Rep. Matt Gaetz said it would play to the “president’s advantage” to have his top administration officials testify in the upcoming impeachment hearings.
A team from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) based in Austria said climate change not only resulted in higher temperatures but is also producing more severe climatic events such as drought, heatwaves and floods. "Climatic shocks to agricultural production contribute to food price spikes and famine, with the potential to trigger other systemic risks, including political unrest and migration," IIASA lead author Franziska Gaupp said.
The gunman was a Saudi national living in the US as an aviation student. 'Nonimmigrant aliens' are typically barred from buying guns.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a novel case by Arizona seeking to recover billions of dollars that the state has said that members of the Sackler family - owners of Purdue Pharma LP - funneled out of the OxyContin maker before the company filed for bankruptcy in September. The justices declined to take the rare step of allowing Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich to pursue a case directly with the Supreme Court on the role the drugmaker played in the U.S. opioid epidemic that has killed tens of thousands of Americans annually in recent years. The lawsuit accused eight Sackler family members of funneling $4 billion out of Purdue from 2008 to 2016 despite being aware that the company faced massive potential liabilities over its marketing of opioid medications.
Migrants are embracing acupuncture treatments while living in dangerous Mexican border towns as they await their immigration court date in the U.S.
A Uighur woman living in the Netherlands has gone public about helping to leak secret Chinese government documents regarding human rights abuses in China’s Xinjiang province because of fears for her safety. Asiye Abdulaheb told Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant that she was involved in last month’s leak of papers to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), which highlighted the Chinese government's crackdown on Muslims in Xinjiang. The reveal, which followed an earlier document leak to the New York Times, showed how the Chinese government has indoctrinated and punished over a million Muslims, mainly members of the Uighur ethnic minority, in internment camps. Ms Abdulaheb, 46, told the New York Times that she went public to dissuade Chinese authorities from harming her, her ex-husband Jasur Abibula and the former couple’s two children. She said that after tweeting an excerpt from the documents in June she received a message on Facebook saying: “If you don’t stop, you’ll end up cut into pieces in the black trash can in front of your doorway.” Ms Abdulaheb and Mr Abibula are Dutch citizens and have lived in the Netherlands since 2009. Ms Abdulaheb said she had worked in a government office in Xinjiang, and was sent the secret documents electronically by an unnamed source or sources in June. Mr Abibula was convinced by a Xinjiang-based friend to travel to Dubai in September where, according to Ms Abdulaheb, he was met by Chinese security officials. They allegedly questioned him for days and attempted to convince him to help them hack his ex-wife’s computer. “I thought that this thing has to be made public,” Ms Abdulaheb said. “The Chinese police would definitely find us. The people in Dubai had told my ex-husband, ‘We know about all your matters. We have a lot of people in the Netherlands.’” Beijing dismissed the documents as “fake news”, claiming that the internment camps were “re-education centres” built to quell terrorism. On 3 December the US House of Representatives passed the Uighur Act of 2019 bill, which could lead to sanctions on Chinese officials involved in the abuses.
In early October, Elizabeth Warren hit her stride. Her stock in the Democratic primary had been climbing steadily since midsummer, and as Joe Biden continued to lag, the Massachusetts senator became the first presidential hopeful to overtake him as front-runner in the RealClearPolitics polling average.She’s been in free fall ever since.Warren now sits at just 14.8 percent in the RCP average, in third place behind Bernie Sanders, with about half the support Biden has. The former vice president has lost a step or two (or several) since his time as Obama’s right-hand man, but it’s looking less and less likely that Warren will be the Democrat to supplant him as the party’s favorite heading into 2020’s early primaries.For media observers who have been pulling for Warren from the start of her campaign, there can be only one plausible explanation for her fall from grace: sexism.On November 10, after Biden attacked Warren’s Medicare for All plan and her campaign shot back, saying the former vice president was using GOP talking points against her, Biden released a statement saying Warren’s response was reflective of an “angry unyielding viewpoint.” Warren’s defenders have latched on to the phrase as evidence that Biden — along with voters who have declined to back Warren — is guilty of sexism.“The Sexism Is Getting Sneakier” was the headline of one article in the Atlantic on the subject, in which the author mused:> Anger, rendered as a criticism . . . is a targeted missile, seeking the spaces in the American mind that still assume there is something unseemly about an angry woman. It is attempting to tap into the dark and ugly history in which the anger displayed by a woman is assumed to compromise her—to render her unattractive precisely because the anger makes her uncontrollable.The Washington Post’s analysis of the incident ran under the headline “Is Elizabeth Warren ‘angry’ and antagonistic? Or are rivals dabbling in gendered criticism?” The authors suggested that charges against Warren “get at something far beyond her policy positions, and into one of the most fraught areas for a female candidate: Is she likable?”The New York Times report noted that “by calling Warren’s approach ‘condescending,’ ‘angry’ and elitist, Biden and his allies are making a risky case against a female candidate.” An opinion article in Essence magazine put it much more bluntly: “Only Sexist Men Take Issue with Elizabeth Warren’s Justified Anger.”Though Warren brushed off questions about Biden’s use of “angry,” she seems more than willing to use rhetoric about sexism to her advantage. When Kamala Harris exited the race in early December, Warren’s campaign took the occasion to send a fundraising email reading, “Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand — two women senators who, together, won more than 11.5 million votes in their last elections — have been forced out of this race, while billionaires Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg have been allowed to buy their way in.”It turns out that Warren supporters were laying the groundwork to defend her with an argument about pervasive sexism even before her rise and fall. “‘A Woman, Just Not That Woman’: How Sexism Plays Out on the Trail” was the headline of a Times piece in February. “Reluctance to support female candidates is apparent in the language that voters frequently use to describe men and women running for office; in the qualities that voters say they seek; and in the perceived flaws that voters say they are willing or unwilling to overlook in candidates,” the author asserted.“Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton and the sexist hypocrisy of the ‘likability’ media narrative. Here we go again” was the contribution from an NBC News opinion article, which claimed that only female candidates are subjected to criticism of their appearance and tone. In September, a Democratic strategist said that supporting Sanders over Warren is “showing your sexism.”But if sexism really were to blame, why would Warren have spent several months as the race’s second front-runner, in close contention with Biden? What few on the left appear to have considered is the possibility that Warren’s policy positions and recent blunders bear the most responsibility for her declining popularity.Over the last several months, Warren has stumbled — and not because voters discovered she’s a woman.There was this report puncturing her narrative about having faced pregnancy discrimination. There was her false response to a question about whether her children had ever attended private school. And there was her repeated refusal, during the last debate before her Medicare for All rollout, to say whether her plan would raise taxes on the middle class, along with her subsequent falsehood that it would not.But the best explanation for Warren’s decline is her Medicare for All plan itself, and her drop in the polls is clearly correlated with its rollout. As recently as October 22, Warren trailed Biden in the RCP average by about four points. The week following her Medicare for All debut, she had dropped nearly ten points behind him. By mid November, she had fallen into third place behind Sanders, and she hasn’t recovered her second-place standing since.Finally, if sexism were responsible for the bulk of Warren’s woes, the polling data would make little sense. In the most recent Quinnipiac poll, for example, 23 percent of women said they preferred Biden, while 16 percent favored Warren. A recent poll from The Hill/HarrisX found a similar situation: Thirty-three percent of female respondents chose Biden, 16 percent chose Sanders, and only 10 percent chose Warren.To claim that Warren’s collapse is the result of sexism, her defenders would have to excuse her obvious missteps and insist that women fail to embrace female candidates due to “internalized misogyny.” And, of course, they’re all too happy to do just that.
Depends if it actually happened.
Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Saturday he still plans to shift the military’s focus to competing with China and Russia, even as security threats pile up in the Middle East.
Esper outlined his strategic goals and priorities in a speech at the Reagan National Defense Forum, an annual gathering of government, defense industry and military officials.