to cooperate. In Tuesday's elections, the GOP got a lesson in the dangers of alienating Latinos. Many Republicans strategists have said the party must soften its stance on illegal immigration. Latinos now account for 16% of the population, and that figure is expected to jump to 22% by 2030. With Hurricane Sandy ravaging the East Coast, Mr. Obama had a chance to show compassion to storm victims and deploy government resources to neighborhoods left in ruins. No less a critic than New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican who gave the keynote speech at Mr. Romney's nominating convention, went out of his way to praise Mr. Obama's performance. About two-thirds of the public approved of the president's handling of Hurricane Sandy, a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll showed. Worse for Mr. Romney, the storm froze the race at a moment when he had been gaining momentum and cutting into Mr. Obama's lead. Sandy diverted the nation's attention for days, forcing Mr. Romney to cancel some events and to juggle attacks on Obama with expressions of sympathy for storm victims. Still, Mr. Obama's re-election would have seemed unlikely in the nadir of his presidency, the fall of 2010, when voters in the midterm election gave Republicans control of the House. Mr. Obama termed that election, "a shellacking." White House advisers turned their attention to his political revival, knowing he was in a tough spot. Unemployment hovered near 10%, and aides worried that independent voters had abandoned the president. Internal focus groups showed that voters didn't give credit to Mr. Obama for the stimulus program, even though many economists concluded that the measures staved off an even more serious downturn. Aides settled on a strategy that emphasized steady improvement in the jobless rate while positioning Mr. Obama as a champion of the middle class. Rather than save their money for the post-Labor Day race to November, the Obama campaign spent millions of dollars on TV ads attacking Mr. Romney for his record at Bain Capital. They painted him as a predatory capitalist who bought companies and laid people off in search of a quick profit. Mr. Obama burned through a good chunk of his campaign cash, making some Democrats uneasy. But he made Mr. Romney unpopular among some voters. In the end, Mr. Obama suffered no shortage of funds. In September alone, he took in $181 million in campaign donations. Altogether, the president and allied groups will have raised nearly $1 billion over the course of the campaign. —Patrick O'Connor and Colleen McCain Nelson contributed to this article. Write to Peter Nicholas at peter.nicholas@wsj.com, Carol E. Lee at carol.lee@wsj.com and John D. McKinnon at john.mckinnon@wsj.com Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8	1
Infrastructure negotiations between President Biden and a group of Republicans led by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) have officially broken down, and Biden now plans to turn his attention toward striking a deal with a separate, bipartisan group of senators, administration officials said Tuesday night.What we're hearing: When Biden and Capito spoke by phone on Tuesday, the call only lasted a few minutes, and it was clear that the two sides remain too far apart to find a compromise. The two parties still hadn't agreed on how to define what constitutes infrastructure, let alone set a price tag or way to pay for it.What they're saying: Biden "informed Sen. Capito today that the latest offer from her group did not, in his view, meet the essential needs of our country," White House press secretary Jen Psaki said."He offered his gratitude to her for her efforts and good faith conversations, but expressed his disappointment that, while he was willing to reduce his plan by more than $1 trillion, the Republican group had increased their proposed new investments by only $150 billion."“While I appreciate President Biden’s willingness to devote so much time and effort to these negotiations, he ultimately chose not to accept the very robust and targeted infrastructure package, and instead, end our discussions," Capito said.Timing: The Biden administration made clear they saw this week was the deadline for real progress on a deal with Capito and other GOP senators. Now he will focus on engaging the "G20" group of Democratic and Republican senators, led by Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.).That group has floated a larger, $900 billion infrastructure proposal focused on roads, bridges and other traditional projects.Psaki said that Biden spoke with Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Sinema and Manchin today, and told the group he would continue to contact them by phone while in Europe over the next week.Biden also designated his Jobs Cabinet and White House aides Steve Ricchetti, Louisa Terrell and Brian Deese to meet with them in person, Psaki added.Of note: The issue of how to pay for the package remains the major stumbling block.Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday that Democrats are working on a reconciliation bill as a backup plan in case talks fall through. He added that he plans to move forward with an infrastructure bill in the Senate in July, whether a deal between the two sides is reached or not.	1
The breakneck pace of hiring slumped in February, a sign that U.S. growth is cooling, though strong wage growth and earlier robust job gains suggest the economy’s near decadelong expansion will endure. U.S. nonfarm payrolls rose a seasonally adjusted 20,000 in February, the Labor Department said Friday, marking the slowest pace for job growth since September 2017—when hurricanes skewed hiring patterns—and falling well below economists’ expectations for 180,000 new jobs. Some of February’s weak job growth might have been a response to strong hiring in previous months. Payrolls grew 311,000 in January and 227,000 in December. The three-month average for job gains clocked in at 186,000, near the average for much of the expansion. The unemployment rate dropped to 3.8% in February from 4% the month before, returning to a level last seen in October. Wages grew at the fastest pace in nearly a decade. For months, strong U.S. job growth has been a counterpoint to other economic disturbances, including a partial federal-government shutdown in late December and January, a sputtering U.S. housing sector and a global economic slowdown. “The labor market has really stood out as the lone bright spot in a sea of more mixed measures,” said Scott Anderson, chief economist at Bank of the West. The latest report, he said, “is just catching up” to the mixed economic picture. Jobs were weak in some seasonal industries that snapped back from big gains in previous months, including construction, retail and hospitality. Construction employment fell 31,000 after rising 53,000 the month before. Leisure and hospitality jobs were flat after rising 89,000 the month before. Manufacturing employment stayed positive for the 19th straight month, the longest run of gains since the mid-1990s. But payroll growth in the sector slowed, possibly reflecting crimping effects from global trade tensions. Doug Smoker, president of Indiana-based boat manufacturer Smoker Craft Inc., said U.S. steel-and-aluminum tariffs enacted in 2018 drove up boat prices and hurt business with dealers, an important customer base. Retaliation from Canada further squeezed the company’s sales. If not for tariff-induced uncertainty, Smoker Craft would be in hiring mode, Mr. Smoker said. Instead, it has left some positions open and allowed its workforce to contract 5%. “There seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel from what we’re hearing about China and all this other stuff,” he said, referring to news reports that the U.S. and China could reach a trade deal, “but we really don’t know.” Some economists said Friday’s report exaggerated the extent of weakness sweeping the job market. Federal workers might have been counted twice in January, when payrolls were so strong, if they took additional part-time work during the shutdown, said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Grant Thornton. Those same workers who returned to their jobs in February would only be counted once, depressing the overall number. “The headline is certainly a bit of a head fake. The underlying trend is still solid,” Ms. Swonk said. The payroll estimate is closely watched by investors because it is one of the most comprehensive numbers produced by the government on how the economy is performing and it is timely, coming just a few days after month-end. Stocks fell sharply initially after the report, but investors pared the losses later in the day. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 22.99 on the day, or 0.09%, to 25450.24. The Labor Department report was striking in part because it happened as new signs flashed of a global slowdown, worrying central banks. The European Central Bank this week cut its estimate of how fast Europe will grow in 2019 and introduced new stimulus measures. Beijing also has ramped up efforts to boost China’s slowing economy. For its part, the Federal Reserve has for now shelved plans to raise interest rates. Friday’s report likely reinforced the inclination of many officials to avoid changing rates for at least a few months while they assess how the economic outlook evolves. The Fed’s willingness to keep borrowing costs low in the face of new economic uncertainty is one factor easing the concern of investors that the slowdown could worsen. The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta estimates economic output is growing at an annual rate of 0.5% in the first quarter, well below growth near 3% in 2018. Many economists see some pickup in growth after the first quarter, in part because the negative effects of the government shutdown will be reversed. There were other signs within Friday’s report that the job market wasn’t as soft in February as payrolls suggested. The jobless rate, which is based on a different survey than the hiring estimate, has stabilized between 3.7% and 4% for 12 straight months after a long march lower that started in late 2009. U.S. companies continue to report challenges finding qualified workers. Some analysts figured hiring might be slowing in part because companies can’t find enough people to fill open positions. At 3.8%, the jobless rate remains near lows rarely seen in the past half-century. At the same time, the fact that it hasn’t fallen further alleviates Fed officials of the worry that it might get so low that it ignites inflation pressures. February’s improvement in unemployment reflected, in part, the return to work of federal employees after the government shutdown, the Labor Department said. The broadest measure of unemployment—which includes the discouraged and part-time workers who want full-time work—fell to its lowest level since 2001. Another silver lining was hourly worker wages, which were up 3.4% from a year earlier in February, the strongest pace since April 2009. For much of the expansion wage growth has been anemic. It is now outpacing inflation, meaning workers are keeping more of what they bring home. Income gains for households could help sustain consumer spending and overall economic growth in the months ahead. Jermaine Waller is one worker feeling the benefits of higher wages. After eight years working minimum-wage security jobs, Mr. Waller, 31, grew frustrated and pursued training, becoming certified as a collision-repair technician. Signs solicit workers for employment opportunities on March 1 in Zelienople, Pa. Photo: Keith Srakocic/Associated Press Newsletter Sign-up Real Time Economics The latest economic news, analysis and data curated weekdays by WSJ's Jeffrey Sparshott. More In February he started work at Blossom Chevrolet in Indianapolis, Ind., which offered Mr. Waller a raise to $17.50 an hour to lure him from another dealership. He said a shorter commute means he could surprise his son with lunch at school. “I can afford the stuff I never had—and to be the Dad I never had,” he said. —Eric Morath contributed to this article. Write to Sarah Chaney at sarah.chaney@wsj.com Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8	1
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellRepublicans take cheap shots at Fed nominees Republicans do not have a right to remain silent White House uses GOP's own rhetoric to rebut Supreme Court criticisms MORE (R-Ky.) said on Wednesday that he's barely spoken to President BidenJoe BidenCory Booker and Rosario Dawson have reportedly split US ups estimate of Russian forces on Ukraine border to 130,000 Harris heads to Munich at pivotal moment MORE since the Jan. 20 inauguration, accusing the White House of shifting to the "hard left.""I don't believe I've spoken with him since he was sworn in," McConnell said during an interview with Fox News, adding that he hadn't been invited to the White House either.Spokespeople for McConnell didn't immediately respond to a request for comment, but clarified to CNN that while they had spoken since the Jan. 20 inauguration, they haven't talked about the agenda.McConnell previously told reporters on Feb. 2 that he and Biden had spoken about Myanmar and the budget process and coronavirus relief. Democrats used a special process known as budget reconciliation to pass their sweeping $1.9 trillion bill over GOP objections. The filibuster cannot be used to slow measures moved under the budgetary rules."Well the president called me on two things: Burma was one of them, the other was ... the budget process and COVID relief," McConnell told reporters.But McConnell used the Fox News interview on Wednesday to drive home his view that he doesn't believe Biden, whom he worked with in the Senate, is being bipartisan."I haven't been invited to the White House, so far this administration is not interested in doing anything on a bipartisan basis in the political center," McConnell said."There's been no efforts whatsoever by the president or the administration to do anything in the political center. It's been trying to jam through everything on the hard left," McConnell added.McConnell and Biden were able to cut some deals during the Obama administration, sparking speculation after Biden won the White House that their relationship could be crucial to the prospects for getting any big agreements through the Senate where 60 votes are still needed for most legislation.The White House is in touch with GOP senators on infrastructure and Biden previously hosted 10 Republicans to discuss coronavirus relief. But Democrats are also wary of slowing down, or narrowing bills, to try to make them bipartisan, pointing back to what they view as strategic missteps during the Obama administration."We made a big mistake in 2009 and ’10," Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerDemocratic Senate debates merits of passion vs. pragmatism Former prisoner becomes first sworn in for seat in New York state legislature On The Money — Inflation hits highest rate since February 1982 MORE (D-N.Y.) told CNN earlier this month. "We cut back on the stimulus dramatically and we stayed in recession for five years."	1
The sentencing of one former ally of President Trump and the disclosure of a key agreement with another intensified the focus on Mr. Trump’s alleged role in coordinating efforts to suppress the stories of two women to protect his 2016 campaign. The dual developments on Wednesday came as part of a legal saga that has led Mr. Trump’s own Justice Department to directly implicate him in federal crimes, exposing him to potential legal and political peril as he enters the second half of his presidential term. Michael Cohen, Mr. Trump’s longtime fixer and personal lawyer, was sentenced Wednesday in federal court to three years in prison. He had pleaded guilty in recent months to nine felony counts, including two campaign-finance violations related to payments he arranged during the 2016 presidential campaign to silence two women who said they had sexual encounters with Mr. Trump. Shortly after Mr. Cohen’s sentencing, prosecutors publicly disclosed that American Media Inc., the National Enquirer’s parent company, had also admitted to coordinating with the Trump campaign in making one of those illegal payments. The company said the purpose of its $150,000 payment to a former Playboy model in August 2016 was to quash her story of an affair with Mr. Trump to prevent it from influencing the 2016 election—not for legitimate editorial reasons, as the company previously said. American Media has provided “substantial” assistance to investigators and agreed to future cooperation, prosecutors said. In exchange, the government said it won’t criminally prosecute the company for any campaign-finance violations. Among the assistance provided, David Pecker, American Media’s chief executive and a longtime friend of Mr. Trump, shared information with prosecutors about Mr. Trump’s direct involvement in the payment scheme and received immunity for testifying before a grand jury in the Cohen investigation, the Journal previously reported. Mr. Trump on Monday described the payments Mr. Cohen arranged as a “simple private transaction” and said if the payments were illegal, it was his lawyer’s “mistake.” The president has denied the sexual encounters with the women as well as ordering Mr. Cohen to arrange the payments to them. Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, said in an interview after the sentencing that the payments were legal. At his sentencing Wednesday before a packed federal courtroom in downtown Manhattan, Mr. Cohen, 52 years old, apologized for lying to the American public and told the judge his “blind loyalty to Donald Trump ” had led him astray from his values. “Time and time again, I felt it was my duty to cover up his dirty deeds, rather than listen to my own inner voice,” Mr. Cohen said, as his daughter wept in the seat behind him. Mr. Cohen said the sentencing would free him from the “personal and mental incarceration” he has been under since he started working for Mr. Trump more than a decade ago. When he took the job, he admired the real-estate tycoon’s business acumen, Mr. Cohen said, adding: “I now know there is little to be admired.” Ahead of the 2016 election, Mr. Cohen paid $130,000 to Stephanie Clifford, the former adult-film star known professionally as Stormy Daniels, to keep quiet about her allegations of a sexual encounter with Mr. Trump. Mr. Cohen also facilitated American Media’s payment to the former Playboy model Karen McDougal. The Journal first revealed the existence of the payments. In a pre-sentencing court filing last week, federal prosecutors in Manhattan wrote that Mr. Trump, identified in the document as “Individual-1,” directed and coordinated both illegal payments with Mr. Cohen. The filing indicated investigators have evidence corroborating Mr. Cohen’s statements, made in open court in August, that he committed the campaign-finance violations at Mr. Trump’s direction and with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. The Wall Street Journal first reported a month ago the details of Mr. Trump’s central role in the payments, including that he was involved in or briefed on nearly every step of the agreements. The statements by Mr. Cohen and American Media could undercut Mr. Trump’s ability to argue the payments weren’t intended to protect his campaign. Mr. Trump has previously said they didn’t constitute campaign contributions. In handing down his sentence, U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley III said Mr. Cohen admitted to a “veritable smorgasbord of fraudulent conduct,” including crimes that undermined democratic institutions. In addition to the campaign-finance charges, Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty in August to five counts of tax fraud and one count of making false statements to a bank. Last month he pleaded guilty to a charge brought by the office of special counsel Robert Mueller that he lied to Congress. Although Mr. Cohen deserves credit for taking steps to cooperate with investigators, Judge Pauley said, “that does not wipe the slate clean.” He ordered Mr. Cohen to pay more than $1.3 million in restitution and $100,000 in fines, as well as forfeit $500,000. Mr. Cohen will report to prison on March 6, and his lawyers have requested he be placed at the federal prison in Otisville, N.Y. The prison sentence caps a dramatic about-face for Mr. Cohen, who once famously said he would take a bullet for the president. He has since aimed one straight at his former boss, providing prosecutors with information that Mr. Trump and his inner circle may have taken part in federal crimes surrounding the 2016 election. Whether a payment was intended to influence the election has been a key question in prior campaign-finance prosecutions. When the Justice Department accused John Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, of using illegal campaign contributions to conceal an affair during his 2008 presidential run, he argued the money was meant to hide his mistress from his wife, not to influence the election. A jury acquitted him of one charge and deadlocked on the rest. Mr. Cohen’s lawyers had asked the judge to grant him no prison time, suggesting Mr. Cohen believed the information he shared with prosecutors about the president and others should have earned him a get-out-of-jail-free card. Mr. Cohen turned on his former boss when he could have held out instead for a pardon, his lawyers wrote. Federal prosecutors in Manhattan, however, said Mr. Cohen was no hero and asked the court to impose a “substantial” prison sentence. Prosecutors cited Mr. Cohen’s refusal to pursue a formal cooperation agreement with the Southern District of New York, which would have required him to reveal his entire criminal history to the government, including information about crimes committed by other people. Mr. Cohen did provide significant and credible information to Mr. Mueller’s office, prosecutors said, but he declined to answer questions about other areas of investigative interest to Manhattan federal prosecutors beyond campaign-finance crimes. In a statement to the court on Wednesday, Guy Petrillo, one of Mr. Cohen’s lawyers, harshly criticized the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office’s handling of Mr. Cohen’s case, pointing to the “strident tone” of the office’s sentencing memorandum, including what he described as an “immature and meaningless observation” about Mr. Cohen’s temper. “Mr. Cohen had the misfortune to have been counsel to the president,” Mr. Petrillo said. Responding in court, a prosecutor said the office “treated Mr. Cohen just the way we treat every other defendant.” Lanny Davis, an adviser to Mr. Cohen, said after sentencing that Mr. Cohen would eventually “state publicly all he knows about Mr. Trump,” including to any congressional committee. Mr. Cohen has already met seven times with Mr. Mueller’s office and shared information about efforts by Mr. Trump’s inner circle to forge closer ties with Moscow in the months before the 2016 election, including previously unknown contacts between Russians and the Trump campaign from as early as fall 2015, according to court documents. Sitting presidents cannot be indicted under Justice Department guidelines, but Democrats will take over control of the House in January, enabling them to subpoena records. They have said they plan to investigate Mr. Trump’s involvement in the hush-money payments, which incoming House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.) has described as “impeachable offenses.” Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), who is expected to take control of the House Intelligence Committee, said on Sunday: “Is a crime directed and coordinated by the president which helped him obtain office sufficient to warrant his removal from that office? That’s a legitimate question to ask.” Special counsel Robert Mueller said in a court filing that former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen went to “significant lengths” to assist the Russia probe. But Manhattan federal prosecutors said in a separate filing that Cohen should receive a “substantial” prison sentence because his assistance fell short of full cooperation. Photo: AP Republicans in Congress have largely dismissed the president’s involvement in the payments. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah), after being told New York prosecutors had alleged the president ordered Mr. Cohen to arrange the hush-money payments, said: “OK, but I don’t care. All I can say is he’s doing a good job as president.” Mr. Cohen, who served as a Trump Organization lawyer and later as Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, will continue assisting the Russia investigation, prosecutors said. Mr. Cohen’s pleaded guilty last month to a charge of lying to Congress about the extent of efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow during the 2016 campaign, saying he deliberately tried to minimize Mr. Trump’s involvement in the process in an attempt to curtail the Russia investigation. While President Trump publicly fought with women leading up the the 2016 election, in private he directed schemes to silence their stories of two alleged affairs. Here’s a timeline of Trump’s personal involvement. Once the special counsel investigation concludes, Mr. Mueller is expected to submit a report to the Justice Department that is also anticipated to reach Congress. That report could incorporate any findings related to the president by New York prosecutors. —Rebecca Ballhaus contributed to this article. Write to Nicole Hong at nicole.hong@wsj.com and Rebecca Davis O’Brien at Rebecca.OBrien@wsj.com Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8	1
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump said on Monday that he plans to display battle tanks on Washington’s National Mall as part of a pumped-up Fourth of July celebration that will also feature flyovers by fighter jets and other displays of military prowess.The military hardware is just one new element in a U.S. Independence Day pageant that will depart significantly from the nonpartisan, broadly patriotic programs that typically draw hundreds of thousands of people to the monuments in downtown Washington.While past presidents have traditionally kept a low profile on July 4, Trump plans to deliver a speech at the Lincoln Memorial.Also on the agenda are an extended fireworks display and flyovers by Air Force One, the custom Boeing 747 used by U.S. presidents, and the U.S. Navy’s Blue Angels jet squadron.“I’m going to say a few words, and we’re going to have planes going overhead,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “And we’re going to have tanks stationed outside.”Democrats in Congress have accused Trump of hijacking the event to boost his re-election prospects in 2020. They have also questioned how much the event will cost the cash-strapped National Park Service.Trump has pushed for a military parade in Washington since he marveled at the Bastille Day military parade in Paris in 2017. His administration postponed a parade that had been planned for Veterans Day in November 2018 after costs ballooned to $90 million, three times the initial estimate.Trump said modern M1 Abrams tanks and World War Two-era Sherman tanks would both be on display. District of Columbia officials have said the heavy military equipment could damage city streets.“You’ve got to be pretty careful with the tanks because the roads have a tendency not to like to carry heavy tanks, so we have to put them in certain areas,” Trump said.The antiwar group Code Pink said it had secured permits to fly a “Baby Trump” blimp, depicting the president in diapers, during his speech. “Babies need enormous amounts of attention and are unable to gauge the consequences of their behavior - just like Donald Trump,” co-founder Medea Benjamin said in a news release.The Interior Department, which oversees the event, has not said how much the event will cost. Two fireworks firms will put on a 35-minute display for free, which the agency said was equal to a donation of $700,000.Reporting by Andy Sullivan and Makini Brice; Additional reporting by Jeff Mason; Editing by Diane Craft and Peter Cooneyfor-phone-onlyfor-tablet-portrait-upfor-tablet-landscape-upfor-desktop-upfor-wide-desktop-up	1
WASHINGTON—In striking down the federal Defense of Marriage Act this past week, the Supreme Court not only rejected a longstanding rationale for laws disfavoring gays and lesbians—the welfare of children. The court turned it on its head.Backers had justified the 1996 federal law as a way to ensure children didn't grow up thinking that gay relationships were equal to those of heterosexuals. The same was true for Proposition 8, the 2008 California initiative ending same-sex marriage that also fell with the Wednesday ruling by the high court. More As a testament to "moral disapproval of homosexuality," the Defense of Marriage Act could discourage "wavering children" from becoming gay themselves, the House report on the legislation said. Likewise, because "the best situation for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father," Proposition 8 would stop public schools from teaching children "that gay marriage is OK," according to the proponents' official ballot statement. House Republicans echoed that view at a news conference this past week to denounce the Supreme Court's ruling. "The Supreme Court has ignored the needs of children," said Rep. Randy Weber (R., Texas). "The desires of adults are not more important than the needs of children," added Rep. Tim Walberg (R., Mich.). While such arguments seemed aimed at heterosexual parents who view homosexuality as a threat to their children, the Supreme Court on Wednesday looked to another group of children—those whose parents are gay. Politics Counts By denying those families legitimacy, the Defense of Marriage Act "humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. DOMA, as it is known, "makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives," Justice Kennedy wrote. The harm went beyond humiliation, the court found. DOMA "raises the cost of health care for families by taxing health benefits provided by employers to their workers' same-sex spouses," Justice Kennedy wrote. "And it denies or reduces benefits allowed to families upon the loss of a spouse and parent, benefits that are an integral part of family security." By focusing on the rights of children, who aren't responsible for their parents' identity, Justice Kennedy went beyond his prior rulings upholding gay rights. This time, his ruling was grounded in concrete harms as well as abstract notions of equality. Same-sex marriage proponents previously have raised the benefits to children in state litigation. In 2009, for instance, the Iowa Supreme Court cited the interests of children of gay parents in holding that the state Constitution required recognition of same-sex marriage. Some states have sought to head off similar rulings by amending their state constitutions to explicitly bar same-sex marriage. While Wednesday's Supreme Court decision left intact laws in 35 states that forbid gay marriages, Justice Kennedy has now made the interest of children a factor when weighing whether laws disfavoring gays violate the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court previously has invalidated state laws that injured children as a way of expressing moral disapproval of their parents' behavior. In the 1960s, the court began to strike down laws that denied rights to children of unmarried couples. Louisiana, for example, had barred such children from suing over the wrongful death of a parent. A state court upheld that statute. "Denying illegitimate children the right to recover in such a case is actually based on morals and general welfare because it discourages bringing children into the world out of wedlock," it said. The Supreme Court disagreed. "Why should the illegitimate child be denied rights merely because of his birth out of wedlock?" Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the court. "We conclude that it is invidious to discriminate against them when no action, conduct, or demeanor of theirs is possibly relevant." Separately, same-sex marriages resumed in California on Friday afternoon following a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to lift the stay on the case after Wednesday's Supreme Court ruling. Write to Jess Bravin at jess.bravin@wsj.com Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8	1
Media caption, President Trump confirms he's prepared to shut down the government for months or yearsUS President Donald Trump has said he could declare a national emergency to build a US-Mexico border wall without the approval of Congress.It came after he met senior Democrats, who refused his requests for funding.The stand-off has seen Mr Trump withhold support for a bill to fully fund the government until he gets money for the border wall. He said he was prepared for the partial government shutdown - now in its third week - to last years.Around 800,000 federal workers have been without pay since 22 December.Trump aides and lawmakers will meet later on Saturday in a fresh bid to resolve the impasse. What happened in Friday's meeting with Democrats?The Republican president initially gave a positive account of the 90-minute meeting at the White House, describing it as "very productive".But when asked whether he had considered using emergency presidential powers to bypass congressional approval of funding, Mr Trump said he had."I may do it. We can call a national emergency and build it very quickly. That's another way of doing it."Image source, EPAImage caption, Democrats House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer walk out of the West Wing"I'm very proud of doing what I'm doing," the president added. "I don't call it a shutdown, I call it doing what you have to do for the benefit and safety of our country."House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday's meeting had been "contentious", while Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said: "We told the president we needed the government open. He resisted."Can Trump declare a national emergency?Anthony Zurcher, BBC News, WashingtonDonald Trump says he can declare a "national emergency" and build his promised wall along the border without congressional approval. If that's the case, the question becomes why he doesn't go ahead and do that. Why put federal workers through the pain of forgoing pay and hamstring key government agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, if he could bypass Democratic objections with the snap of his presidential fingers?The answer is because the solution isn't that simple. There are provisions of US law that allow the president to direct military construction projects during war or national emergency, but that money would have to come from Defence Department funds allocated by Congress for other purposes. Such a move may prompt Congress, including Republicans, to push back.Then there's the inevitable legal challenge from Democrats to such an exercise of presidential authority. Any presidential order to build a wall would be met by an equally imposing wall of court filings blocking its construction.The president's latest suggestions are best viewed as simply another attempt to gain the upper hand in negotiations with Democrats.This may not be a threat, more a bluff.What's the background?Democrats, who now hold the majority in the House, passed spending bills on Thursday to reopen the government, including $1.3bn (£1bn) of border security funds until 8 February.But the legislation cannot take effect unless it passes the Republican-controlled Senate, where leader Mitch McConnell said his party would not back any measure without the president's support.Media caption, Five historic moments as new US Congress opensThe Kentucky senator called the Democratic budget "a time-wasting act of political posturing".In Friday's news conference, Mr Trump also told reporters he might consider asking his cabinet to decline a $10,000 raise that is due to take effect because a pay freeze has expired as an inadvertent result of the shutdown.The fiscal fiasco began when Congress and Mr Trump failed to reach an agreement over a budget bill in December.Media caption, The return of the woman Republicans love to hateThe Republicans had passed an initial funding bill including $5bn (£4bn) for the wall, when they still had a majority in the House, but they could not get the necessary 60 votes in the 100-seat Senate. Two vulnerable Republican senators up for re-election in 2020 - Cory Gardner of Colorado and Susan Collins of Maine - have broken ranks to back approving the budget and ending the shutdown.The White House is again floating the idea of a deal for "Dreamers" - immigrants who illegally entered the US as children. Democrats want to ensure that these individuals are shielded from deportation, but have insisted that they will not support a deal over wall funding.Vice-President Mike Pence told Fox News the deal was being "talked about", but that Mr Trump said no deal was possible "without a wall".What does the partial shutdown mean?About 25% of the US federal government has no fundingNine departments have been affected, including Homeland Security, Justice, Housing, Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, and the TreasuryNative American tribes who receive substantial federal funding are strugglingNational Parks have become hazardous without staffMore on this story:More women than ever before won seats in Congress in the 2018 mid-terms.More on this story	1
BURLINGTON, Vt. (Reuters) - A resolute Bernie Sanders said on Wednesday he would stay in the Democratic presidential race despite a series of big losses to front-runner Joe Biden, promising to keep up the public pressure for his sweeping economic and social justice proposals.Sanders acknowledged falling behind the former vice president in the count of delegates needed to win the nomination, but said he remained committed to the overarching goal of defeating Republican President Donald Trump in November.“On Sunday night, in the first one-on-one debate of this campaign, the American people will have the opportunity to see which candidate is best positioned to accomplish that goal,” he told reporters.Biden, 77, and Sanders, 78, will debate in Phoenix on Sunday ahead of nominating contests next Tuesday in Arizona, Florida, Illinois and Ohio.On Tuesday, Biden notched decisive primary victories in Michigan and three other states, taking a big step toward the party’s nomination to take on Trump, 73, and casting doubt on the future of Sanders’ White House bid.Sanders - who won in North Dakota but had hoped for an upset victory in the key state of Michigan to boost his flagging chances - said his anti-corporate economic agenda was winning the ideological battle and gaining support from young people who are the country’s future.Many Democratic voters, however, still believe Biden has the best chance of beating Trump, Sanders said.“While our campaign has won the ideological debate, we are losing the debate over electability,” said the democratic socialist U.S. senator from Vermont.Sanders’ losses on Tuesday, coming after a series of Biden wins in last week’s Super Tuesday contests in 14 states, put Sanders in a deeper hole in the delegate count. Biden leads Sanders 786-645 in the race for the 1,991 delegates needed to clinch the nomination at July’s Democratic convention.Biden has already begun to look ahead to the November election, calling for party unity and making an appeal to supporters of Sanders.“We share a common goal, and together we are going to defeat Donald Trump,” Biden said in Philadelphia on Tuesday night, thanking Sanders and his supporters for their energy and passion.WAS ONCE FRONT-RUNNERJust two weeks ago, Sanders was seen as the front-runner after an impressive win in Nevada in mid-February, while Biden and the other moderate candidates split the vote of the party’s centrists.But Democrats who worried Sanders’ agenda would doom the party to defeat in November have rushed to rally around Biden. Biden’s decisive victories on Super Tuesday and in Tuesday’s showdown in Michigan created a growing sense of inevitability about his candidacy.Two of the largest Democratic super PACs said they would back Biden, and former rival Andrew Yang joined other former contenders like Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker in endorsing him.During his first presidential bid in 2016, Sanders’ battle with eventual winner Hillary Clinton lasted into June, long after the delegate math made her nomination inevitable.Sanders said he looked forward to advocating for his progressive agenda during the debate on Sunday, and previewed some of his questions for Biden.“Joe, what are you going to do to end the absurdity of the United States of America being the only major country on earth where healthcare is not a human right?” Sanders asked.“Joe, what are you going to do to end the absurdity of billionaires buying elections and the three wealthiest Americans owning more wealth than the bottom half of our people,” he said.The debate in Phoenix will not have an in-person audience because of health concerns over the coronavirus outbreak, which forced Sanders and Biden to cancel events in Cleveland on Tuesday. It was unclear how the pandemic might affect the campaign going forward.Biden planned to deliver remarks on Thursday on the issue, which he has characterized as a test of presidential leadership. His campaign canceled planned public events in Florida and Illinois and converted them into “virtual” campaign events to minimize health risks.Reporting by Michael Martina in Detroit, John Whitesides in Washington and Trevor Hunnicutt in Philadelphia; Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu, Ginger Gibson and Chris Kahn in Washington; Writing by John Whitesides; Editing by Scott Malone, Howard Goller and Peter Cooneyfor-phone-onlyfor-tablet-portrait-upfor-tablet-landscape-upfor-desktop-upfor-wide-desktop-up	1
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama authorized his administration to provide arms to rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, officials said Thursday, a major policy shift after the White House said it had confirmed that Damascus used chemical weapons in the country's civil war. The classified order directing the Central Intelligence Agency to coordinate arming the rebels in concert with its allies reverses a long-standing policy that limited the U.S. to providing nonlethal support. The White House declined to comment on the authorization, saying only that Mr. Obama had decided to ramp up "military support" to moderate rebels both in "scope and scale." U.S. officials also told The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that the U.S. military proposal for arming the rebels also calls for a limited no-fly zone inside Syria that would be enforced by U.S. and allied planes on Jordanian territory to protect Syrian refugees and rebels who would train there. Such a move, if the White House goes ahead, would represent a significantly bigger U.S. engagement in Syria's civil war. Syria in the SpotlightTrack the latest events in a map, see the key players and a chronology of the unrest. Related Coverage The developments followed a series of high level meetings at the White House and consultations with allies in which officials discussed the intelligence findings and proposals for arming the rebels. U.S. officials said the issue divided Mr. Obama's national security team but that the administration faced little choice other than to step up its support or risk watching as rebels lose still more ground to a resurgent Assad regime backed by Russia, Iran and soldiers from the militant Hezbollah group. Rebels requested specific weapons to hold off Mr. Assad's forces and Hezbollah fighters who are closing in on rebel positions in the city of Aleppo, the Journal reported Wednesday. The head of Syria's opposition Supreme Military Council, or SMC, issued a plea to U.S. officials and others for arms. Ben Rhodes, the White House Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications, said the U.S. has concluded that forces loyal to the Syrian regime have used chemical weapons against rebels, resulting in up to 150 deaths. The U.S. determination came the same day the United Nations reported that the number of deaths in the 27-month conflict has surpassed 90,000. The assessment on chemical weapons was based in part on laboratory analysis of physical samples taken from Syria, Mr. Rhodes said. He referred to the use of chemical weapons as a "red line" and said it has changed Mr. Obama's calculus about U.S. involvement in the conflict. In April, the White House notified Congress that U.S. intelligence agencies believed with "varying degrees of confidence" that Mr. Assad's forces had used chemical weapons, including sarin gas, in limited quantities. In the two months that followed, the U.S. came under heavy pressure from allies Britain and France to make a clear-cut determination. While U.S. officials initially voiced doubts, Britain and France said early on that they were more certain chemical weapons had been used. On Thursday, Mr. Rhodes said the U.S. now "has high confidence in that assessment given multiple, independent streams of information." The U.S. findings about chemical-weapons use were shared with Russia, part of a U.S. effort to get Moscow to cut support to Mr. Assad. The U.S. ramp-up will be a key issue at a gathering of leaders of the Group of 8 leading countries in Ireland next week. Mr. Rhodes highlighted four instances in which the U.S. believes chemical weapons were used: on March 19 in the Aleppo suburb of Khan Al-Asal; April 13 in the Aleppo neighborhood of Sheikh Maksud; May 14, in Qasr Abu Samra, which is north of Homs; and on May 23 in an attack in eastern Damascus. Officials said the White House has yet to decide what types of arms the U.S. will provide to the rebels. The rebels have asked for antitank missiles and antiaircraft weapons known as Manpads, as well as for large amounts of ammunition for small arms. U.S. officials have made clear the White House is unlikely to provide Manpads to the rebels because of concerns they could be turned against civilian aircraft. But the U.S. hasn't ruled out providing antitank weapons and small arms. Officials say European allies have expressed a willingness to provide Manpads and potentially other heavier weapons sought by rebels. "The red line has been crossed and now we are going to go ahead with arming the opposition," a senior U.S. official said. The move is an about-face by Mr. Obama, who last year blocked a proposal backed by then-Central Intelligence Agency Director David Petraeus and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to arm the rebels. At the time, Mr. Obama voiced concerns that arms could end up in the hands of Islamists battling Mr. Assad. But administration officials who favored providing arms said the White House believes it has a clearer picture today of the opposition and confidence that sufficient safeguards can be put in place to prevent U.S. weapons from reaching Islamist fighters aligned with al Qaeda. More important, officials say, the White House was moved by concerns that Mr. Assad's forces and thousands of Hezbollah fighters may be poised for an assault on Aleppo that would deal such a serious blow to moderate rebel forces that it will be hard for them to regroup and bounce back. U.S. officials say weapons and training will likely be delivered to the rebels inside Jordan, a key ally that has been overwhelmed by a flood of refugees from Syria and has offered the U.S. use of its bases to help set up a safe zone along the Syrian border. U.S. military planners, responding to a request by the White House to develop options for Syria, recommended the limited no-fly zone along the Syrian border to protect rebels and refugees inside Jordan. The plan would create what one official called a "no fighting zone" that would stretch up to 25 miles into Syrian territory along the Jordanian border, preventing Mr. Assad's forces from launching attacks against the rebels and refugees and protecting U.S. personnel involved in distributing weapons and providing training. Under this plan, the U.S. and its allies would enforce the zone using aircraft flown from Jordanian bases and flying inside the kingdom, according to U.S. officials. Jordan has been inundated by a flood of refugees that Jordanian and U.S. officials say is a growing threat to the kingdom, a key U.S. ally in the region. The U.S. has already moved Patriot air defense batteries and F-16 fighter planes to Jordan, which could be integral to any no-fly zone if Mr. Obama approves the military proposal. Proponents of the proposal think a no-fly zone could be imposed without a U.N. Security Council resolution, since the U.S. would not regularly enter Syrian airspace and wouldn't hold Syrian territory. U.S. planes have air-to-air missiles that could destroy Syrian planes from long ranges. But officials said that aircraft may be required to enter Syrian air space if threatened by advancing Syrian planes. Such an incursion by the U.S., if it were to happen, could be justified as self-defense, officials say. Creating even a limited buffer zone that Syrian airplanes cannot enter will be expensive, costing an estimated $50 million a day, officials said. Republican lawmakers were quick to praise the increase in aid. Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain of Arizona said in a joint statement: "The president's red line has been crossed. U.S. credibility is on the line. Now is not the time to merely take the next incremental step. Now is the time for more decisive actions." Write to Adam Entous at adam.entous@wsj.com and Julian E. Barnes at julian.barnes@wsj.com Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8	1
President TrumpDonald TrumpHillicon Valley — Cyberattack hits Ukrainian defense On The Money — GOP senators block Biden's Fed picks Florida county clerk's typo directed ticketed drivers to site selling Trump merchandise MORE's decision to block an overseas fact-finding trip planned by Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiOregon Democrat violates conflicts-of-interest law, failing to report stock trades by deadline Pelosi leading congressional delegation to Israel, Germany, UK Feehery: Washington's biggest scandal MORE (D-Calif.) and other Democrats has intensified a showdown between two of Washington’s most powerful figures over a partial federal government shutdown with no end in sight.Trump's stunning decision on Thursday to cancel the military plane scheduled to shuttle the Democrats to Brussels and Afghanistan was widely viewed as retaliation for Pelosi’s effort, just a day earlier, to postpone the president’s Jan. 29 State of the Union address until the government is reopened.Borrowing language from Pelosi’s own proposal, Trump said the Democrats can take their trip when the spending impasse has ended.“We will reschedule this seven-day excursion when the shutdown is over,” Trump wrote to Pelosi. “I also feel that, during this period, it would be better if you were in Washington negotiating with me and joining the Strong Border Security movement to end the shutdown.”The maneuver drew immediate howls from Democrats — and even some Republicans — who lamented the near-collapse of comity between the two parties and expressed deep concerns about how the sides will find the common ground to end what has evolved into the longest government closure in the nation’s history. Amid the finger-pointing over which party is to blame, the messages quickly devolved into acrimonious personal insults.“All too often in the last two years the president has acted like he is in the fifth grade,” said Rep. Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffPelosi leading congressional delegation to Israel, Germany, UK Trump Jan. 6 comments renew momentum behind riot probe Mask rules spark political games and a nasty environment in the House MORE (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who was poised to go on the trip.“To have someone who has that kind of character running the country is an enormous problem at every level.”Ambling through the Capitol, House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerWhite House director of broadcast media leaving for private sector Pelosi won't say if she'll run for Speaker again if Democrats win: 'That's not a question' Questions loom over how to form congressional staff union MORE (D-Md.) appeared disgusted, saying Trump’s decision “demeans the presidency.” And Rep. Dan KildeeDaniel (Dan) Timothy KildeeHouse Democrats warn delay will sink agenda Overnight Energy & Environment — Biden tries to reverse Trump on power plants 23 House Democrats call for Biden to keep full climate funds in Build Back Better MORE (D-Mich.) characterized the move as "petty, childish and counterproductive."“She's doing her duty as a senior member of the United States government, and the fact that the president would think that's not important because he's going to have another temper tantrum is just another indication just how dangerous this psychologically unfit person is to hold that office,” Kildee told The Hill.“This is not good."Trump, in his letter, characterized Pelosi’s trip as a “public relations event,” inviting the Democrats to resume their travel plans on commercial flights.“That would certainly be your prerogative,” he wrote.The message fits a familiar mold for a president with notoriously thin skin who doesn’t take kindly to criticism. His targets have transcended party and profession, to include Democrats, Republicans, the media, celebrities and just about anyone else who challenges his actions. The common theme is this: If you whack me, I’ll whack back harder.The Democrats were not alone in criticizing Trump’s response. Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamThe conservative case for nominating a Black woman to the Supreme Court The Hill's Morning Report - World poised for war Anxious Democrats want Biden to speed up vetting for Supreme Court pick MORE (R-S.C.), a Trump ally, said it was “inappropriate” for Trump to postpone Pelosi’s visit with the troops. But Graham also reserved plenty of fire for the Democrats.“One sophomoric response does not deserve another,” Graham said in a statement.Other Republicans offered support for Trump's response, arguing he was fully within his rights and that Pelosi should be in Washington to work toward an end to the shutdown. Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio) argued it was one thing for Trump to travel to Iraq to visit U.S. troops during the shutdown and another for Pelosi to do so."I think the president of the United States represents the entire country as commander in chief. I think if he wants to speak to the troops, that it certainly honors our entire nation," Turner told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in an interview. "I think Nancy Pelosi's been elected from a small portion of San Francisco. She should be behind her desk right now working diligently to open this government, close the border, and not pursue the open border policies she has, and make certain that we can move forward."Trump’s decision marked the first formal response from the White House to Pelosi’s own entreaty, delivered to the White House Wednesday morning, to delay the State of the Union address until the government is fully funded. Pelosi noted that the Homeland Security Department and Secret Service are both affected by the partial shutdown, expressing concerns about security risks surrounding the president’s high-profile annual speech.Republicans pounced, accusing Pelosi of seeking to deny Trump an enormous national platform to make the case for his border wall — the source of the spending impasse — during the shutdown. Pelosi, for her part, rejected that characterization on Thursday morning.“I’m not denying the platform at all,” she told reporters in the Capitol. “We’re saying let’s get a date when government is open. Let’s pay the employees.”Trump’s letter, which arrived several hours after Pelosi’s remarks, appeared to be timed for maximum impact.A handful of Democrats were already aboard a U.S. Air Force bus outside the Longworth Office Building on Capitol Hill, waiting to be shuttled to Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington for a flight to Brussels. After meeting with NATO commanders and U.S. military leaders in the Belgian capital, the lawmakers were scheduled to continue on to Afghanistan, where they would visit with troops and “obtain critical national security and intelligence briefings from those on the front lines,” according to Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill.When it became clear the trip was not happening, a number of those Democrats — including Reps. Schiff; Eliot EngelEliot Lance EngelLawmakers pay tribute to Colin Powell NYC snafu the latest flub from a broken elections agency Cynthia Nixon backs primary challenger to Rep. Carolyn Maloney MORE (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; and Mark TakanoMark Allan TakanoToxic-exposed veterans have held up their part of the pact — now it's our turn This week: Democrats set for showdown on voting rights, filibuster Key House chairman wants to lead official trip to Taiwan in January MORE (D-Calif.), who chairs the Veterans’ Affairs panel — gathered in Pelosi’s office in the Capitol to discuss next steps. Engel, in cargo pants, appeared to be dressed in preparation for a long flight.Over the next six hours, with a bank of cameras and dozens of reporters outside her office, Pelosi never emerged. Instead, Schiff addressed the press, with sharp words for Trump and an elusive message about the Democrats’ response that could have been interpreted to mean that Pelosi was still seeking ways to take her trip.“We’re not going to allow the President of the United States to tell the Congress it can’t fulfill its oversight responsibilities, it can’t ensure that our troops have what they need whether our government is open or closed,” Schiff said.“As far as we can tell, this has never happened in the annals of congressional history,” he continued. “But at the end of the day, we’re determined our oversight will continue no matter what the president’s actions are.”As the Democrats plotted in Pelosi’s office, another power-meeting was happening across the Capitol, where Vice President Pence and Jared KushnerJared Corey KushnerTrump creates new Jan. 6 headaches for GOP Donald Trump slams Jan. 6 panel after Ivanka Trump interview request: 'They'll go after children' Kushner investment firm raises more than B: report MORE were huddling with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellGOP scrambles to figure out what Trump legal drama means for future Senate leaders send Putin symbolic warning shot amid invasion fears GOP boycotts Biden Fed nominees' vote as bank fights inflation MORE (R-Ky.), who’s facing increasing pressure from moderate Republican senators to open the government and then negotiate border security — the same message Pelosi and the Democrats are airing.Pence and Kushner did not comment upon leaving the meeting.What happens next remains unclear. Pelosi did not rescind her State of the Union invitation to Trump in her letter this week. Instead, she suggested that — “unless government reopens this week” — the pair “work together to determine another suitable date after government has reopened.”But House lawmakers left the Capitol Thursday for the long holiday weekend without ending the impasse, leading to plenty of speculation about Pelosi’s next move. It became clear late Thursday that any such announcement wouldn’t come before Friday.“Go home,” Hammill told reporters still lingering outside Pelosi’s office Thursday night. “You’re not going to get anything else from us today.”	1
By Max Greenwood - 01/23/17 08:42 PM EST © Getty Images The Obama administration sent $221 million to the Palestinian Authority on Friday as President Obama prepared to leave the White House for the last time, The Associated Press reports.The outgoing administration formally notified Congress of the decision just hours before President Trump was inaugurated.Congress had initially approved the spending. But two House Republicans, Reps. Ed Royce (Calif.), who serves as the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay GrangerNorvell (Kay) Kay Granger Negotiators reach 'breakthrough' in government funding talks House passes stopgap bill to prevent shutdown Lawmakers say spending deal up to leaders MORE (Texas), who is on the powerful Appropriations Committee, put holds on the aid money because the Palestinian Authority was seeking membership in international organizations.Former Secretary of State John KerryJohn KerryWhy not try a different path to defend Ukraine? Largest companies' 'net-zero' promises avoid meaningful, immediate cuts: analysis Coming soon: Climate lockdowns? MORE notified some lawmakers about the decision to release the money on Thursday, the AP reports.The $221 million sent to the Palestinian Authority is intended to provide humanitarian aid in ares such as Gaza and the West Bank, as well as to support political reforms there.The Obama administration also notified lawmakers on Friday that it would release $6 million in foreign spending, with $4 million of it going to programs to fight climate change and $1.25 million to United Nations organizations.Trump has voiced skepticism about climate change in the past and has criticized the U.N. The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006 \| 202-628-8500 tel \| 202-628-8503 faxThe contents of this site are © 1998 - 2022 Nexstar Media Inc. \| All Rights Reserved.	1
Progressive allies of Rep. Ilhan OmarIlhan OmarBlack women lawmakers commend Biden on commitment for Supreme Court nominee Congressional Black Caucus members press DOJ on voting rights: 'No lawsuit is too trivial' Omar seeking third term in Congress MORE (D-Minn.) are rushing to her defense as the House prepares to approve a resolution condemning anti-Semitism that is largely seen as a rebuke of the outspoken lawmaker’s remarks about Israel.Omar’s progressive allies largely stayed quiet during other recent controversies regarding Israel, which led to an apology from Omar.But this time, Omar is holding her ground, and supporters such as fellow progressive freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezThe Hill's Morning Report - Russia-Ukraine waiting game Ocasio-Cortez laments 'sh-- show' of Congress Sanders endorses Jessica Cisneros over sitting Democratic lawmaker MORE (D-N.Y.) are speaking out.Ocasio-Cortez said advancing a resolution to rebuke Omar should have only been done as a last resort if efforts to address the remarks privately didn’t work. “ ‘Calling out’ is one of the measures of last resort, not 1st or 2nd resort,” she wrote in a tweet on Tuesday. “We do it when repeated attempts to ‘call in’ are disrespected or ignored. And I believe that Ilhan, in her statement a few weeks ago, has demonstrated a willingness to listen+work w/impacted communities.”Progressive Rep. Rashida TlaibRashida Harbi TlaibOmar seeking third term in Congress Democrats press cryptomining companies on energy consumption Overnight Energy & Environment — Biden announces green buildings initiative MORE (D-Mich.), who with Omar is one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, also tweeted that her fellow freshman is “being targeted just like many civil rights icons before us who spoke out about oppressive policies.”The House resolution, which could receive a vote as soon as Wednesday, does not mention Omar at all. But it was thrown together after she accused people who back Israel of pushing allegiance to a foreign country.“I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” Omar said at an event last week at Washington, D.C.’s Busboys and Poets restaurant. “I want to ask, why is it OK for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, of fossil fuel industries, or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobby that is influencing policy?”The resolution states that the House “rejects anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States.”Ocasio-Cortez suggested there was a double standard for rebuking lawmakers with votes on resolutions.“One of the things that is hurtful about the extent to which reprimand is sought of Ilhan is that no one seeks this level of reprimand when members make statements about Latinx + other communities (during the shutdown, a GOP member yelled ‘Go back to Puerto Rico!’ on the floor),” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted, referring to an incident in January when Rep. Jason SmithJason Thomas SmithOvernight Health Care — Biden eyes additional COVID-19 funding Biden administration eyes billion for COVID-19 funding in talks with Congress Republican rep won't run for Senate, hopes to become Ways and Means chair: report MORE (R-Mo.) yelled “Go back to Puerto Rico!” at Rep. Tony Cárdenas (D-Calif.). Smith later apologized and claimed he was referring to a House Democratic delegation to Puerto Rico during the shutdown.This isn’t the first time Omar has faced accusations of anti-Semitism.In January, she expressed regret over a 2012 tweet amid the Gaza war stating, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”Last month, Omar suggested that U.S. lawmakers defending Israel are motivated by campaign donations, tweeting, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” Omar later apologized under pressure from House Democratic leaders. Two days later, the House adopted a measure from Rep. David KustoffDavid Frank KustoffHouse GOP seek to block Biden from reopening Palestinian mission in Jerusalem READ: The Republicans who voted to challenge election results Lobbying world MORE (R-Tenn.) to condemn anti-Semitism as part of a resolution to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led military campaign in Yemen. That resolution also didn’t specifically mention Omar, who voted for it.This time, Omar has defended herself.When House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita LoweyNita Sue LoweyTwo women could lead a powerful Senate spending panel for first time in history Lobbying world Progressives fight for leverage amid ever-slimming majority MORE (D-N.Y.), who is Jewish, criticized her remarks, Omar wrote on Twitter, “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee.”In response, the Anti-Defamation League expressed support for a resolution condemning anti-Semitism.Other, more liberal groups have taken a different tack.J Street, which describes itself as a “pro-Israel, pro-peace” advocacy group, issued a statement on Tuesday endorsing the effort to rebuke anti-Semitism but questioned the effectiveness of targeting Omar. “At the same time, we are concerned that the timing of the resolution will be seen as singling out and focusing special condemnation on a Muslim woman of color — as if her views and insensitive comments pose a greater threat than the torrent of hatred that the white nationalist right continues to level against Jews, Muslims, people of color and other vulnerable minority groups in our country,” J Street said in the statement. “By narrowly focusing on progressive critics of Israeli policy and the politics surrounding Israel-related issues, much of our current debate bears little relation to the reality of anti-Semitism in the United States today. This plays directly into the hands of the president and his allies, who act in bad faith to weaponize the debate for political gain,” J Street’s statement added.IfNotNow, a Jewish progressive activist group, started a petition urging Democratic leaders to withdraw the resolution, arguing the focus should be on white nationalism. A coalition of Muslim and left-leaning Jewish advocacy groups also plan to hold a press conference on Wednesday in support of Omar and urge Democratic leaders to “equally condemn” anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and racism.Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerAmerican unity is key to a Europe whole and free Anxious Democrats want Biden to speed up vetting for Supreme Court pick Democratic Senate debates merits of passion vs. pragmatism MORE (D-N.Y.) called Omar’s comments “wrong and hurtful,” but also called for condemning Islamophobia. An altercation broke out last week over the display of a poster at the West Virginia Statehouse linking Omar to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.“I also want to say that what happened linking all Muslims to the terrorist attack was wrong and hurtful and both should be condemned,” Schumer said.Conservative-leaning groups focused on Israel and GOP lawmakers have called for Omar’s removal from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but Democrats are signaling they have no plans to do so.Rep. Gerry ConnollyGerald (Gerry) Edward ConnollyOvernight Energy & Environment — Postal Service faces ire over vehicle plans Democrats press postmaster to go with electric vehicles Former Washington football team staffers detail sexual harassment, humiliation, racism to House panel MORE (D-Va.), a fellow House Foreign Affairs Committee member, pointed out that Republicans never removed former Rep. Dana RohrabacherDana Tyrone RohrabacherNow someone wants to slap a SPACE Tax on Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, et al 'Blue wave' Democrats eye comebacks after losing reelection Former Rep. Rohrabacher says he took part in Jan. 6 march to Capitol but did not storm building MORE (R-Calif.) from the panel despite his pro-Russia views that many disagreed with.At the same time, Connolly thinks Democratic leadership’s decision to pass the resolution in response to Omar is appropriate.“I’m not Jewish. And I’m not a member of AIPAC. And I’m offended. You don’t have to be Jewish to take offense at age-old tropes and stereotypes that led to some horrible things in the 20th century,” Connolly said Tuesday. Connolly said the current calls to reconsider Omar’s seat on the Foreign Affairs Committee could potentially grow louder if she sparks yet more controversy. “Should it happen again, I think that will be a topic of conversation,” Connolly said. Other Democrats warned the body was coming close to equating speaking against the Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to anti-Semitism. “Voting to condemn antisemitism is fine, even if you feel compelled to do it twice. But I worry that accusation is a way to kill all debate about policy regarding Israel,” tweeted Sen. Brian SchatzBrian Emanuel SchatzThe Hill's 12:30 Report: Negotiations crawl as government funding deadline nears Democrats hit limits with Luján's absence Luján stroke jolts 50-50 Senate MORE (D-Hawaii), who is Jewish. “And folks need some new, non-inflammatory language to be supportive of Israel but opposed to Bibi’s policies,” Schatz added, referring to Netanyahu.Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyOn The Money — GOP senators block Biden's Fed picks Negotiators make progress in fiscal 2022 spending talks Democrats show little appetite for Biden's call for gun control MORE (D-Conn.) suggested Twitter was the problem.“We should set as a predicate that we all support a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, and there’s probably lots of disagreement amongst members of Congress as to the elements of that,” Murphy told reporters. “Twitter and social media is not a great place to make much of this, which seems to be where a lot of the debate is happening these days.”Jordain Carney contributed.	1
(Reuters) - A candidate backed by U.S. President Donald Trump convincingly won a two-man Republican primary run-off for governor of Georgia on Tuesday in a race that became a proxy battle between the president and the state’s popular Republican governor, Nathan Deal.Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, whose hard line campaign approach dovetailed with Trump’s, was projected to defeat Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle, who had the endorsement of Deal, local media reported.Kemp earned the president’s backing last week, a surprise endorsement that analysts said gave him an edge in a race between the two conservatives.Kemp thanked Trump for his support in a speech accepting his victory.“We had the momentum in this race and those endorsements by the president and the vice president, they poured gasoline on the fire and fueled the Kemp surge to victory,” he told supporters.With about 90 percent of the votes reported, Kemp was backed by 69 percent of the Republican voters against Cagle’s 31 percent.Kemp will face Democrat Stacey Abrams, who is vying to become the first black woman to serve as a U.S. state governor in what is expected to be one of the most hotly contested races in November’s midterm elections.Trump carried Georgia by 5 percentage points in 2016.Cagle, 52, bested Kemp, 55, by 13 points in the first round of the Republican primary in May, though none of the candidates at the time won more than 50 percent of the vote, setting up a run-off election.Cagle’s support diminished, however, after secret recordings surfaced where he acknowledged supporting a bill he called “bad public policy” to undercut a rival in the race and said the primary appeared to be a contest to see who could be “craziest.”That last comment likely referred to Kemp’s political advertisements. In one, he sat in room full of guns with a shotgun on his lap while saying jokingly that a teenage boy with him should support the right to carry arms if he wanted to date his daughter and, in a second spot, promised to “round up” illegal immigrants in his pick-up truck.Deal, who cannot run again due to term limits, endorsed Cagle last week.Kemp tweeted on July 18 that would “unapologetically stand” with Trump.Both candidates embraced Trump and have similar policy positions, including support for gun rights and tough anti-illegal immigration measures.Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Leslie Adler and Christian Schmollingerfor-phone-onlyfor-tablet-portrait-upfor-tablet-landscape-upfor-desktop-upfor-wide-desktop-up	1
ORLANDO, Fla. (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Thursday met survivors of a massacre at an Orlando gay nightclub and relatives of the 49 people killed and said the United States must act to control gun violence and fight what he called homegrown terrorism.“I held and hugged grieving family members and parents, and they asked, ‘Why does this keep happening?’,” Obama told reporters, before urging Congress to pass measures to make it harder to legally acquire high-powered weapons like the semi-automatic rifle used in the attack on Sunday.“I’m pleased to hear that the Senate will hold votes on preventing individuals with possible terrorist ties from buying guns,” he said.Obama and Vice President Joe Biden arrived in Orlando, Florida, four days after a U.S.-born gunman claiming allegiance to various Islamist militant groups carried out the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.During the shooting rampage the gunman, Omar Mateen, exchanged text messages with his wife, it was reported on Thursday, as well as posting on Facebook and placing a phone call to a television station. Police killed Mateen, 29, a U.S. citizen born in New York to Afghan immigrants.Obama, who has visited mass shooting victims’ families in towns from San Bernardino, California, to Newtown, Connecticut, since he has been president, laid flowers at a memorial for the victims of the attack on the Pulse nightclub.Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack but U.S. officials have said they do not believe Mateen was assisted from abroad. CIA Director John Brennan told a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Thursday that the agency had “not been able to uncover any direct link” between Mateen and militants abroad.A married couple also claiming allegiance to Islamic State shot dead 14 people in San Bernardino, California, in December.ORLANDO MOURNSWakes were held on Thursday for at least four victims - Kimberly Morris, Anthony Luis Laureano Disla, Eric Ivan Ortiz-Rivera and Roy Fernandez, as Orlando braced for what was expected to be two weeks of somber events.More than 300 people, including Florida Governor Rick Scott, came to the viewing for Ortiz-Rivera, who was born in Dorado, Puerto Rico. He was 36 when he was killed during a night of dancing to celebrate a friend’s new house - his husband had stayed home that night in the couple’s apartment.“He was in a Snapchat video that’s out there, dancing away, so we know he had some fun before the madness,” said his cousin, Orlando Gonzalez.Twenty-three of the 53 wounded remained hospitalized, six in critical condition, according to the Orlando Regional Medical Center.One of Mateen’s Facebook messages during the attack, apparently referring to air strikes against Islamic State by the United States and its allies, said: “You kill innocent women and children by doing us air strikes ... now taste the Islamic State vengeance,” according to U.S. Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson, who asked Facebook to turn over material from Mateen’s accounts.CNN reported, citing a law enforcement official it did not identify, that Mateen had also exchanged text messages with his wife, Noor Salman, during the three hours he was holed up in a bathroom inside the nightclub. Salman is under investigation to find out whether she knew about Mateen’s plans ahead of time.Florida news website TCPalm reported that Mateen, who worked as a security guard, was frequently suspended while he was in junior high and high school, and was passed to the next grade despite poor academic performance. It cited records from St. Lucie County schools.CONGRESS UNDER PRESSUREThe attack sparked a new debate over how the United States responds to Islamist militant violence at home and abroad, with Republican Senator John McCain telling reporters on Thursday he viewed Obama as “directly responsible” for the Orlando attack because of his failure to prevent the rise of Islamic State.Shortly afterward, McCain said on his official Twitter feed that he was referring to Obama’s national security decisions, “not to the President himself.”Mateen carried out the slaughter with an assault weapon and handgun that had been legally purchased although he had twice been investigated by the FBI for possible connections with militant Islamist groups.Obama reiterated his frustration over the failure of Congress to pass any gun control measures in more than two decades. The massacre put pressure on Congress to act.After a marathon of speeches by Democrats on Wednesday and into the early hours of Thursday, a Democratic senator said Republicans had agreed to hold votes on measures to expand background checks and prevent people on U.S. terrorism watch lists from buying guns.No formal deal between the parties for votes was announced, and it was unclear when and how the Senate would proceed with the votes, which would be amendments to an appropriations bill funding the Commerce and Justice departments. Even if votes are scheduled, it is unclear whether any of the bills could gain enough support to pass the Senate.Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said the chamber would most likely vote on four gun control measures on Monday.Republicans, who currently hold a 54-person majority in the 100-seat Senate, have blocked a number of Democratic-backed gun control measures over the years, saying they infringed on Americans’ constitutional right to bear arms.Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump also joined the gun debate, announcing on Wednesday he would meet the National Rifle Association to talk about barring people who are on terrorism watch lists from buying guns.Additional reporting by Julia Harte and Peter Eisler in Orlando, Patricia Zengerle and Jonathan Landay in Washington and Zachary Fagenson in West Palm Beach, Florida; Writing by Scott Malone; Editing by Howard Goller, Peter Cooney and Paul Taitfor-phone-onlyfor-tablet-portrait-upfor-tablet-landscape-upfor-desktop-upfor-wide-desktop-up	1
Trump Picks Heather Nauert, Former Fox News Anchor, As U.N. Ambassador State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert speaks during a briefing last year. President Trump announced Friday that Nauert is his choice as the next ambassador to the United Nations. Alex Brandon/AP hide caption toggle caption Alex Brandon/AP State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert speaks during a briefing last year. President Trump announced Friday that Nauert is his choice as the next ambassador to the United Nations. Alex Brandon/AP Updated on Friday at 2:44 p.m. ET. From Fox & Friends to the State Department, and now likely to the United Nations. President Trump says he will nominate Heather Nauert, the State Department spokeswoman and a former Fox News host, to become the next ambassador to the U.N. "She's very talented, very smart, very quick, and I think she's going to be respected by all, so Heather Nauert will be nominated for the ambassador to the United Nations," Trump told reporters Friday. If confirmed by the Senate, Nauert will replace Nikki Haley, who is leaving the post at the end of the year. Nauert was camera-ready when she came to the State Department in April 2017, having worked at ABC and Fox. She never traveled with and was not close to her first boss at the department, former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. With Mike Pompeo in charge of State, Nauert has been on the road much more. Yet she faced some criticism for a tourist-like Instagram post from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on a trip that was meant to focus on the killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. Nauert (left) and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speak with reporters while flying from Panama to Mexico on Oct. 18. Brendan Smialowski/Pool/AP hide caption toggle caption Brendan Smialowski/Pool/AP Nauert (left) and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speak with reporters while flying from Panama to Mexico on Oct. 18. Brendan Smialowski/Pool/AP There have been other missteps, including the time when she cited D-Day — the Allied invasion of Normandy against the Nazis — as an example of America's strong relationship with Germany. She has been a strong defender of Trump's at the podium, something he has clearly noticed. "She's excellent, she's been with us a long time, she's been a supporter for a long time," Trump told reporters on Nov. 1. The State Department used to hold daily briefings. That has been scaled back to two a week, at most. Nauert, 48, has been back and forth between her husband and two sons in New York and her job in Washington, D.C. Before joining the Trump administration, she had no government or foreign policy experience, though she did work on some overseas assignments for ABC, including in Baghdad.	1
Former presidential candidate Tom Steyer spoke at his Get Out the Vote rally in Columbia, S.C., on Friday, the day before the Democratic primary. Photo: mark makela/Reuters Updated Feb. 29, 2020 9:49 pm ET Tom Steyer, the billionaire environmental activist and San Francisco hedge-fund founder, said he is ending his Democratic presidential bid after pouring more than $250 million of his personal fortune into it. “I said if I didn’t see a path to winning that I’d suspend my campaign, and honestly, I can’t see a path where I can win the presidency,” Mr. Steyer said late Saturday, after coming in third in South Carolina’s primary, where he had spent much of his time and resources. He added that he would support whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee. Mr. Steyer, 62 years old, has never held political office and began his long-shot campaign in July, launching a well-funded barrage of advertising calling President Trump unfit for office and sounding the alarm on climate change. But in November, an even wealthier billionaire entered the race and began outspending him. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg had spent more than double Mr. Steyer’s campaign investment by the end of January. Mr. Steyer largely ignored the first few primary states and staked his candidacy on South Carolina, where he concentrated most of his time and won the backing of several prominent African-American local lawmakers. He spent about $22 million on TV and radio ads in the state—more than eight times as much as the next-highest spender, according to ad tracker Kantar/CMAG. Mr. Bloomberg has focused on states that vote in March. Nationally, Mr. Steyer’s campaign also spent much more than all of the Democrats in the race except for Mr. Bloomberg, Federal Election Commission reports show. But all that money wasn’t enough to help him break through. He averaged about 2.5% in national polls in late February, RealClear Politics shows. In the decade before he became a presidential candidate, Mr. Steyer’s generous spending on political candidates and groups supporting stricter environmental policies and his efforts to increase youth voter turnout made him one of the Democratic Party’s top donors. Those efforts and a self-financed TV campaign advocating the impeachment of Mr. Trump added up to about $350 million over the years, The Wall Street Journal found. —Sabrina Siddiqui contributed to this article. Write to Julie Bykowicz at julie.bykowicz@wsj.com Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8	1

End of preview. Expand in Data Studio

This is a copy of the "valurank/PoliticalBias_AllSides_Txt" dataset. This is just private repo for my use. I just read all the text files and made them into a csv file. Nothing is different apart from that.

Dataset Card for news-12factor

Dataset Description

~20k articles labeled left, right, or center by the editors of allsides.com.

Languages

The text in the dataset is in English

Dataset Structure

3 folders, with many text files in each. Each text file represent the body text of one article.

Source Data

URL data was scraped using https://github.com/mozilla/readability

Annotations

Articles were manually annotated by news editors who were attempting to select representative articles from the left, right and center of each article topic. In other words, the dataset should generally be balanced - the left/right/center articles cover the same set of topics, and have roughly the same amount of articles in each.

Downloads last month: 299

Size of downloaded dataset files:

39.6 MB

Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:

63 MB

Number of rows:

17,362