Categories Uncategorized

Zelensky highlights 'good news' surrounding recaptured settlements

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Wednesday shared what he called “good news” about his country’s armed forces recapturing settlements from Russian counterparts as the months-long conflict with Moscow continues.

“This week we have good news from the Kharkiv region. Probably, you all have already seen reports about the activity of Ukrainian defenders. And I think every citizen feels proud of our warriors,” Zelensky said in his presidential address on Wednesday. “It is a well-deserved pride, a right feeling.”

Zelensky noted the successful victories Ukraine’s brigade units had in the unnamed settlements, thanking them “bravery and heroism” they showed during the combat missions. 

The leader also congratulated the country’s 406th separate artillery brigade and the 60th separate infantry brigade for their own victories on the battlefield. 

“Each success of our military in one direction or another changes the general situation along the entire frontline in favor of Ukraine,” Zelensky said in his address, noting that the new victories will help benefit fighters in regions such as Zaporizhzhia, where its nuclear plant has been the target of heavy shelling attacks during the conflict, as many share concerns about a potential nuclear disaster across the European continent. 

“The more difficult it is for the occupiers, the more losses they have, the better the positions of our defenders in Donbas will be, the more reliable the defense of Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv and the cities of the Dnipropetrovsk region will be, the faster we will be able to liberate the Azov region and the entire south.” 

Zelensky’s remarks come as Secretary of State Antony Blinken made an unannounced visit to the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv on Thursday, announcing that the U.S. will send more than $2 billion in military aid to Ukraine and other countries that have been threatened by Russia. 

U.S. officials also announced on Thursday that President Biden has approved additional military aid to Ukraine worth up to $675 million, which includes armored ambulances, anti-tank systems, artillery munitions, and howitzers.

Source: TEST FEED1

DHS unwinds Trump-era public charge restrictions

The Biden administration on Thursday finalized a rule to replace Trump-era limitations that sought to limit immigration of those it feared may rely on social services.

The new Department of Homeland Security policy rolls back the Trump administration’s so-called public charge rule, restricting immigration pathways for those seeking to become U.S. citizens only if they are “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence.”

The Biden administration stopped defending the Trump-era rule just months after taking office, but the new rule is a departure from a Trump-era policy requiring prospective new citizens to forecast whether they might at any time rely on government aid.

It barred those who received assistance from one program over the course of a year, and roped in new programs that were previously excluded from consideration, including food stamps and medical assistance.

“This action ensures fair and humane treatment of legal immigrants and their U.S. citizen family members,” said DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a release. 

“Consistent with America’s bedrock values, we will not penalize individuals for choosing to access the health benefits and other supplemental government services available to them.”

The Hill first reported the rule was expected to be released Thursday.

DHS described its new rule as restoring “the historical understanding of a ‘public charge’ that had been in place for decades, until the prior administration began to consider supplemental public health benefits such as Medicaid and nutritional assistance.”

An applicant’s use of cash assistance programs will still be weighed as a factor in a green card application.

The Trump-era public charge rule was one of a number of restrictions the administration sought to put in place, restricting pathways to citizenship for those already in the U.S. as well as for those overseas seeking immigration visas.

But the Biden administration said the policy had ramifications for U.S. citizens as well, particularly in households where parents hold different immigration statuses, noting a drop of enrollment in such programs for children from such families.

Source: TEST FEED1

Justice should welcome special master for Mar-a-Lago case

What if Judge Aileen Cannon is right? In terms of conducting a criminal investigation, what is the actual harm in appointing a special master in the Mar-a-Lago case?

For argument’s sake, let’s take the point of view that appointing a special master is no big deal and will eventually work to the government’s advantage.

Why would anyone do that? 

Because criminal investigations are complicated, and one must take the long view here. The Department of Justice (DOJ) needs to keep its powder dry for the time being. Resist any appeal, for now.

The mother of all legal battles will likely come after an indictment — if any — comes down. Should Donald Trump or any of his associates be charged, the legal defense team would almost certainly file a motion to suppress all evidence obtained by the government derived from the execution of the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.

The court would then set a date for a suppression hearing, which would effectively be a mini-trial — because should the government prevail (and they should, given what is known about the case so far), it would be game – set – match: DOJ. Evidence from the search warrant would be admitted into court during the actual trial, and Trump has no viable defense, that I see.

So, the suppression hearing would be the big deal.

The government’s hand would actually be reinforced during a suppression hearing by the appointment of a special master: DOJ could argue that not only did the FBI follow every DOJ protocol with regard to the search warrant but the evidence was also reviewed by a special master as requested by the Trump legal team.

It should not take more than a month or so for the special master to analyze the documents seized, so those arguing that the special master appointment is slowing things down with regard to the investigation really don’t know what they’re talking about, because an appeal of the special master decision to the 11^th Circuit — one of the most conservative in the land — would likely take months.

So, when Judge Cannon asked out loud to the government “What do you have to lose?” she was right: There is almost nothing to lose.

Should the special master exclude a couple of miscellaneous documents, the DOJ would still have several hundred at its disposal to prosecute.

If the special master were to exclude all the documents seized, using an expansive interpretation of executive privilege, then the DOJ must fight that legal battle to the highest court.

But what are the odds of that happening? Almost none.

The documents seized belong to the government, not the ex-president. That is the whole point of the search warrant; in fact, that is the whole point of the entire investigation.

DOJ needs to swallow hard and get on with its investigation — and, yes, that means dealing with a special master.

The big legal fight — if there is one — will be at the suppression hearing, and the fact the DOJ will have followed every protocol will be better served by abiding by Judge Cannon’s wishes and utilizing the special master.

The likelihood of a stronger government hand at a suppression hearing, should there be one, trumps the needless delay of wasting time now over premature legal bickering and appeals with regard to the special master.

The DOJ needs to recognize that fact and ride out the appointment of a special master, because it holds the winning hand — and it can demonstrate the absurdity of Judge Cannon’s legal reasoning later, if necessary. Appealing now would only move the game to Donald Trump’s home court: slow-walking the justice system, one of his specialties.

Justice would best be served if DOJ did not to fall into that trap.

I don’t see that Trump has any viable legal defense for his ill-considered actions with regard to mishandling government documents. It appears that Bill Barr, his former attorney general, agrees.

DOJ should not help create a defense for him: It should finish the investigation, hand down an indictment and do so in short order — and, yes, that means dealing with a special master.

Martin J. Sheil is a retired supervisory agent for IRS Criminal Investigation with 30 years experience, including service as coordinator of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) for the Gulf Coast Region, Branch Chief for the North Texas District (Dallas), Special Agent in Charge for the South Texas District (San Antonio) and as Director of IRS CI Asset Forfeiture in Washington, D.C.

Source: TEST FEED1

Teens confide in these adults more than parents about mental health

New data suggests teens reach out to educators more than their parents about mental health concerns, while experts stress both adults can play complementary roles in supporting young people’s mental health. 

Most educators, 78 percent, have been approached by a child about a mental or emotional concern, according to a CVS Health/Morning Consult survey published Thursday. That’s compared to 58 percent of parents who report the same, underscoring how a network of adults can help young people navigate their mental health.

More than three-quarters of educators say they are concerned about adolescents’ mental health, compared to 43 percent of parents who say the same. Nearly half of parents surveyed say they had initiated a mental health conversation with their child, while 22 percent of educators report ever doing so.

America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.

The poll was conducted online in August 2022 among 500 parents and 340 educators of teens between the ages 13 and 17.

The results come as children and adolescents face increasing mental health concerns, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Around 1.5 million more kids experienced depression or anxiety in 2021, prompting U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy to issue an advisory in December.

“Mental health challenges in children, adolescents, and young adults are real and widespread,” Murthy said, adding “the future wellbeing of our country depends on how we support and invest in the next generation.”

When asked about top stressors teens face today, educators overwhelmingly cited family dynamics and relationships, self-esteem, bullying and social dynamics, along with social media usage. In comparison, parents were more likely to cite academic pressure, self-esteem, and pandemic-related stress as top negative mental health influences.

Over 70 percent of educators also say issues relating to gender, race, and sexuality were factors relating to teens’ negative mental health compared with just one quarter of parents. Both cohorts agreed the most beneficial resource to bolster teen mental health is more affordable mental health care. 

This is a priority for President Biden who in July announced a nearly $300 million allotment to expand access to mental health care in schools.  

Despite increasing popularity for mental health days, where children do not attend school to focus on their well-being, only 12 states allow the practice. At the same time, barriers like social stigma and economic challenges may prevent more schools from taking up the practice.

As children turn to adults in many aspects of their lives for mental health support, both parents and educators say they feel equipped to help. An equal percentage of parents and educators report they would know where to find support for a young person, according to the survey. Both also say they would speak directly to the child, to one another, or seek help from a professional.

“Young people continue to face a mental health crisis, but they are not facing it alone,” said CVS Health President and Chief Executive Officer Karen S. Lynch in a press release. “Mental health can, and should, become a part of everyday conversation in the classroom, during lunch hour and at the dinner table.” 

Source: TEST FEED1

Why the midterms are so hard to predict

In 1993, the Buffalo Bills were down 32 points to the Houston Oilers in the third quarter of an NFL playoff game. In one of the most astounding comebacks in sports history, the Bills defeated the Oilers by a score of 41-38. 

Welcome, political fans, to the final quarter of the 2022 midterm House elections. Over the past several weeks, the punditry has morphed from digging the Democrats’ graves to hyping expectations of their over-performing. 

Going into the summer, some forecasts had Democrats losing as many three-dozen seats. Coming out of summer, David Wasserman, the unusually prescient analyst from the Cook Political Report, wrote (correctly, in my view): “GOP Control No Longer a Foregone Conclusion.” 

Except.  

It’s still too early to tell. We are in a world of contradictions. Predictable and volatile at the same time. Settled one day, unsettled the next. 

Most midterm cycles are easily defined by the political winds. This one is all about wind shears. As Wasserman notes, the climate has been changed by a variety of influences: the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling undermining Roe v. Wade, falling gas prices, GOP primaries that produced Trumpian candidates in moderate electorates, legislative victories like the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS bill.

At the center of this particular playoff are two quarterbacks, the chairmen of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), and the National Republican Campaign Committee (NRCC), Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.).   

As one who held the DCCC chair from 2011 to 2016, I’ve watched both manage the environment with fascination. I can tell you that the job places you in a schizophrenic world. You’re simultaneously praised and pilloried; your reputation is celebrated and cremated. 

But this cycle is particularly difficult to manage. Here’s why. 

First, both campaign committees basically plan as political meteorologists, making decisions by those prevailing winds. I used to call it a “flip-flop” scenario. A favorable wind at your back dictates a strategy of offense, and the battlefield is expanded to flip more seats. In a “flop” environment, with strong headwinds, you hunker down to save as many incumbents as you can. The battlefield is consolidated, resources triaged to minimize losses.

Second, the winds can change. A candidate’s utterances can turn safe districts into more competitive ones. For example, I remember sitting with Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) when he chaired the DCCC in the miserable 2010 cycle. He’d just learned that Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who represented a reliably blue district, had endorsed a boycott of his home state to protest a state law that harmed immigrants. Grijalva’s position was noble, courageous. But the electoral blowback at the time looked serious. I’ll always remember the incredulity in Van Hollen’s voice: “Now we have to defend Raul Grijalva’s district?”

Third, there is the infatuation some have with the “congressional generic ballot,” which measures whether voters want Republicans or Democrats in Congress. Consider the fluctuation of that measure since the beginning of the year, according to Five Thirty Eight: On Jan. 1, Republicans were up by nearly a point; drifting into summer, in May, they expanded to 2.5 points; on Aug. 1, they were tied with Democrats; by mid-August, Democrats had taken the lead; and last Monday, Democrats were up by a point.  

Don’t be misled. The generic ballot reflects vague preferences at a particular moment, not turn out at the polls. And a midterm election strongly rests on turnout.  

I remember watching the congressional generic ballot in 2014, the midterm following President Obama’s reelection. In the first six months of the year, our lead in the generic was between two and seven points. It began to decline in summer. Between August and September, the Republicans surged ahead by as many as seven points. Then, in the closing weeks, we’d battled back to a one-point lead. We felt good. We knew we’d lose seats, but the generic suggested it wouldn’t be calamitous. 

The day after the midterms, the actual vote reflected a 5.7-point advantage for Republicans. 

That was in a fairly routine environment, with easier to predict trends and wind directions and more reliable rules of engagement.  

I revise my analogy to the Bills comeback triumph. Actually, this isn’t an NFL game. This is hockey. Offense and defense shifting constantly. Bursts of propulsion. Skirmishes and random eruptions. And the majority for both parties seem as thin as ice.  

Steve Israel represented New York in the U.S. House of Representatives over eight terms and was chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee from 2011 to 2015. He is now director of the Cornell Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy Institute of Politics and Global Affairs. Follow him on Twitter @RepSteveIsrael. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Geraldo Rivera says he could never support Trump again

Fox News personality Geraldo Rivera said in a new tweet that he’s not going to support former President Trump again. 

Rivera on Wednesday stressed the former president’s “shameful” claims the 2020 election was stolen.

“Election Deniers depress me,” Rivera said. “I blame President Trump for his shameful campaign to slander and undermine American faith in our elections.” 

“For all his positive accomplishments, and there are many, I could never support him again,” Rivera added. “Without fealty to the Constitution, we’re 2d rate.”

The former syndicated talk show host has been a frequent critic of Trump in the past few years, previously saying that Trump hadn’t spoken to him after Rivera declared that the 2020 election result had been decided. 

Rivera, who in January, 2021 said that Trump should be impeached for his role in the rioting at the Capitol, said in August that the former president still rules the GOP, adding that he’s disappointed in many if not most Republicans for still believing Trump’s election claims. 

Rivera last month tweeted a response to James Carville’s interview with The Hill during which the Democratic strategist said that GOP voters are “stupid” for believing that Trump did not lose the 2020 election.

“James Carville is wrong. Trump does rule the GOP. Many, if not most Republicans believe Trump was robbed in 2020. That doesn’t make them ignorant or racist,” Rivera said at the time. “It makes them disappointing. They’re drunk on Trump Koolaid, and either don’t believe he lost, or worse, don’t care.”

Source: TEST FEED1

A Russian soldier speaks out: ‘The people are afraid’

Finally, a courageous Russian soldier tells all about the war against Ukraine. Pavel Filatyev is a 33-year-old paratrooper who wrote an explosive memoir, “Zov” (Call), that appeared in early August. Filatyev exposes the war as an act of Russian aggression, shows that most Russian soldiers are hungry, dirty and demoralized, and savagely criticizes the Russian generals and officers. His exposé rings true, if only because it is identical to the one proffered by Ukrainian and Western policymakers, journalists, analysts and generals.

Filatyev starts by describing the first “two months of filth, hunger, sweat, and the feeling of being next to death. It’s too bad that they don’t allow reporters to us in the frontlines, since the entire country could then admire the hairy paratroopers, dirty, filthy, thin; it was unclear who they were angrier at — the stubborn Ukrainians who don’t want to de-Nazify or their own incompetent commanders incapable of providing supplies even during combat. Half of my boys dressed and wore Ukrainian uniforms because they were of better quality and comfort, while ours were worn out since our great country was unable to dress, equip, and feed its own army.” He continues in this vein throughout the entire text, sparing no criticism of Russian military institutions. Unsurprisingly, morale is low: “An atmosphere of apathy rules over the contract soldiers, 90 percent of whom discuss ways to end their contracts as soon as possible.”

Filatyev dismisses the regime’s justifications for the war. It can’t be Ukraine’s NATO aspirations, because Russia wages no war with its other NATO neighbors. It can’t be that Ukraine would have attacked if Russia hadn’t, he says, since “how could a country that has difficulty defending itself … attack us?” It can’t be that the Ukrainians are Nazis who oppress Russians, as he hasn’t heard of a single instance of Russians being persecuted for their language or culture in Ukraine. Nor, finally, can it be that the self-styled republics in Donetsk and Luhansk needed Russian protection from supposed Ukrainian Nazis hell-bent on destroying therm.

“Don’t we have enough territory?” Filtayev asks rhetorically.

Filatyev ends his memoir on a less than hopeful note:

“I fought in Ukraine, and if I don’t have the right to say, ‘no to war,’ then who has the right to start it? I cannot return our army home, but I can relate my experience and my thoughts about participating in this war and call on my co-citizens to concern themselves with their own country, which has so many of its own problems. … The people are afraid and do not want to state their position and influence policy. It’s a vicious circle. We are all guilty, but it’s necessary to reach some conclusions and begin to correct our fall.” 

Filatyev then assumes an almost pathetic tone: “Where is the breadth of the Russian soul? Where are our nobility and spirituality? I cannot believe that we have again become enslaved serfs. After all, our ancestors shed so much of their own blood for freedom. Perhaps nothing will change things, but I will not participate in this madness.”

In an interview with a Russian opposition website, Filatyev emphasizes the lies on which Vladimir Putin’s war is based. “I don’t see in the trenches the children of Skabeyeva, Solovyov, Kiselev, Rogozin, Lavrov, and Medvedev” — the first three being Russian propagandists, the latter three being top policymakers — “even as I continually hear their calls to kill.” Fortunately, the soldiers appear to understand the mendacity and hypocrisy of the regime and its spokespersons, he says. “The Russian army does not want to fight. Not because it’s afraid, but because it understands that the government has dragged it into a fatal war. It’s a problematic war, in which there is no truth. Most Russian soldiers don’t feel that truth is on their side.”

Filatyev then turns apocalyptic: “For many it will be hard to recognize the truth and the fact that we liberated no one, but simply destroyed cities and killed many people. But when they do realize this, then there’ll be a collapse.”

Of the regime, of course.

Alexander J. Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark. A specialist on Ukraine, Russia and the USSR, and on nationalism, revolutions, empires and theory, he is the author of 10 books of nonfiction, as well as “Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse, and Revival of Empires” and “Why Empires Reemerge: Imperial Collapse and Imperial Revival in Comparative Perspective.”

Source: TEST FEED1

The Hill's Morning Report — Mar-a-Lago documents drama rattles some in GOP

Secrets and eyes, politics and whys.

Former President Trump’s cartons of U.S. classified and intelligence documents, now in the hands of the Justice Department, present legal and political challenges for Attorney General Merrick Garland and his team as they ponder a court deadline this week that’s akin to three-dimensional chess for the executive branch. 

DOJ’s choice about whether to appeal an order to select an independent reviewer to examine the materials seized on Aug. 8 at Mar-a-Lago could impact future presidents, stall an investigation involving allegedly mishandled U.S. intelligence and hand the former president and his allies months of political openings to stoke distrust of the FBI and the Biden administration. 

On Capitol Hill, Senate Republicans are scrambling to play defense without knowing exactly what Trump removed from the White House, how his retention of sensitive materials may have compromised U.S. secrets and whether he is guilty of actions that would result in criminal penalties for any lesser current or former U.S. official. Trump’s documents drama could pose complex legal, international and political repercussions for his future — in 2024 and beyond.

Ahead of the midterm contests, Republican senators want to talk about President Biden’s economic record and inflation but instead are barraged with questions about Trump’s decision to stash more than 300 classified documents at his personal residence, reports The Hill’s Alexander Bolton.

“It’s stunning, it’s outrageous that highly sensitive documents of the United States of America were kept in an insecure place. That’s why we have laws to prevent it,” Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) told The Hill.

“I think classified information is supposed to be handled in a certain way and obviously we understand that here,” Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D) added, referring to a secure facility in the Capitol that must be used by senators to review sensitive intelligence documents. “The rules … are pretty clear.”   

▪ Politico: GOP offers strained Trump defenses in the Mar-a-Lago probe — for now.

▪ The Hill: Florida judge throws Trump, DOJ curveball with special master decision, according to legal experts.

▪ The New York Times: Garland faces tough calls in weighing a response to a judge’s Trump ruling.

The Justice Department has until Friday to propose a specific independent reviewer or appeal a judge’s ruling in Trump’s favor that involves his claims of potential attorney-client privilege and executive privilege. The unusual legal questions presented have become a test of Trump’s (and perhaps any future president’s) post-White House powers (The Washington Post).

The New Yorker Q&A reports on where the Trump documents investigation could head: “On Friday, if the government doesn’t make an immediate appeal, or if it does but still goes ahead and makes the filing, it will want to be pressing for some pretty tight timelines on any special master to complete the review, because what the government does not want to have is this dragging out,” explained Mary McCord, a former assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and a former acting assistant attorney general for national security. McCord is Georgetown University Law Center executive director of the nonpartisan Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection.

With 61 days to go until Nov. 8, election handicappers and political strategists predict Republican candidates remain favored to win control of the House this year, even if by a smaller margin than projected as the summer began. In Republicans’ favor: Democratic retirements and gerrymandered districts. The Hill’s Max Greenwood unpacks the political conditions for Republican candidates. 

▪ Yahoo News: Biden leads Trump by 6 points in a hypothetical 2024 rematch, the widest margin in six months, according to the latest Yahoo News-YouGov poll. 

▪ Reuters explainer: What’s at stake in the 2022 congressional elections.

▪ Politico: Democratic governors in the big battlegrounds are looking strong — but the GOP is expanding the map. 

Related Articles

▪  Politico: Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman (D), vying for a Senate seat, said during an interview that he will debate GOP opponent Mehmet Oz this fall once they iron out accommodations for Fetterman’s “auditory processing” challenges caused by a stroke. 

▪ The New York Times: There is no law barring a convicted or imprisoned felon from becoming president. With that in mind, some in Congress want to disqualify Trump in 2024 as an “insurrectionist” under a clause in the Constitution.

▪ The Hill: Biden sparks debate with Marine backdrop to combative address. 

▪ The Hill and The Associated Press: Gloves off in new Biden midterm strategy. 

LEADING THE DAY

➤ CONGRESS 

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) promised on Wednesday to pass a side deal he struck this summer with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). The hitch: opposition from progressive Democrats in the House and Senate. 

Schumer said he will attach permitting reform legislation that would speed the development of fossil fuel and other energy projects to the stopgap spending measure Congress must approve to keep the federal government funded beyond Sept. 30 (The Hill).

The Washington Post: Senate negotiators push toward a same-sex marriage vote this month, possibly as early as next week, with GOP support.

The Senate Judiciary Committee today is expected to mark up a proposed bipartisan Journalism Competition and Preservation Act that aims to give news outlets power to negotiate with tech giants such as Google and Facebook to distribute their content and local news (The Hill). 

A delegation of U.S. lawmakers arrived in Taiwan on Wednesday on a previously unannounced trip, the latest group of senior U.S. officials to visit the island and defy Beijing, which has reacted with anger to such exchanges. The de facto U.S. Embassy in Taiwan said eight lawmakers, led by Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, would be staying until Friday as part of a larger visit to the Indo-Pacific region (Reuters).

IN FOCUS/SHARP TAKES

➤ ADMINISTRATION

On canvas, former President Obama is a portrait almost in black and white, his gaze steady and inscrutable, his posture relaxed and self-contained against a white background, his tie the same steely gray as his hair.

Michelle Obama, who for eight years with her husband appeared to be a study in motion and energy, is seated and still, depicted in vivid color on a White House Red Room sofa, attired in a pale blue evening gown, both shoulders bare.

In the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., the 44th president and the former first lady will be frozen in time as the contemporary pathbreakers they were and are, depicted among iconic visages of predecessors, including Abraham Lincoln and Jacqueline Kennedy. 

On Wednesday during a “hanging” ceremony full of bonhomie in the East Room hosted by Bidenand first lady Jill Biden, guests applauded the official White House portraits of the former president painted by Robert McCurdy, and of Michelle Obama, painted by artist Sharon Sprung. The Obamas selected the artists, each of whom worked from photographs.

The Hill: “I want to thank Sharon Sprung for capturing everything I love about Michelle. Her grace, her intelligence, and the fact that she is fine,” Obama said, to appreciative clapping.  

The nonprofit White House Historical Association helps manage the portrait process and since the 1960s has paid for most of those in the collection through private donations and merchandise sales. Other portraits of the Obamas remain popular with traveling exhibits from the National Portrait Gallery collection. Those works by artists Kehinde Wiley and Amy Sherald return to Washington in November.

The Associated Press published a short video tour of White House portraits HERE, and the White House Historical Association created a longer video showcase HERE.

▪ The Hill’s In the Know: Here are the official White House portraits of Barack and Michelle Obama. 

▪ Reuters: The White House event included a Trump barb and a tan-suit joke.

OPINION

■ A better strategy to rein in Big Tech: Congress should pass the Open Apps Market Act, by Joel Thayer, opinion contributor, The Hill. https://bit.ly/3BlYXDk

■ Oklahoma embarks on a grotesque execution-spree, by The Washington Post editorial board. https://wapo.st/3D5ELXG

WHERE AND WHEN

The House will meet on Friday at 9 a.m. for a pro forma session and return to work in the Capitol on Sept. 13.

The Senate convenes at 10 a.m. and will resume consideration of the nomination of Andre Mathis to be a United States circuit judge for the 6th Circuit.

The president will receive the President’s Daily Brief at 9 a.m. Biden will promote the nationwide availability and accessibility of updated COVID-19 vaccine boosters during a Roosevelt Room speech at 1:45 p.m. The president will headline a Democratic National Committee fundraising event at 7 p.m. in Montgomery County, Md., and return to the White House.

Vice President Harris will speak in Houston at the National Baptist Convention 142nd Annual Session at noon local time. 

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is in Dearborn, Mich., to deliver a 2 p.m. speech at Ford Motor Co.’s Rouge Electric Vehicle Center about the administration’s economic growth strategy and the Inflation Reduction Act’s alternative fuel incentives for vehicles and transportation (Detroit News). Yellen also will meet with representatives of small businesses that are recipients of Detroit’s Motor City Match grant program, expanded by the city through $15 million in American Rescue Plan funding.

Economic indicator: The Labor Department at 8:30 a.m. will report on filings for unemployment benefits during the week ending Sept. 3.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley will hold a press conference at 9:45 a.m. EDT at Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany following a Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting.

The White House daily press briefing is scheduled at 12:30 p.m.

🖥  Hill.TV’s “Rising” program features news and interviews at http://thehill.com/hilltv, on YouTube and on Facebook at 10:30 a.m. ET. Also, check out the “Rising” podcast here.

ELSEWHERE

➤ INTERNATIONAL

Eager to preserve international unity among allies in support of Ukraine, Biden today will host a call among Group of Seven, European Union and NATO allies (Bloomberg News).

During a Wednesday meeting of the U.N. Security Council, the United States formally accused Russia of a war crime by forcibly deporting “hundreds of thousands” of Ukrainians to Russia, including children, and said it has information that Russian officials are overseeing so-called filtration operations. 

“These operations aim to identify individuals Russia deems insufficiently compliant or compatible to its control,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield told her counterparts (Reuters). The United States is among 45 nations coordinating the investigation of alleged Russian war crimes in Ukraine. Russia dismissed the allegation as “fantasy,” calling it the latest invention in a Western disinformation campaign (Politico).

Russian President Vladimir Putin, during a defiant speech on Wednesday to an economic forum in Vladivostok, called Western sanctions “stupid” and threatened to halt all energy sales to Russia’s critics if they move forward with a cap on oil prices proposed by the Group of Seven industrialized economic powers.

“I’m sure we have not lost anything and will not lose anything,” Putin said of Russia’s prospects despite war with Ukraine, heavy military casualties and punishing international sanctions. “The main thing is strengthening our sovereignty, and this is the inevitable result of what is happening now” (The Washington Post).

Putin’s power over natural gas supplies is weakening, according to European Union leaders (The New York Times), who say they plan to cap Russian natural gas prices after Putin threatened to cut off all energy supplies if the EU takes such a step. The specter of energy rationing in some of the world’s richest countries this winter is the talk of Europe (Reuters). 

Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping will meet next week in Uzbekistan at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit, Russian Ambassador to China Andrei Denisov announced on Wednesday (The Associated Press). The two leaders last met in February weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine. Moscow and Beijing have increasingly aligned their foreign policies to oppose liberal democratic forces in Asia, Europe and beyond, making a stand for authoritarian rule with tight borders and little regard for free speech, minority rights or opposition politics.

In rare public comments, Ukraine’s military commander in chief, Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, warned on Wednesday of the threat of Russia using nuclear weapons in Ukraine, which he said would create the risk of a “limited” nuclear conflict with other powers (Reuters).

➤ ECONOMY

💰 Wage increases for job-switchers compared with compensation for employees who have not pulled up stakes indicate the monetary benefits of moving on in a tight labor market. Research shows millennials and Gen Zers have taken advantage of the current labor shortages, switching jobs more frequently than their older colleagues and, in return, reaped pay hikes and other benefits. If the U.S. economy contracts, the labor market will likely take a hit, according to economists. That means the window of opportunity for job hoppers to leverage demand for their skills, especially those workers at the bottom of the income ladder, will begin to close (The Hill).

⛽ Inflation: U.S. gasoline prices keep tumbling. The average price of a gallon of gas was $3.76 per gallon on Wednesday, according to AAA’s gas price tracker. That’s a decrease of $1.26 per gallon since prices reached a peak in mid-June. If oil prices continue to decline, drivers will likely continue to see pump prices drop further, AAA predicts. … Federal Reserve Vice Chair Lael Brainard on Wednesday added her voice to those reinforcing expectations that the central bank later this month will opt for a third consecutive 0.75 percentage point rate rise. “We are in this for as long as it takes to get inflation down,” she said (Financial Times). The Fed concludes a two-day meeting on Sept. 21.  

➤ TECH

Apple had a surprise in store on Wednesday: No U.S. price hikes for its newest iPhone, despite inflation and supply chain challenges (CNBC). Want to learn more about what the company unveiled? CNBC dissects the devices, displays, developments and trends, which Apple CEO Tim Cook touted at the company’s annual iPhone launch event. Think themes: personal health data (Apple Insider) and safety features (CNBC). 

➤ PANDEMIC & HEALTH

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) on Wednesday lifted a mask mandate covering New York transit, which commuters disliked and found confusing. “We haven’t seen any [COVID-19] spikes, and also people are getting back to work, back to school,” she said during a press conference at a health center in New York City, shortly before receiving her omicron-targeted booster that’s being made available this week. “We have to restore some normalcy to our lives” (Bloomberg News). 

China’s continued COVID-19 lockdowns will likely lead to long-lasting political and economic consequences, Foreign Policy reported on Wednesday in its China Brief. 

🦠 Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) tested positive for COVID-19 while traveling in India for an eight-day economic itinerary and will isolate there and return to the United States next week, his staff said on Wednesday (The Hill). … Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) also tested positive for the coronavirus, his office announced on Wednesday (The Hill).

Total U.S. coronavirus deaths reported as of this morning, according to Johns Hopkins University (trackers all vary slightly): 1,048,989. Current average U.S. COVID-19 daily deaths are 336, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Hill: A United States District Court in Texas on Wednesday ruled against the Affordable Care Act’s mandatory coverage of HIV prevention drugs. The administration says it is reviewing the opinion.

➤ STATE WATCH

California is in the news today because of extreme heat, drought, wildfires and coping woes, including threats of rolling blackouts and restrictions on electricity and water. Here are five things to know about conditions in the Golden State (The Hill) and a look at how California is responding to record high temperatures (The Hill).

As weather-related hazards appear nationwide, the focus on energy and water now and in the future continues to be shadowed by past decisions, or rather, indecision. For The Atlantic, Robinson Meyer reports that the U.S. electricity industry knew about the dangers of climate change 40 years ago and denied them anyway.

In Nevada, police on Wednesday arrested Clark County Public Administrator Robert Telles, 45, in connection with the slaying of Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Jeff German, who had written stories about alleged bullying and favoritism in the politician’s office. Police made the arrest on suspicion of murder after serving a search warrant at Telles’ home. He is to appear in court today. German was found stabbed to death outside his residence on Saturday and was likely killed on Friday (NBC News).

THE CLOSER

Take our Morning Report Quiz

And finally … 🏈 It’s Thursday, which means it’s time for this week’s Morning Report Quiz! Inspired by the momentous news that Football Is Back, we’re looking for smart guesses about the NFL and the upcoming season. 

Email your responses to asimendinger@thehill.com and/or aweaver@thehill.com, and please add “Quiz” to subject lines. Winners who submit correct answers will enjoy some richly deserved newsletter fame on Friday.

The Washington Commanders take the field under the franchise’s new nickname this weekend — but that’s not the only change. What color alternate jersey did the team roll out for the upcoming season?

1. Silver
2. Gold
3. Black
4. Alternate burgundy 

How many NFL teams made head coaching changes ahead of the 2022 season?

1. Six 
2. Eight 
3. Ten 
4. Twelve 

Which of the following is a rule change that goes into effect this season?

1. Teams can wear alternate helmet designs during season
2. Kickoffs take place from the 30-yard line
3. Coaches may now challenge four plays per game 
4. None of the above 

Super Bowl LVII this season will be held in Glendale, Ariz. How many Super Bowls have been played in the greater Phoenix area?

1. Zero 
2. Three 
3. Six 
4. Eight 

Stay Engaged

We want to hear from you! Email: Alexis Simendinger and Al Weaver. Follow us on Twitter (@alweaver22 & @asimendinger) and suggest this newsletter to friends!

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden sparks debate with Marine backdrop to combative address

President Biden sparked debate about his own adherence to political norms during his speech last week warning of GOP attacks on democracy, when the White House placed two Marines in the backdrop of his high-profile address from Philadelphia.

It wasn’t the first time a president has given a speech in front of the military. But as the nation becomes more polarized, even those who think Biden’s imagery was not particularly political say it was bad optics. 

“This is — to take sort of a football analogy — this is a 5-yard penalty. Definitely not a 10- or 15-yard penalty or loss of downs,” said Peter Feaver, a professor of political science and public policy at Duke University.

During his speech at Independence Hall in Philadelphia on Sept. 1, Biden warned that former President Trump and other so-called MAGA Republicans represent a threat to the country. 

The White House insisted that the speech was an official address and not a political one, but Biden invoked his predecessor by name — something he does not often do — and urged Americans to “vote, vote, vote!”

The speech elicited praise from the left and backlash from Republicans. But some common ground emerged over two Marines positioned behind him during the speech. 

Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, who commanded U.S. Army Europe from 2011 to 2012, said on Twitter that he thought Biden’s speech was “ well delivered” and “definitely needed at this time in our history.” However, he said the military shouldn’t have been in the background. 

“Why is that my opinion? For the same reason I believe: the military shouldn’t attend political events in uniform; people running for office shouldn’t wear uniforms in ads/tout their veteran status in their campaigns; active duty personnel shouldn’t publicly support candidates,” he added. 

Paul Rieckhoff, founder of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, similarly praised Biden’s speech as “very powerful and important,” adding that it was “overdue in many ways.” 

However, he said that if the presence of the Marines was not intentional, then it was “just sloppy.” 

“Plenty of people in the White House know better. Or should. Either way, there’s just no need to have it even as a concern. It just shouldn’t be done in America,” Rieckhoff tweeted.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre defended the presence of the Marines during the speech.

“The presence of the Marines was intended to demonstrate the deep and abiding respect the president has for these service members, to these ideals and the unique role our independent military plays in defending our democracy, no matter which party is in power,” Jean-Pierre said during a briefing Friday.

“And it is not abnormal. It is actually normal for Presidents from either side of the aisle to give speeches in front of members of the military,” she added. “It is not an unusual sight or is not an unusual event to have happen.”

Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder didn’t answer a question on the Marines during a Tuesday briefing, instead referring to Jean-Pierre’s comments.

The Department of Defense’s long-standing policy is that active-duty service members can carry out the obligations of citizenship but will not “engage in partisan political activities.” 

Furthermore, active-duty personnel are to “avoid the interference that their political activities imply or appear to imply DoD sponsorship, approval, or endorsement of a political candidate, campaign or cause.” 

But the two Marines standing behind Biden during his speech were following orders, so they themselves didn’t do anything wrong, experts said. 

“It certainly breaks with the norms of civil-military relations, and it puts the Marines in a tough situation,” said Katherine Kuzminski, a senior fellow and program director for Military, Veterans and Society at the Center for a New American Security. 

“Any service member who is asked to do something by the commander in chief is going to follow through on that — that is the bedrock of our expectations of the military. But it added a military flavor to the events in a way that didn’t need to happen and that broke with the civil-military norms,” she continued.

Recent presidents from George W. Bush to Barack Obama have drawn criticism for using the military as a political backdrop. 

Feaver pointed out that the most obvious comparison made on Twitter was a speech Bush gave in 2003 aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln to declare the end of major operations in Iraq — commonly referred to as “Mission Accomplished.”

“That was a speech that the Democrats in particular did not like, and there there was some element, perhaps, of politicization,” Feaver said. “But what he was doing was praising the sailors who had worked on that mission, so it was a little bit closer to legitimate than using the merely as wallpaper, which is what happened on Thursday night.”

Kuzminski pointed out that Obama announced a surge of 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to an audience of cadets at West Point Military Academy in 2009.

“They were in the audience, they weren’t standing behind the president, and they were the people who are going to be most directly affected by the policy. So while the president was making a broad political statement about military policies to the country, he’s also directing his comments to the individuals who would be most affected,” she said.

However, concern of politicization of the military rose to a fever pitch during Trump’s time in office, particularly after he threatened to use the military to quell demonstrators in summer 2020. 

Trump’s rhetoric prompted tensions with military leaders, with his former Defense Secretary James Mattis offering stunning public criticism in a statement to The Atlantic. 

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley apologized in June of that year after he appeared alongside Trump in a photo taken outside of St. John’s Church in Lafayette Square after federal authorities attacked peaceful protesters. 

Early on in his term, Trump signed an executive order temporarily barring entry of immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries during a ceremony at the Pentagon. 

“I think that most scholars would agree that some of the violations there were above and beyond what we’ve normally seen with many presidents in terms of violating democratic norms of civil-military relations,” said Risa Brooks, a Marquette University political science professor who specializes in civil-military relations, of the Trump administration. 

The increasing polarization across U.S. society has exacerbated those concerns over threats to civilian-military norms. It’s something that eight former secretaries of Defense and five former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff acknowledged in an open letter published in War on the Rocks.

Their letter noted that civilian control of the military is exercised by all three branches of government and that the members of the military “swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution, not an oath of fealty to an individual or to an office.”

“Members of the military accept limits on the public expression of their private views — limits that would be unconstitutional if imposed on other citizens. Military and civilian leaders must be diligent about keeping the military separate from partisan political activity,” they wrote.

Kuzminski of the Center for a New American Security said future presidents would be well advised to take those warnings to heart. 

“In the future, I think any president would — it would behoove any president to keep the military out of political speeches or political events and not put them in that position in the first place,” she said. 

Morgan Chalfant contributed.

Source: TEST FEED1

Schumer in tough spot over Manchin promise

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday pledged to add permitting reform legislation to a stopgap funding bill that would prevent a government shutdown, but he’s in a tough spot as he seeks to deliver on a promise to Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).

The permitting reform is a side-deal Schumer struck with Manchin in late July to pass a climate, tax and health care bill known as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which is projected to help reduce that nation’s carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030.

Manchin offered his support for the bill in July after winning significant concessions, and his vote allowed Democrats to pass a major achievement for President Biden.

Schumer made clear Wednesday that he doesn’t plan to backtrack on his promise.

“Permitting reform is part of the IRA and we will get it done,” Schumer said Wednesday. “Our intention is to add it to the CR.”

But that plan is running into opposition from progressive House Democrats and outside environmental groups. There’s also a chance that several Senate Democrats may balk at the deal with Manchin, now that they no longer need his vote to pass a budget reconciliation bill. 

Rep. Raúl Grijalva’s (D-Ariz.) office told The Hill on Wednesday that 50 lawmakers had signed onto his letter calling for a separate vote on the permitting reform provisions instead of putting them in the continuing resolution.

Attaching it to a short-term government funding measure would force House progressives to choose between voting no and possibly forcing a shutdown or voting yes and making it easier to develop new energy projects that would burn fossil fuels and pump more carbon into the atmosphere. 

Many environmental groups are also up in arms over the deal. 

More than 650 such organizations sent a letter to Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) expressing their opposition last month. 

“This fossil fuel wish list is a cruel and direct attack on environmental justice communities and the climate. This legislation would truncate and hollow-out the environmental review process, weaken Tribal consultations, and make it far harder for frontline communities to have their voices heard by gutting bedrock protections in the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act,” they wrote.  

Some Senate Democrats also said they couldn’t say whether they would support a short-term government funding bill that includes permitting reform until they review the details of the bill. 

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said he wants to know what the net impact on carbon emissions will be from passing both the Inflation Reduction Act and the permitting reform package. 

“‘Are we helping to solve the climate problem?’ is the question,” Whitehouse said. “I don’t even know what the permitting reform is.”  

And while many Republicans also support the types of reforms Manchin supports, several GOP senators on Wednesday panned Manchin’s proposal for not going far enough. 

“It seems pretty weak to me. I want to see how they have it written up but I hear it sounds pretty weak —  ineffective,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), has said that he would oppose such a measure on principle, calling it part of a “political payback scheme.”

There is doubt over whether the government funding measure combined with permitting reform could pass the House, given the growing opposition from progressive House Democrats. 

“I like the idea of permitting reform. So, I’ll certainly keep an open mind,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told The Hill on Wednesday. But he also said he’d be “surprised” if Manchin “gets what was promised.”

“I know there were progressives over in the House that don’t like the idea. They swallowed the reconciliation bill, but it’s going to be an interesting process to watch,” he said, adding jokingly that “this may be a Lucy and the football moment” for Manchin. 

Schumer could find a way around the jam by also adding to the government funding measure a bill to codify marriage equality. That could make it more difficult for House liberals to vote no, but it would also threaten Republican support for the package in the Senate. 

Schumer says his preference is to bring the marriage equality bill to the Senate floor separately. 

“We would prefer to do it as a separate bill. We hope there are ten Republicans to help us with that,” he said Wednesday. 

A bipartisan group of Senate negotiators met earlier in the day in an effort to put together a deal on marriage equality legislation that could muster 60 votes in the Senate to overcome an expected GOP filibuster. 

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (Wis), one of the lead Democratic negotiators on the marriage bill, said she also wants to keep it separate from the short-term government funding bill. 

Baldwin said Wednesday that she’s close to getting the 10 Republican votes she needs. 

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), one of the bill’s cosponsors, told reporters on Wednesday the talks are making progress. 

“I’m never confident until a roll call. But we’re making good progress. It’s a lot of sincere interest,” Collins said.

Collins’ comments came after she and Baldwin penned an opinion piece published in The Washington Post addressing “mischaracterizations” about the bill’s scope, including the idea that it would “legalize or recognize polygamous relationships or marriages.” 

Some Democrats are hesitant to sign onto the idea linking the marriage bill and the government funding package, though they won’t rule out the proposal if it helps them get both priorities passed by the end of the month. 

“I’m for the art of the possible,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), said. “If it makes it easier to pass it we should do it that way. If it makes it harder to pass it we shouldn’t.”

“This is gaining, slowly in the Senate, bipartisan support,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said, referring to the marriage equality bill. “I’m hopeful that we can get it done whatever the vehicle.”

Some Republican leaders are insisting on a clean funding package, potentially punting a separate vote on the marriage equality bill until after the coming midterm elections. 

Collins and Baldwin have also pushed against using the funding bill as a vehicle for their bill, though they would like to see a vote before the November election.

Despite opposition in the House, there is support among some climate hawks in the Senate to add Manchin’s permitting proposal to the government funding bill. They argue that it will bolster the deployment of clean energy. 

“We are going to have to build big, planet-saving projects and the environmental movement has been organized around stopping things from being built and although that continues to be an important aspect of being an environmentalist, now we need to think about building projects that will save the planet,” Schatz said. 

But if enough liberals opposing the plan flex their muscles in the House, it’s not guaranteed the funding bill would get enough Republican votes to make it to Biden’s desk. 

By attaching both permitting reform and marriage equality legislation to the CR, Schumer could shift blame to Republicans opposing the same-sex marriage measure. 

Otherwise, progressives Democrats will have to swallow permitting reforms that will make it easier to build new energy projects and tougher for environmental activists to slow them down. 

“My guess is, if it’s on our CR, they’re gonna have to eat it if they don’t like it,” Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) said on the issue. “Or wrap their arms around it if they do.”

Source: TEST FEED1