Mediaboss Marketing

President Trump's tweeted transgender military ban on July 26 drew immediate criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, who were caught unawares by the decision. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

In early 2016, when the controversy over North Carolina's transgender bathroom law was dominating the headlines, Donald Trump broke with others in his party, such as Sen. Ted Cruz. He suggested this particular culture war wasn't worth fighting.

North Carolina did something that was very strong. And they're paying a big price. There's a lot of problems, Trump said. He added: Leave it the way it is. North Carolina, what they're going through with all the business that's leaving, all of the strife and this is on both sides. Leave it the way it is.

That Trump looks a lot different than the one we saw Wednesday. He announced on Twitter that he would ban transgender people from serving in any capacity in the U.S. Military.

This is something even the Obama administration wrestled with, andthe Pentagonrescinded its ban on transgender service members only about a year ago. But Trump's decision is a bold one for a few reasons: 1) In any capacity sounds like an extremely broad ban, and 2) Trump's choice of words tremendous medical costs and disruption are likely to outragethe LGBT community. That's a community that had hoped Trump, whatever his other policies, would be something of an ally, or at least not an adversary.

President Trump announced that transgender troops won't be allowed to serve in the military on July 26, reversing the Pentagon's 2016 decision to lift the ban. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

It's not totally clear that Trump is preparing to go down the culture-warrior road here, but for an embattled president who seems to love controversy andis increasingly just trying to maintain his base, itwould seem an attractive and logical move.And that's a prospect that GOP leaders should be very concerned about.

I think Commentary's Noah Rothman put it well here, suggesting that the culture wars could be a kind of emergency fallback for Trump, who faces a broadening Russia investigation and a record-low approval rating for a new president:

There are few better ways to rally the socially conservative troops than to warn about things like the dangers of transgender people serving alongside U.S. troops or using the wrong bathrooms. A bathroom law debate in Houston in 2015 included some of the most brutal and suggestive campaign ads you'll ever see, with plenty of innuendo aboutsex offenders entering bathrooms with children.

Campaign for Houston released a video ad against a bathroom law in Houston in 2015. (Campaign for Houston)

But whilelocal and state Republicans have waged bathroom-bill fights, the national GOP has largely steered clear of them. And as the country has moved sharply in favor of same-sex marriage and LGBT rights, the national GOP has largely moved on from these issues. Rather than taking progressive positions, it has simply ignored them.More than a decade after values voters were supposed to have delivered George W. Bush his reelection win, the party has recognizedthat the country has moved past it on these issues.

And that's because it has seen the polls and it saw what happened in North Carolina. Even as Trump was carrying the state, Republican Gov. Pat McCrory, who defended the bathroom law, lost reelection. He was one of thevery few big-name Republicans who actually underperformed Trump, andthere are plenty who tied McCrory's loss directly to that bathroom bill.

[Trumps stance on LGBT rights has always been confusing]

But Trump's decision is already reigniting the culture wars, to some degree. An anonymous Trump administration official offered this hugely cynical quote to Axios's Jonathan Swan on Wednesday morning:

"This forces Democrats in Rust Belt states like Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, to take complete ownership of this issue. How will the blue collar voters in these states respond when senators up for re-election in 2018 like Debbie Stabenow are forced to make their opposition to this a key plank of their campaigns?"

In response to that quote, another White House official distanced the decision from that kind of political calculation. When I read that, I was like, what's wrong with whoever you are? the official told The Washington Post's Philip Rucker. This was not a political decision. It was a military readiness and military resource decision.

But then the official added: It will be fun to watch some of them [Democrats] have to defend this, but that was never an impetus.

Even that quote should terrify the GOP. The idea that anybody in the White House sees political gain from this decision either directly or indirectly suggests the culture wars are on the table.

Update: Shortly after this posted, Trump tweeted something else that suggests he might be wading into the culture wars.

Read the original here:
'It will be fun to watch [Democrats] have to defend this': Why Trump's transgender military ban should frighten GOP - Washington Post

One of Chicagos most prominent African-American clergy organizations, The Leaders Network, along with a number of its allies, have vowed to join Rev. Al Sharpton, the National Action Network, and several hundred faith leaders for the 1,000 Ministers March in Washington, D.C. in a call for social justice.

The announcement of the March collaboration was made at a press conference held at New Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church, 4301 W. Washington Blvd., the home church of Rev. Marshall Hatch, co-chairman of the board for The Leaders Network. The march is scheduled to kick-off from the Dr. King monument and travel to the Department of Justice on August 28. The date of the march comes with historical relevance as on August 28, 1963, Dr. King delivered his iconic I Have a Dream speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

You cant go to the end of the speech and grab the dream without the content of what the dream is about, said Sharpton. I dont think the march is to influence as much as it is to announce to the nation that we will not be turned back.

Sharpton, flanked by over a dozen faith leaders, declared throughout his statement that dream busters will not be allowed to continue their assignment of subverting justice without opposition. He highlighted some of the remarks made by President Donald Trump and U.S. Attorney Jeff Sessions with regards to Chicagos gun violence and what appears to be a high level of disinterest in enforcing the consent decree issued by the U.S. Department of Justice with regards to the systemic racial and police brutality issues facing Chicagos Police Department.

President Trump said hes going to send in the Feds, but you should not send the Feds in and say they are not going to deal with the report from the U.S. Department of Justice, said Sharpton. You must enforce the patrolling of these communities with the sensitivity to the patterns and practice that some police have demonstrated in these communities. You cant have it both ways; you must fight criminal behavior whether the criminal has on blue jeans or a blue uniform; a criminal is a criminal and ought to be treated like that.

Sharpton explained he made the call to 1,000 ministers because its time we stood up and proclaimed that its time for the Christian Right to meet the right Christians.

For those Evangelical ministers who stood in the Oval Office and laid hands on President Trump, my question is what ministers will lay hands on the poor, those who will lose Medicare, those who will be subject to no gun control laws, those who will be subject to schools closing in Chicago, said Sharpton.

Pastor Cy Fields, president of The Leaders Network, explained the reason behind the groups collective decision to participate in the march is because of their call for justice. He said leading up to the March efforts will be made to galvanize a collaboration of faith groups and organizations with the goal of bringing a delegation to Washington, D.C. He made sure to clarify that the March was open to all genders, denominations, and generations.

We have found that this current administration seeks to work against all that Dr. King believed in and so were going to stand on the moral issue of justice and justice for all, said Fields.

Fields said the matter of relevancy extends to Chicago by highlighting the dissent decree made by the U.S. Department of Justice that has been widely disregarded by Sessions since hes been sworn into office.

Whats in jeopardy is the hard work, labor of so many and the voices of those on the streets and of those who suffered at the hands of police violence that means that there will not be any supervision over the reforms, said Fields.

Pastor Ira Acree, co-chairman of the board for The Leaders Network, called for DOJ oversight in the execution for the consent decree suggested and said it was the only way to begin the process of creating true reform within CPD.

Were still reeling from the aftermath of the Laquan McDonald murder cover up, said Acree. We have extra motivation to have a strong presence on the premises of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. A scathing DOJ report gave us information for the world to know, but many of us locally already knew that we have police abuse that goes on in Chicago, systemic racism, and a blue code of silence.

Acree called for an end of race baiting rhetoric in favor of actions that would truly make America better for once and all.

Individuals interested in attending the march alongside The Leaders Network were asked to visit

theleadersnetworkchicago.org for more details.

Originally posted here:
Chicago's Leaders Network to Join Rev. Al Sharpton's DC March - Chicago Defender

Re: Hunting in Kuwait as explanation why this Noor guy shot through the car

I remember being in Kuwait with the president of the investment bank I worked for. We were invited by one of our directors to hunt turtle doves. There were five of us in all and each had a 12-gauge shotgun.

Instructions were: Only shoot straight and up; shotgun point in air resting on shoulders when not being used. Thats it. I was on the far left, and the fellow on the other end was a Syrian.

Well, we were out there and no straggling turtle doves were migrating. A half-hour later, not one shot was fired. Then, two birds from a tree ahead darted out, between me and the houses on my left.

We all looked, but the Syrian turned toward us and began shooting over our heads at the birds. The rest of us hit the ground. Even though our host took his gun away, I gave them mine and went back because, if there is a way to overreact, the Syrian would think it is natural and cant even consider the consequences.

You cannot place these people in a position of authority (for example with a gun in their hands). They will always shoot as a default reaction to anything that is instant. Neither training nor thinking can change their natures.

And that is why he shot. He had a gun.

Since then, weve found out that this is exactly why Officer Mohamed Noor shot the gentle yoga instructor walking toward the police car. He heard a loud noise or as Powerline blog is calling it, The Loud Noise Heard Round the World.

Noor shot from the passenger seat, killing Justine Damond, according to his partner, sitting at the wheel, who is presumably now deaf. Damond had called 911 to report what sounded like a rape in the alley behind her house, and was approaching the responding police car when she was shot.

As usually happens when Muslims attack, the press is consumed with worry about their mental state and well-being.

Sample Headlines:

Somalis on edge after Minneapolis cop named in fatal shooting The Daily Herald (Everett, Washington), July 18, 2017

Somalis in Minneapolis on defensive after police shooting St. Paul Pioneer Press (Minnesota), July 21, 2017

Minneapolis shooting brings unwelcome attention to Somalis Associated Press, July 22, 2017

There are nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world, amounting to a quarter of the worlds population, controlling 50 countries. The English-speaking world is about a fifth that size and constitutes a dwindling majority in about a half-dozen countries. But, somehow, no matter how the story is written, Muslims always get to play the victim, and Anglo-Saxons are cast as the aggressors.

Thats why a Somali cops fatal shooting of a pajama-clad Good Samaritan has gone directly into the Be Nice to Muslims! file, rather than the Why Are All These Somalis Here? file. (Answer: Because of an earlier mistake with excessive Scandinavian immigration.)

I cant help noticing that it was precisely the Be Nice to Muslims! dictate that put this Somali nincompoop on the police force in the first place.

Among Noors evident errors the night he killed Justine:

1) Shooting from the passenger seat, the bullet whizzing inches past his partners face, through the drivers side window;

2) Not turning his bodycam on when responding to a 911 call;

3) Shooting to kill because he heard a loud noise;

4) Believing that white women in America pose a threat to a policeman.

A few of the Weather Underground ladies were accomplices to cop-killings, 40 years ago, but even they werent lone white women cop-killers.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, women of any race committed about 10 percent of all murders from 1980 to 2008, and black people committed a majority of all murders. Other than a small child, its difficult to think of a demographic that poses less of a threat to a policeman in America than a 40-year-old white woman.

Noors African-American neighbor, Chris Miller, said he was shocked when he heard about Damonds shooting until he found out it was Noor. Miller told The Daily Telegraph (Australia) that his Somali neighbor was quick to anger and was always going off on women and children. He is extremely nervous, Miller said, a little jumpy he doesnt really respect women, the least thing you say to him can set him off.

Sounds perfect for a police officer!

May we see Officer Noors cadet exam? His training reports? Does anyone believe there is the slightest possibility that Noor was not rushed through the Police Academy so that the nice people of Minneapolis could feel good about themselves for having a real Somali on the police force?

Minnesotas importation of these stone-age people is a completely self-inflicted wound. Its as if the state decided to inject itself with Hepatitis C. Hey, you know what? Were too white and pure. Everyone tie a vein off and give yourself a shot of hep C. We could learn from that!

With Somalis, you get all the social pathologies of Muslims and the American underclass rolled into one package. Theres the terrorism and pederasty but also the criminality and joblessness!

At least with taxpayer-draining Mexican illegals, you can say, yes, but they provide the rich with such cheap labor! Someone, somewhere in America, gets a benefit. There is absolutely no benefit to the more than 100,000 Somalis brought in by Minnesota, except to feed the Scandinavian ethnomasochism, expressed as arrogant self-regard.

Gosh, theyre good people. R.I.P. Justine.

Continue reading here:
Ann Coulter: Pretty White Australian Girls' Lives Matter - Breitbart News

EU President Jean-Claude Juncker said the bloc would act "within days" if it does not receive reassurances on the potential impact of new sanctions on European interests.

The bill, drawn up largely in response to Moscow's alleged meddling in the 2016 US election, calls for new measures against Russia, North Korea and Iran. It also limits any effort by the White House to weaken such penalties.

The EU has previously coordinated with the US over sanctions in response to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. But it fears the latest measures could hit companies that are involved in the financing of a controversial new pipeline, Nord Stream 2, that would carry natural gas from Russia to Germany.

Juncker said the bill could have "unintended unilateral effects" on the EU's energy security. "This is why the Commission concluded today that if our concerns are not taken into account sufficiently, we stand ready to act appropriately within a matter of days," Juncker said. "America first cannot mean that Europe's interests come last."

Germany, which strongly backs the new pipeline, said it was concerned over the sanctions. It would be "unacceptable for the United States to use possible sanctions as an instrument to serve the interests of US industry policies," Foreign Ministry spokesman Martin Schfer said Wednesday.

France called the US bill "unlawful" due to its "extraterritorial reach," saying it could impact Europeans if enacted. "We have challenged similar texts in the past," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "To protect ourselves against the extraterritorial effects of US legislation, we will have to work on adjusting our French and European laws."

If the bill clears a vote in the US Senate, it then heads to the desk of US President Donald Trump. It is not clear if that will happen before Congress breaks for summer recess at the end of the month.

Trump has not indicated whether he will sign the bill, which also gives Congress a way to block any easing of new sanctions against Russia, North Korea and Iran, as well as older ones against Russia.

Trump's presidency has been dogged by questions his campaign's ties with Russia and his pre-election promises to improve relations with Moscow. The Trump administration and the Russian government have consistently denied collusion.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov warned that "the authors and sponsors of this legislation are taking a serious step towards the destruction of prospects for normalizing relations with Russia," according to state news agency Tass.

Ryabkov said the plan "does not fit the framework of common sense" but insisted Russia was "not succumbing to emotions" in its response.

"We will work to find ways to move forward, persistently, consistently looking for ways of searching for compromise on issues, which are significant for Russia and, I think, for the US," he said.

The Kremlin said the proposed sanctions bill was "sad news in terms of Russia-US relations" and for the "prospects of their development."

"This is no less disappointing from the point of view of international law and international trade relations," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. But he added that Moscow would wait to form a full opinion until the draft becomes law.

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani said his country would respond to the US new sanctions, according to Iranian state broadcaster IRIB.

"The US is continuing hostility towards Iran and Iran will definitely respond to US sanctions," Rouhani reportedly said during a cabinet meeting Wednesday. He did not say how Tehran would respond.

The European Union expressed frustration that it had not been consulted over the new proposals. "New sanctions should always be coordinated between allies," EU President Jean-Claude Juncker said in a statement.

The latest set of sanctions against Russia are intended to penalize its alleged election meddling, as well as its human rights violations, annexation of Crimea and military operations in eastern Ukraine.

"While the President supports tough sanctions on North Korea, Iran and Russia, the White House is reviewing the House legislation and awaits a final legislative package for the President's desk," White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Tuesday.

However, aides and members of Congress from both parties say that if Trump does decide to veto it, there will be sufficient votes to override the veto and enact the bill into law.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly ridiculed the sanctions and called on countries, particularly the United States, to drop them.

Moscow rejects claims it interfered in the US election process, insists its annexation of Crimea was legal and denies direct involvement in the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

CNN's Yon Pomrenze reported from Moscow and Laura Smith-Spark wrote from London. CNN's Clare Sebastian, Mary Ilyushina, Amir Daftari and Saskya Vandoorne contributed to this report.

See the original post:
EU warns US over 'America first' Russia sanctions bill - CNN

The Commission substantiates its grave concerns on the planned reform of the judiciary in Poland in a Rule of Law Recommendation addressed to the Polish authorities. In the Commission's assessment, this reform amplifies the systemic threat to the rule of law in Poland already identified in the rule of law procedure started by the Commission in January 2016. The Commission requests the Polish authorities to address these problems within one month. The Commission asks the Polish authorities notably not to take any measure to dismiss or force the retirement of Supreme Court judges. If such a measure is taken, the Commission stands ready to immediately trigger the Article 7(1) procedure[1] a formal warning by the EU that can be issued by four fifths of the Member States in the Council of Ministers.

The Commission also decides to launch an infringement proceeding against Poland for breaches of EU law. The College will immediately send a Letter of Formal Notice once the Law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation is published.

At the same time, the Commission recalls its offer to pursue a constructive dialogue with the Polish Government.

President Jean-Claude Juncker said: "The Commission is determined to defend the rule of law in all our Member States as a fundamental principle on which our European Union is built. An independent judiciary is an essential precondition for membership in our Union. The EU can therefore not accept a system which allows dismissing judges at will. Independent courts are the basis of mutual trust between our Member States and our judicial systems. If the Polish government goes ahead with undermining the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in Poland, we will have no other choice than to trigger Article 7."

First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said: "Our Recommendations to the Polish authorities are clear. It is time to restore the independence of the Constitutional Tribunal and to either withdraw the laws reforming the judiciary or bring them in line with the Polish Constitution and with European standards on judicial independence. Polish courts like the courts of all Member States are called upon to provide an effective remedy in case of violations of EU law, in which case they act as the "judges of the Union" and must comply with the requirements of the independence of the judiciary in line with the Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. We want to resolve these issues together in a constructive way. The Commission's hand remains extended to the Polish authorities for dialogue, and we welcome any steps to amend these laws in line with our Recommendations."

1. Rule of Law Recommendation

The Rule of Law Recommendation adopted today complements two previous Recommendations, adopted on 27 July and 21 December 2016, and concerns the lack of an independent and legitimate Constitutional review in Poland. As it stands, the Polish authorities have still not addressed the concerns identified in the first two Recommendations. Moreover the Polish authorities have now taken additional steps which aggravate concerns about judicial independence and significantly increase the systemic threat to the rule of law in Poland.

The Commission's Rule of Law Recommendation sent today to Poland covers four new legislative acts now adopted by thePolish Parliament which in the Commission's assessment will increase the systemic threat to the rule of law: the Law on the Supreme Court, the Law on the National Council for the Judiciary (both 'vetoed' on 24 July by the President of the Republic), the Law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation (signed by the President of the Republic on 25 July and awaiting publication and entry into force); and the Law on the National School of Judiciary (published and in force since 13 July). These Laws, in their current form, will structurally undermine the independence of the judiciary in Poland and have an immediate and very significant negative impact on the independent functioning of the judiciary.

In particular, the dismissal of Supreme Court judges will seriously aggravate the systemic threat to the rule of law. The Commission therefore asks the Polish authorities not to take any measure to dismiss or force the retirement of the Supreme Court judges. Should the Polish authorities take such measures, the Commission is ready to immediately activate the mechanism set out in Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union.

On the basis of its Rule of Law Recommendation, the Commission invites the Polish government to address the concerns outlined within one month and to inform the Commission of the steps taken.

2. Infringement procedure on the basis of EU law

The College of Commissioners also took a decision to prepare an infringement procedure for the possible breach of EU law. The College is ready to send a Letter of Formal Notice concerning the Law on the Ordinary Courts as soon as it is officially published. The Commission's key legal concern identified in this law relates to the discrimination on the basis of gender due to the introduction of a different retirement age for female judges (60 years) and male judges (65 years). This is contrary to Article 157 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Directive 2006/54 on gender equality in employment. In the Letter of Formal Notice, the Commission will also raise concerns that by giving the Minister of Justice the discretionary power to prolong the mandate of judges which have reached retirement age, as well as to dismiss and appoint Court Presidents, the independence of Polish courts will be undermined (see Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in combination with Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights).

Next steps

The Commission's Recommendation invites the Polish Government to address the problems within one month, and to inform the Commission of the steps taken to that effect. The Commission stands ready to pursue a constructive dialogue with the Polish Government. With regards to the infringement procedure, the Commission will send the Letter of Formal Notice once the Law on the Ordinary Courts is published.

Background

The rule of law is one of the common values upon which the European Union is founded. It is enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union. The European Commission, together with the European Parliament and the Council, is responsible under the Treaties for guaranteeing the respect of the rule of law as a fundamental value of our Union and making sure that EU law, values and principles are respected. Events in Poland led the European Commission to open a dialogue with the Polish Government in January 2016 under the Rule of Law Framework. The Framework introduced by the Commission on 11 March 2014 has three stages (see graphic in Annex 1). The entire process is based on a continuous dialogue between the Commission and the Member State concerned. The Commission keeps the European Parliament and Council regularly and closely informed.

The European Parliament has consistently supported the Commission's concerns, including in the two Resolutions of 13 April and 14 September, 2016. On 16 May 2017, the Commission informed the General Affairs Council of the situation in Poland. A very broad majority of Member States supported the Commission's role and efforts to address this issue, and called upon the Polish Government to resume the dialogue with the Commission.

A wide range of other actors at the European and international levels have expressed their deep concern about the reform of the Polish justice system: representatives of the judiciary across Europe, including the Network of Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union and the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary, the Venice Commission, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, the United Nations Human Rights Committee as well as numerous civil society organisations such as Amnesty International and the Human Rights and Democracy Network.

For more information:

[1]Article 7.1 of the Treaty on European Union provides for the Council, acting by a majority of four fifths of its members, to determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the common values referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty (see Annex II). The Commission can trigger this process by a reasoned proposal.

Annex I Rule of Law Framework

Annex II Article 7 Treaty on European Union

1.On a reasoned proposal by one third of the Member States, by the European Parliament or by the European Commission, the Council, acting by a majority of four fifths of its members after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2. Before making such a determination, the Council shall hear the Member State in question and may address recommendations to it, acting in accordance with the same procedure.

The Council shall regularly verify that the grounds on which such a determination was made continue to apply.

2.The European Council, acting by unanimity on a proposal by one third of the Member States or by the Commission and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2, after inviting the Member State in question to submit its observations.

3.Where a determination under paragraph 2 has been made, the Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide to suspend certain of the rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to the Member State in question, including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council. In doing so, the Council shall take into account the possible consequences of such a suspension on the rights and obligations of natural and legal persons.

The obligations of the Member State in question under the Treaties shall in any case continue to be binding on that State.

4.The Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide subsequently to vary or revoke measures taken under paragraph 3 in response to changes in the situation which led to their being imposed.

5.The voting arrangements applying to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council for the purposes of this Article are laid down in Article 354 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Read the original:
European Commission acts to preserve the rule of law in Poland - EU News