Mediaboss Marketing

Today in 5 Lines

During an address at MacDill Air Force Base, President Trump accused the press of not reporting on terrorist attacks. Earlier in the day, Trump tweeted that polls showing his executive order on immigration to be unpopular are fake news. A group of national security and intelligence officials, including former Secretaries of State John Kerry and Madeleine Albright, signed a letter saying Trumps executive order would endanger U.S. troops. And 97 companies, including Apple and Google, filed a legal brief condemning the ban. Senate Democrats plan to express their opposition to the confirmation of Betsy DeVos, the education secretary nominee, ahead of Tuesdays Senate vote. John Bercow, the speaker of Britains House of Commons, said he would be strongly opposed to Trump addressing Parliament during his official visit to the U.K.

Forgive and Forget?: Now that Donald Trump is the president of the United States, a small cadre of high-profile conservativesthe haters, the losers, the Never-Trumpers who never fell in linehas found itself wondering whether their partys president will use his new powers to settle old scores. (McKay Coppins)

How to Beat Trump: Donald Trump presents a unique challenge to those looking to organize against him. David Frum lists three ways for the left to mobilize effectively.

An Unexpected Choice: If prominent neoconservative Elliott Abrams is selected and confirmed as deputy secretary of state, he will occupy a peculiar position in an administration that has promised to repudiate nearly everything that neoconservatism stood for, and which has disdained foreign-policy professionals as bumbling fools. (David A. Graham)

Follow stories throughout the day with our Politics & Policy portal.

Deja Vu: Kellyanne Conway, a top adviser to Donald Trump, walked back her comments about the non-existent Bowling Green Massacre on Friday, saying she made an honest mistake. But she referenced the same fictitious event in an earlier interview with Cosmopolitan.com. (Kristen Mascia)

Strategy Stumbles: Interviews with administration officials reveal that the president is increasingly frustrated with the backlash to his recent executive actionsand is rethinking an improvisational approach to governing that mirrors his chaotic presidential campaign. (Glenn Thrush and Maggie Haberman, The New York Times)

Whats Wrong With Nationalism?: The concept has a bad reputation across the globe, but nationalism can be a force for good, write Rich Lowry and Ramesh Ponnuru: A benign nationalism involves loyalty to ones country: a sense of belonging, allegiance, and gratitude to it. (National Review)

Tipping the Scales: For the first time in the Affordable Care Acts history, more people favor the law than oppose it. Danielle Kurtzleben explains why the theory of relative deprivation, or being deprived of something a person feels they are entitled to, could explain the reversal of public opinion. (NPR)

A New Home: Nebraska has accepted more refugees per capita than any other state, but it also happens to be a deeply conservative one. Robert Samuels captures how this dynamic has affected some Syrian refugees who have settled in the state. (The Washington Post)

Taking Control: The Republican Party currently controls the House, Senate, and White House for the first time since 2007. These graphics show which party held a majority under past administrations and what the majority managed to accomplish. (Chris Canipe, The Wall Street Journal)

Actress Melissa McCarthy caused a stir this weekend with her impersonation of White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer on Saturday Night Live. What are some of your favorite political impressions in comedyand why?

Send your answers to hello@theatlantic.com, and our favorites will be featured in Fridays Politics & Policy Daily.

-Written by Elaine Godfrey (@elainejgodfrey) and Candice Norwood (@cjnorwoodwrites)

View post:
The Atlantic Politics & Policy Daily: Senate Democrats Stay Up Late on a School Night - The Atlantic

Bannon, the former Breitbart executive who has now emerged as one the most influential advisers inside Trump's White House, described a "victimology" among African Americans created by the welfare state, which caused them to attack black conservatives.

After listing off several prominent black conservatives, Bannon said, "These people are heroes. They take an incredible, incredible amount of grief because the welfare state has built in this victimology. And the elitist, liberal, progressives have a plantation mentality that they don't think African Americans should be out of government control."

A spokesperson for the Trump administration did not return a request for comment.

Bannon added in the webinar that Tea Party activists have to support black conservatives.

"The Democratic progressive party cannot rule if they don't get 90% of the black vote. If we cut into the black vote, if we make it 80/20, we can win a hundred congressional seats this time," Bannon said.

Earlier in the program, Bannon said conservative women and minorities are attacked by liberals because they pose a threat to their narrative about conservatives.

"If you think the women are vilified, if you think Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann, and Michelle Malkin, all of these great women in the tea party movement are absolutely vilified because they are an existential threat to progressive narrative, you haven't seen anything by how they viciously attack our black and African American conservatives," he said.

Read more:
Steve Bannon in 2010: Democrats have a 'plantation mentality' towards African-Americans - CNN

House Judiciary Committee ranking Democrat John Conyers is among those included in the draft letter. | Getty

House Democrats are preparing to put a squeeze on Republicans for their silence in the face of President Donald Trump's attack on a federal judge.

A draft resolution being circulated by three Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee including ranking Democrat John Conyers sharply criticizes Trump for his weekend swipes at the Seattle-based district court judge, James Robart, who halted the president's travel ban on seven Muslim-majority countries.

Story Continued Below

"Whether or not one agrees with the substance of a particular judicial decision, it is inappropriate for sitting presidents, or other government officials, to engage in ad hominem attacks against a judge, or otherwise place political pressure designed to undermine the independence of that judge, or to erode trust in the entire court system," according to the resolution.

The non-binding, politically charged measure, spearheaded by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), will likely go nowhere in the GOP-controlled House. But it's a tool in the limited Democratic arsenal meant to embarrass Republicans and highlight their uncomfortable relationship with Trump early in his presidency.

The draft resolution quotes from a slew of Trump's weekend tweets aimed at Robart, highlighting Trump's characterization of the George W. Bush-appointed jurist as a "so-called judge."

The measure also slaps at Trump for his campaign-season attack on Gonzalo Curiel, the judge who presided over a lawsuit against Trump University. It concludes with a statement of support for the notion that the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government are co-equal and "each deserves the respect of the others."

Republicans have largely refrained from directly criticizing Trump over his weekend comments about Robart, though several issued harsh rebukes of Trump during the campaign when he slammed Curiel. A few GOP lawmakers, though, chided Trump for getting personal with Robart.

"It is best not to single out judges," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

And on ABC's "This Week," Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), a frequent Trump critic, said: "We dont have so-called judges."

Read this article:
Democrats seize on Trump's judge slam - Politico

President Donald Trump says those against his travel ban are putting the country in danger. About 100 technology giants, including Microsoft , Google , Facebook and Apple , have signed onto a legal action against the ban. Newslook

People protest against President Trump at the entrance to the Mar-a-Lago Resort where he is staying for the weekend on Feb. 4, 2017, in Palm Beach, Fla.(Photo: Joe Raedle, Getty Images)

SAN FRANCISCONearly three dozen more tech companies late Monday joined a court brief against President Trump's executive order on immigration, swelling the ranks of those seeking a hold on the refugee ban to 127.

Newcomers included Tesla and SpaceX, joining tech heavyweights Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft, and a list of both start-ups and more established Silicon Valley stalwarts.

The amicus brief, filed Sunday evening in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, began with 96 companies, though initial reports were 97, as one company was listed twice.

Monday afternoon those 96 mostly tech companies were joined by 31 more when an addendum was filed.

The brief lauded the drive and creativity of the USA's immigrantsand said that while protecting the nation through increased background checks was important, maintaining America's fundamental commitment to welcoming immigrants was also critical.

USA TODAY

Airbnb aims #WeAccept Super Bowl ad at refugees, immigrants

USA TODAY

Travel ban: How we got here and what is next

"The beneficiaries are not just the new immigrants who chose to come to our shores, but American businesses, workers, and consumers, who gain immense advantages from immigrants infusion of talents, energy, and opportunity," the case states.

The brief is in support of a lawsuit filed in federal court last Monday by Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson thatasked that key provisions of the executive order be declared unconstitutional.

Trump's order, signed a week after he took office, halted entry of all refugees for 120 days, banned admission of refugees from Syria indefinitely, and barred entry for three months of citizens from seven predominantly Muslim nations.

In response to that suit, Senior Judge James Robart of U.S. District Court in Seattle on Friday issued a nationwide restraining order on the immigration order.On Sunday,the 9th Circuit appeals court, considered the nation's most liberal,declined to reinstatethe restrictions.

Trump has sharply criticized the court decisions, and his Administration says the ban is necessary to weed out immigrants with intentions of terrorism. Late Monday, Justice Department officials urged the appeals court judge to reinstate the ban on grounds that not doing so endangered national security

Eventually, the Supreme Court may decide. Courts do take note of who files friends-of-the-court briefs.

Tech firms have complained that Trump's order has created havoc in an industry that is global and has a large number of foreign-born engineers in others working in the U.S. and abroad. Google has said nearly 200 of its staff would be impacted by the ban, while Microsoft said it would affect more than 75.

USA TODAY

The 127 companies on the immigration amicus brief

The list of companies that signed the amicus brief include mostly West Coast tech companies, including Adobe, Airbnb, Box, Dropbox, Etsy, Github, Glassdoor, HP Inc., Kickstarter, LinkedIn, Medium, Mozilla, Netflix, Pandora, Pinterest, Reddit, Salesforce, Slack, Square, Twilo, Yelp and Zynga.

USA TODAY

127 companies now support brief opposing Trump ban

A few non-tech companies also signed, including yogurt company Chobani, snack maker KIND and Levi Strauss & Co.

USA TODAY

Immigrants started 3 retail cos. on the court brief against the Trump order

Uber, whose CEO Travis Kalanick resigned from a Trump advisory council late last week after the ride-hailing company came under pressure from both customers and drivers, signed the brief.

SpaceX and Teslacompanies run by Elon Musk, were among the second-day additions to the list. Musk stayed on the advisory council, despite some backlash from others in the tech industry, saying it was the best chance to influence the administration to make changes to an order he has conceded treats some immigrants unfairly.

USA TODAY

Is Trump's immigration ban headed for the Supreme Court?

The brief marks one of a few recent moments in which the industry has come together around specific issues.

In 2013, more than 20 tech leaders helped create FWD.us, an organization pushing for immigration reform. In 2014, nearly 150 Internet companies sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission supporting net neutrality. And in 2016, many technology companies issued statements supporting Apple in its struggle with the FBI over breaking the encryption on an iPhone used by a terrorist in San Bernardino.

President Donald Trump used his preferred platform to criticize the judge who blocked his administration's travel ban on immigrants. Video provided by Newsy Newslook

"The Order effects a sudden shift in the rules governing entry into the United States, and is inflicting substantial harm on U.S. companies," the brief states. "It hinders the ability of American companies to attract great talent; increases costs imposed on business; makes it more difficult for American firms to compete in the international marketplace; and gives global enterprises a new, significant incentive to build operationsand hire new employeesoutside the United States."

In the filing, the companies note that immigrants or their children founded more than 200 of the Fortune 500 companies that include Apple, Kraft, Ford, General Electric, AT&T, Google, McDonalds, Boeing, and Disney. Immigrants also make up 28% of Main Street business owners and 18% of business owners nationwide as well as 16% of the U.S. labor force, they say. "Immigrants do not take jobs away from U.S. citizens they create them," the filing states.

USA TODAY

Meet James Robart, the judge who halted Trumps immigration ban

A large group of lawyers from tech companies met last Tuesday to discuss possible actions they might collectively take to fight the executive order. The amicus brief appears to be the fruit of that meeting.

There was no immediate response from the administration. On Saturday, President Trump tweeted, "I have instructed Homeland Security to check people coming into our country VERY CAREFULLY. The courts are making the job very difficult!"

Friend of the court briefs often influential

Amicus briefsallow interested parties to give the court their own take on the issues involved, without actually being a part of the case. There are few limits on who can submit them and especially contentious or important cases can have dozens arguing of briefs submitted on each side, said Martin Flaherty, a professor of constitutional law at Fordham Law School in New York City.

Its not uncommon for parties with an interest (called amici, or friends in Latin) to come together to either divvy up what their briefs will cover or work together to craft a single brief as happened in the tech groups case, Flaherty said.

While all such briefs are equal before the law, courts often take note of who is filing them.

An example Flaherty gave was a Michigan affirmative action case that went to the Supreme Court in 2003. An influential amicus filingcame from a group of retired military leaders who argued that affirmative action was crucial for the nations military academies as it would be bad for the schools and the military as a whole were the officer corps not to reflect the diversity of themilitary as a whole.

I would think that perhaps for certain justices, the fact that all these tech companies are saying this would be terrible for the country is important, Flaherty said.

Contributing: Mike Snider in Tysons Corner, Va.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2kE0gqP

Continue reading here:
127 companies now support brief opposing Trump ban - USA TODAY

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The White Houses Jan. 27 immigration reform threatens companies ability to attract talent, business, and investment to the United States, says the legal brief by the companies, who include many Silicon Valley firms. The signers include Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, Reddit, Paypal, Netflix, Lyft, and TaskRabbit, which helps wealthier people hire other people to do household chores.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The 53-page, green-eyeshade demand for economic benefits was submitted Feb. 5 to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as part of the legal battle to block the popular reform.

The new reform follows the presidents campaign promises by curbing the annual inflow of taxpayer-supported refugees, and setting rules to exclude migrants with hostile attitudes, such as an ideological willingness to use violence.

The companies legal brief is focused on their claim that they will lose their ability to hire foreign workers for some of white-collar jobs sought by American graduates.

Each year, roughly 800,000 young Americans graduate from college with skilled degrees in business, science, medicine and technology. But many of the graduates are not working in jobs that match their technical skills. For example, from 2009 to 2013, about one-fifth of underemployed recent college graduatesroughly 9 percent of all recent graduatesdid work in a low-skilled service job, says a 2016 report by two federal economic researchers.

The federal government annually imports 1 million legal immigrants, and allows companies to hire roughly 1 million foreigncontract-workers.The inflow of white-collar contract workers is so large that roughly 1 million are now legally employed in white-collar jobs in the United States, including 100,000 H-1B contract-workers holding prestigious jobs at universities.

Many companies want to preserve the inflow of cheaper white-collar workers. For example, executives at Comcast organized a demonstration against the immigration and refugee reform.

According to the courtroom brief by the technology companies:

The [reform]effects a sudden shift in the rules governing entry into the UnitedStates, and is inflicting substantial harm on U.S. companies. It hinders the abilityof American companies to attract great talent; increases costs imposed on business;makes it more difficult for American firms to compete in the international marketplace;and gives global enterprises a new, significant incentive to build operationsandhire new employeesoutside the United States

This instability and uncertainty will make it far more difficult and expensivefor U.S. companies to hire some of the worlds best talentand impede them fromcompeting in the global marketplace. Businesses and employees have little incentiveto go through the laborious process of sponsoring or obtaining a visa, and relocatingto the United States, if an employee may be unexpectedly halted at the border.

Skilled individuals will not wish to immigrate to the country if they may becut off without warning from their spouses, grandparents, relatives, and friendsthey will not pull up roots, incur significant economic risk, and subject their family to considerable uncertainty to immigrate to the United States in the face of this instability.

The companies legal brief largely ignores the effort by Americans to win higher salaries, more secure employment and it also ignores the gains to civic cohesion from reduced social confusion and uncertainty. Instead, the brief claims there is bedrock guarantee of benefits for immigrants and employers:

Immigrants, family members, andbusinesses deserve much betterand Congress and the Constitution entitle them toan immigration system that is administered reasonably, non-arbitrarily, and in accordwith statutory requirements. The Order contravenes that bedrock guarantee.

Roughly 86 percent of people living in the United States are native-born Americans.But the legal brief also excluded ordinary Americans from their own nation, saying that the country is a nation of immigrants, not of native-born Americans.

America proudly describes itself as a nation of immigrants We are: in 1910, 14.7% of the population wasforeign born; in 2010, 12.9%.2 A quarter of us have at least one parent who wasborn outside the country. Close to half of us have a grandparent born somewhereelse. Nearly all of us trace our lineage to another country.

Each year, 4 million American youths enter the workforce to seek jobs that pay enough to afford a house and a family.

The federal governments policy of importing a huge number of legal immigrants and contract workers lowers Americans salaries by roughly $500 billion a year, according to a Harvard professor, Nearly all of $500 billion is scooped up in greater profits for companies and investors. If the worker inflow is reduced, Americans wages will rise and investors stock prices will temporarily fall, according to a June 2016 report by a stock-market firm.

ManyAmericans are unemployed or have given up looking for work. Roughly 10 percent of American prime age men, or 7 million men aged 25 to 54, have dropped out of the nations workforce, at enormous cost to themselves, their communities and to the nations economic health. Many other Americans are stuck in low-wage work in the heartland of the nation, while investors create jobs for immigrants along the two coasts.

Read the legal brief here.

The rest is here:
Silicon Valley Wants More Foreign Workers, Asks Court to Ban President's Immigration Reform - Breitbart News