The Serious Side - part 7

Ladies, I couldn’t agree more. There are days when I wish the worst for this monster, especially after reading about his ‘staged’ appearance at the climate session AND his latest act of extortion of a foreign leader. He doesn’t have an ounce of humanity, humility, decency or shame.

And whilst all this noise is going on, this seems to be happening...

https://twitter.com/tripgabriel/status/1176183355018104832

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7496145/Pressure-grows-Trump-transcript-says-clear-him.html

[size=34]Nancy Pelosi plans to meet with House Democrats at 4pm TODAY on whether to impeach Trump as they reach a 'tipping point'[/size]

• Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi will convene the Democratic caucus at 4pm on Tuesday to discuss whether to impeach President Donald Trump 
  
  
• It comes after reports Trump encouraged Ukrainian officials to re-open inquiries into business dealings of former vice-president Joe Biden's son, Hunter
  
  
• Biden forced out former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin as he was investigating an energy company called Burisma Holdings
  
  
• The company paid Hunter Biden to be a member of its board
  
  
• It is not clear what law, if any, Trump may have broken by urging the Ukrainian government to re-open the case 
  
  

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
PUBLISHED: 16:11 EDT, 23 September 2019 | UPDATED: 01:01 EDT, 24 September 2019

     



Fresh calls for the impeachment of President Donald Trump will move a step closer on Tuesday as House Democrats head into a closed-door meeting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi at 4pm. 
Democrats themselves remained divided on moving forward with an effort to impeach Trump. 
Pelosi has resisted calls for impeachment and is sticking with her position that Congress must not start formal proceedings unless the American public demands it. 
However, Pelosi and her leadership team on the various oversight committees are considering bringing forward a resolution that will put the House on record on this matter, according to a Democratic leadership aide unauthorized to discuss the private talks. The aide was granted anonymity.


+5



House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has resisted calls for impeachment and is sticking with her position that Congress must not start formal proceedings unless the public demands it


+5


Allegations that President Donald Trump pressured Ukraine's leader to investigate the family of political rival Joe Biden at the same time he was withholding millions in aid from the Eastern European nation are raising alarms in Congress 
However, Pelosi said Sunday that unless the administration provides more information to Congress by the scheduled Thursday hearing at the intelligence committee, its officials 'will be entering a grave new chapter of lawlessness which will take us into a whole new stage of investigation.'

'I think we're reaching a tipping point both within our base and within our caucus,' Rep. Gerry Connolly, a Democrat on the House Oversight and Foreign Affairs committees, told CNN on Monday.
'This weekend, all I hear at home is when are Democrats going to get tough?' Connolly said. 'We are looking weak.'
Allegations that President Donald Trump pressured Ukraine's leader to investigate the family of political rival Joe Biden at the same time he was withheld millions in aid from the Eastern European nation are raising alarms in Congress and pushing a wave of House Democrats toward impeachment proceedings.
Late Monday, an influential group of freshmen Democrats who served in the military and national security before winning office said Trump's actions cut to the core of the country's defenses. Their views, as centrist lawmakers from previously Republican-held districts where Trump has been popular, hold sway with party leadership.


+5


Trump acknowledged bringing up Joe Biden and Hunter Biden during a call with the Ukrainian president
At issue is a summer phone call with Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelenskiy, in which Trump is said to have pushed for investigations into Biden. In the days before that call, Trump ordered the aid to Ukraine frozen, according to reports in The Washington Post and The New York Times.
Trump has insisted he did nothing wrong and has denied that any requests for help in procuring damaging information about Biden were tied to the aid freeze.
Democrats, and some Republicans, urged the White House to be open about his actions, which are the center of a whistleblower complaint. But with no new information from the administration forthcoming, more than a dozen Democrats, including some in House leadership, added their names to those calling for impeachment proceedings.
The sudden rush of activity shows the extent to which Trump's call to the foreign leader, and his subsequent comments about the conversation, are raising further questions about whether the president improperly used his office to pressure another country as a way of helping his own reelection prospects.
'These allegations are stunning, both in the national security threat they pose and the potential corruption they represent,' wrote the seven freshmen, who include a former fighter pilot, soldiers, officers and intelligence analysts.




+5


Meanwhile, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York called on Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to investigate the whistleblower's complaint 
'We do not arrive at this conclusion lightly,' the lawmakers wrote in a Washington Post op-ed. 'These new allegations are a threat to all we have sworn to protect. We must preserve the checks and balances envisioned by the Founders and restore the trust of the American people in our government. And that is what we intend to do.'
Congress on Monday pressed for full disclosure of a whistleblower's complaint about Trump and pushed the White House to release a transcript of Trump's call with the Ukraine president.
The president has acknowledged the phone call. On Monday, he said he didn't want to give money to Ukraine - if there were corruption issues.
'It's very important to talk about corruption,' Trump told reporters as he opened meetings at the United Nations. 'If you don't talk about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is, is corrupt?'
Later Monday, Trump denied telling the Ukraine president that his country would only get U.S. aid if it investigated Biden's son. 'I didn't do it,' he said.
[size=18]Trump says he 'didn't put any pressure on' Ukraine over Biden




[/size]





+5


President Trump said Monday he may, or may not, release details or a transcript of the call but has stressed that foreign leaders should feel free to speak frankly with an American president without fear that the details of their conversations will later be disclosed 
Trump has sought, without evidence, to implicate Biden and his son Hunter in the kind of corruption that has long plagued Ukraine. Hunter Biden served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company at the same time his father was leading the Obama administration's diplomatic dealings with Kyiv. Though the timing raised concerns among anti-corruption advocates, there has been no evidence of wrongdoing by either the former vice president or his son.
The matter is under new scrutiny following the whistleblower's mid-August complaint, which followed Trump's July 25 call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. The person who filed the complaint did not have firsthand knowledge of the call, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Lawmakers are demanding details of the complaint, but the acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, has refused to share that information, citing presidential privilege. He is set to testify Thursday before the House.
'Let's see the transcript,' said Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, about Trump's call with the Ukraine president.
The chairmen of the House intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Government Reform committees are threatening to subpoena Secretary of State Mike Pompeo if he does not produce information about whether Trump and his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, inappropriately tried to influence the Ukraine government for political gain.
Meanwhile, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York called on Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to investigate the whistleblower's complaint. In a letter to McConnell, he said that the Republicans' 'see no evil, hear no evil' attitude toward the president's actions 'is unacceptable and must change.'
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida doesn't think Trump's actions are grounds for impeachment, but said he wouldn't have called a foreign leader to discuss a rival.
'I don't think he should have raised the topic of Joe Biden with the Ukraine president,' Rubio said.











Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Monday the matter is best left behind closed doors in the classified setting of the intelligence committee, though he did push into the spotlight his own role in securing the Ukraine aid.
McConnell said he had been 'personally pressuring' the Trump administration this summer in calls to Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper to release the U.S. aid money.
Trump said Monday he may, or may not, release details or a transcript of the call but has stressed that foreign leaders should feel free to speak frankly with an American president without fear that the details of their conversations will later be disclosed.
Hunter Biden was hired by the Ukrainian gas company Burisma Holdings in April 2014, two months after Ukraine's Russia-friendly former president was ousted by protesters and as Biden's father was heavily involved in U.S. efforts to support the new pro-Western government. The move immediately raised concerns that the Ukrainian firm, whose owner was a political ally of the ousted president, was seeking to gain influence with the Obama administration.
Trump and Zelenskiy plan to meet on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly this week.

[size=34]What it would take for Congress to impeach Trump? [/size]

Some of U.S. President Donald Trump's critics in the House of Representatives are calling for an impeachment investigation following a whistleblower complaint that has roiled Washington.
The complaint, which came from inside the intelligence community, focused on a July phone call in which Trump repeatedly pressured Ukraine´s president to investigate Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, who is one of Trump´s chief political rivals, according to reports by the Wall Street Journal and other U.S. media outlets.
Some Democratic lawmakers have said they have no choice but to try to impeach Trump if he pressured a foreign leader to influence a U.S. election.
The majority of the 235 Democrats in the House already supported an impeachment inquiry based on former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report, which declined to make a judgment on whether Trump obstructed justice but outlined 10 instances in which Trump tried to have Mueller fired or otherwise impede the investigation.
Trump on Sunday acknowledged that he discussed Biden with Ukraine´s president but defended the call as perfectly appropriate.
"The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, with largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place and largely the fact that we don´t want our people like Vice President Biden and his son creating to the corruption already in the Ukraine," Mr. Trump told reporters.
Opinion polls continue to show voters sharply divided over removing Trump from office through impeachment, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has opposed impeachment as a politically risky move unless investigators find powerful evidence of misconduct by Trump that can unify public opinion.
Here is how the impeachment process works.
WHY IMPEACHMENT?
The founders of the United States created the office of the presidency and feared that its powers could be abused. So they included impeachment as a central part of the Constitution.
They gave the House "the sole power of impeachment;" the Senate, "the sole power to try all impeachments;" and the chief justice of the Supreme Court the duty of presiding over impeachment trials in the Senate.
The president, under the Constitution, can be removed from office for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." What exactly that means is unclear. Historically, it can encompass corruption and other abuses, including trying to obstruct judicial proceedings.
No president has ever been removed as a direct result of impeachment. One, President Richard Nixon, resigned before he could be removed. Two, presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, were impeached by the House, but not convicted by the Senate.
HOW DOES IT WORK?
Impeachment begins in the House, the lower chamber, which debates and votes on whether to bring charges against the president via approval of an impeachment resolution, or "articles of impeachment," by a simple majority of the House's 435 members.
If the House approves such a resolution, a trial is then held in the Senate. House members act as the prosecutors; the senators as jurors; the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court presides. A two-thirds majority vote is required in the 100-member Senate to convict and remove a president. This has never happened.
CAN THE SUPREME COURT OVERTURN?
No. Trump has said on Twitter that he would ask the Supreme Court to intervene if Democrats tried to impeach him. But the founders explicitly rejected allowing appeal of a Senate conviction to the federal judiciary.
PARTY BREAKDOWN IN CONGRESS?
The House has 235 Democrats, 199 Republicans, and one independent. As a result, the Democrats could impeach Trump with no Republican support.
In 1998, when Republicans had a House majority, the chamber voted largely along party lines to impeach Clinton, a Democrat.
The Senate now has 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two independents who usually vote with the Democrats. Conviction and removal of a president would require 67 votes. So, for Trump to be removed from office via impeachment, at least 20 Republicans and all the Democrats and independents would have to vote against him.
WHO BECOMES PRESIDENT IF TRUMP IS REMOVED?
In the unlikely event the Senate convicted Trump, Vice President Mike Pence would become president for the remainder of Trump's term, which ends on January 20, 2021.

Watching the news just now, I was reminded that even with all that's been going on - with all the hoopla about how important it is to vote - only 48% of eligible voters got off their butts and actually went to the ballot box in the last elections ...and that was considered a great turnout!

We have taken too much for granted for too long.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7497911/Supreme-Court-delivers-ruling-Boris-Johnson-broke-law.html

[size=34]Eleven Supreme Court judges rule UNANIMOUSLY that Boris Johnson's suspension of Parliament WAS unlawful - in historic ruling that sends Prime Minister's Brexit plans into chaos as Speaker Bercow vows to recall MPs 'without delay'[/size]

• Supreme Court handed down landmark judgment at 10.30am today and slam the PM's motive for shut down
  
  
• Lady Hale said: 'The decision to prorogue was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating Parliament'
  
  
• UK's 11 most senior judges found Boris Johnson gave unlawful advice to Queen when asking her to prorogue
  
  
• PM is in New York and says he won't resign - but will be considering whether he will try close Commons again 
  
  

By MARTIN ROBINSON, CHIEF REPORTER and JAMES TAPSFIELD, MAILONLINE POLITICAL EDITOR
PUBLISHED: 05:30 EDT, 24 September 2019 | UPDATED: 07:39 EDT, 24 September 2019

     


Boris Johnson was humiliated in the Supreme Court today and Britain was thrown into a fresh constitutional crisis as judges ruled unanimously he illegally prorogued Parliament in an 'extreme' move to 'frustrate' debate on Brexit. 
In an eviscerating judgment President Lady Hale said the Prime Minister's decision to ask the Queen to shut down the Commons for five weeks was 'unlawful, void and of no effect'.
Commons Speaker John Bercow has immediately grabbed power and is hoping to recall MPs either tonight or tomorrow with the PM away in New York. 
In a revolutionary ruling at 10.30am today, Lady Hale said: 'The decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions', adding: 'Parliament has not been prorogued'.

And in an extraordinary attack on the PM's motives, Lady Hale added: 'The effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme. No justification for taking action with such an extreme effect has been put before the court'.
She refused to say if he had lied to the Queen - but many of Johnson's critics claim the ruling is tacit confirmation that the judges believe he misled the monarch.
Mr Johnson's allies have called the ruling was a 'disgrace'and said the court case was an attempt to subvert democracy more than three years after Britain voted to leave the EU. 
The court's decision sparked unprecedented courtroom scenes with arch-remainer Gina Miller, who helped defeat Mr Johnson, hugging her lawyer Lord Pannick QC and others as her victory over the Brexiteer Prime Minister was confirmed. 
Outside in Parliament Square her supporters cheered and chanted: 'Johnson out' as she said: 'The ruling today speaks volumes. This Prime Minister must open the doors of Parliament tomorrow. MPs must get back and be brave and bold in holding this unscrupulous government to account'.
Minutes later Jeremy Corbyn celebrated with supporters at the Labour party conference in Brighton and demanded the Prime Minister's resignation as Mr Johnson woke up 3,500 miles away from London in New York where he will meet with President Donald Trump at the United Nations' headquarters this afternoon. 
The PM has already vowed not to resign from No 10 if he lost the case - and he will now be considering whether he can legally defy the court and ask the Queen to prorogue the Commons again.  
But rival MPs seeking to deliver a fatal blow to his premiership are expected to call a vote of no confidence in the Government as soon as the Commons reopens, which if lost could end Boris' premiership and lead to a general election.  
[size=10][size=18]Supreme Court: Proroguing parliament 'unlawful, void and of no effect'




Lo[/size][/size]








+13



Lady Hale delivers the verdict of the Supreme Court as they ruled that Boris broke the law when he shut down Parliament
[size=18]Gina Miller is congratulated following Supreme Court ruling




Lo[/size]



+13


Arch-remainer Gina Miller, who helped defeat Mr Johnson, hugged her lawyer Lord Pannick QC in the courtroom as her victory over the Brexiteer Prime Minister was confirmed


+13


Ms Miller told supporters that MPs should go back to work 'tomorrow' after the unprecedented Supreme Court win for remain supporters


+13



Mr Johnson is currently in New York (pictured) where he is to meet US President Donald Trump on Tuesday for talks at the United Nations General Assembly as the Supreme Court made its ruling

• 11 Supreme Court judges agree unanimously that Boris Johnson broke the law when asking the Queen to prorogue Parliament - but fell short of saying he lied to the monarch;
  
• Reading the judgment Lady Hale told the court: 'The decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions. The effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme. No justification for taking action with such an extreme effect has been put before the court';
  
• John Bercow seizes chance to recall Parliament saying he will do it 'without delay' and without asking Boris Johnson;
  
• The pound rose as soon as the news emerged as markets predict the ruling could delay or derail Brexit; 
  
• European Parliament's Brexit co-ordinator Guy Verhofstadt praises judges and says: 'At least one big relief in the Brexit saga: the rule of law in the UK is alive & kicking';
  
• Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage says Prime Minister's chief adviser Dominic Cummings, said to be the architect of the proroguation plane, must be sacked;  
  

[size=34]What happens now that the Supreme Court has ruled that prorogation was unlawful?[/size]

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Boris Johnson's prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. 
The ruling will have major ramifications for Brexit, the government and the country. 
Here's what is likely to happen next: 
Lady Hale, the President of the Supreme Court, said that suspending Parliament was 'unlawful, void and of no effect'. 
Effectively she said that as a result the order to prorogue Parliament had never actually been made. 
'Parliament has not been prorogued,' she said. 
Lady Hale said while the court was not entirely certain about what should happen next, it believed it should be up to the Commons Speaker John Bercow and the Lord Speaker to decide how to proceed. 
That means when Parliament sits again rests entirely in the hands of Parliament rather than the government. 
Mr Bercow responded to the ruling immediately and said that Parliament 'must convene without delay'. 
He said he will now consult the leaders of the respective political parties before announcing a final decision on when Parliament will sit again. 
However, the expectation will be that MPs and peers will return to Westminster as soon as possible, potentially as soon as tomorrow.
Mr Bercow said: 'I welcome the Supreme Court's judgement that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. 
'The judges have rejected the Government's claim that closing down Parliament for five weeks was merely standard practice to allow for a new Queen's Speech. 
'In reaching their conclusion, they have vindicated the right and duty of Parliament to meet at this crucial time to scrutinise the executive and hold Ministers to account. 
'As the embodiment of our Parliamentary democracy, the House of Commons must convene without delay. To this end, I will now consult the party leaders as a matter of urgency.' 
Mr Johnson suspended Parliament with the argument that he needed time to prepare a Queen's Speech which had been due to take place on October 14. 
Today's ruling effectively destroys that timetable and puts the government back to square one. 
Ministers will now have to decide how to proceed, with rumours that Mr Johnson could try to prorogue Parliament again.   
Such a move would be incredibly controversial. 
Mr Johnson had ruled out resigning in the event of the court ruling prorogation was unlawful. 
But he will now face intense pressure to consider his position. 
The UK remains on course to leave the EU on October 31 but today's decision means the run up to Halloween will be volatile and fraught with difficulty. 



Today's Supreme Court judgment will have seismic consequences over whether the Prime Minister built up over centuries can be neutered by the courts.
It also delivers a sledgehammer blow to his promise to take Britain out of the EU on October 31 'deal or No Deal' with remainer MPs ready to take control of the process. 
In the court's written judgment, Supreme Court president Lady Hale and deputy president Lord Reed said: 'Let us remind ourselves of the foundations of our constitution.
'We live in a representative democracy. The House of Commons exists because the people have elected its members. The Government is not directly elected by the people (unlike the position in some other democracies).
'The Government exists because it has the confidence of the House of Commons. It has no democratic legitimacy other than that.
'This means that it is accountable to the House of Commons - and indeed to the House of Lords - for its actions, remembering always that the actual task of governing is for the executive and not for Parliament or the courts.
'The first question, therefore, is whether the Prime Minister's action had the effect of frustrating or preventing the constitutional role of Parliament in holding the Government to account.' 
Jeremy Corbyn has already demanded an immediate recall of Parliament and an election to get a 'democratic' government.
He said: 'It shows the PM has acted wrongly in shutting down parliament. It demonstrates a contempt for democracy and an abuse of power.' 
Mr Corbyn said Boris Johnson would become 'the shortest-serving prime minister there has ever been' if he resigned.
He added: 'So, obey the law, take no-deal off the table and have an election to elect a government that respects democracy, that respects the rule of law and brings power back to the people, not usurps it in the way that Boris Johnson has done.
To huge cheers from supporters he said: 'Conference, I thank you.'
Labour's Keir Starmer told reporters in Brighton: 'We should be meeting as soon as we can, we're not closed down. It also means that we won't have a Queen's Speech because the parliamentary session has not been brought to an end.'
The Supreme Court suggested that Parliament can now immediately reconvene - but because of the unprecedented situation is still unclear exactly how this could happen.
Normally with a recall of the Commons the PM has responsibility for triggering MPs to sit again.
But Commons Speaker John Bercow and Lords Speaker Lord Fowler could be ready to declare that that Houses will sit tomorrow – or even later today. 
In a statement, Speaker Bercow said: 'I welcome the Supreme Court's judgement that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. 
'As the embodiment of our Parliamentary democracy, the House of Commons must convene without delay. To this end, I will now consult the party leaders as a matter of urgency.'
11 of the UK's most senior judges were asked to have the final say on two polar-opposite court cases brought as the PM vowed to take Britain out of the EU on October 31 'deal or No Deal'.
Last month the High Court in London threw out the case brought by arch-Remainer Gina Miller and former prime minister Sir John Major after three judges decided Mr Johnson's decision was 'political' and not a matter for them.
But the Court of Session in Edinburgh sided with a SNP-led case that the PM's decision was illegal and purely for political gain so should be reversed.
The Prime Minister wanted the Supreme Court to back the English decision and dismiss the Scottish one - but lost in an one of the most extraordinary legal cases involving a British leader in history.


+13



A smiling Gina Miller, an arch-Remainer who brought one of the cases against the Government, leaves the Supreme Court after today's historic ruling 
London Mayor Sadiq Khan has said Boris Johnson 'misled the British public, Parliament, the Queen and the Courts' about the reason he prorogued Parliament.

'The truth is that the Prime Minister wanted to silence our MPs and prevent them from debating and scrutinising his catastrophic plans for a no-deal Brexit,' he said in a statement shared to Twitter.
'Parliament must now be immediately recalled so that MPs can get on with their job of holding this undemocratic and dishonest Government to account.'
Jo Swinson, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said the judges' decision proved Boris Johnson was 'not fit to be Prime Minister'.
Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen has called the judgment 'an absolute disgrace'.
Pressed on whether Boris Johnson should resign, Mr Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) said: 'No, we need Boris to be strong.'

[size=34]Pound surges against the euro and US dollar following judgement [/size]

The British Pound is up after the Supreme Court found that Boris Johnson acted unlawfully when he suspended Parliament.
Sterling is going higher against the US Dollar and Euro after the court unanimously ruled that the government breached its power.

[size=16]
+13


A graph showing the value of the pound against the dollar between 5am and 11am today
The pound briefly gained as much as nearly 0.5% on the day to $1.2491. Against the euro, the pound also rose 0.3% on the day to 88.06 pence. 
'Brexit uncertainty combined with political uncertainty is going to keep any big moves in check for the pound,' said Neil Mellor, senior FX strategist at BNY Mellon. 'What can be a potential option is the increase in the chance of a no-confidence vote in Johnson, but we will have to wait and see.' [/size]



'It's the worst possible outcome for our democracy. I think what we've got is a Parliament that's completely out of step with the sentiment of the country, they're holding our democracy to ransom, they're completely ignoring the vote we had in 2016 to leave the European Union - it's an absolute disgrace as far as I'm concerned.
'What we're going to see now is the Speaker effectively taking control of Parliament and playing to the remainers' tune until 31 October when he resigns.
'We've got a zombie Parliament that won't go back to the people and be held to account,' he concluded.
Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat shared a picture of himself sitting in the House of Commons following the Supreme Court's ruling.
'We're sitting,' reads the caption he posted on Twitter.
Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage called for the Prime Minister's chief adviser Dominic Cummings to be removed from his role following the Supreme Court's decision.
'The calling of a Queen's Speech and prorogation is the worst political decision ever,' he tweeted. 'Dominic Cummings must go.'
The European Parliament's Brexit co-ordinator Guy Verhofstadt tweeted: 'At least one big relief in the Brexit saga: the rule of law in the UK is alive & kicking.
'Parliaments should never be silenced in a real democracy.
'I never want to hear Boris Johnson or any other Brexiteer say again that the European Union is undemocratic.'
SNP MP Joanna Cherry, who led the case in the Scottish courts, said Boris Johnson's position was 'untenable' and called on him to resign.
'This is an absolutely momentous decision. There is nothing to stop us - Members of Parliament - resuming immediately the important job of scrutinising this minority Tory government as we hurtle towards Brexit,' she told reporters outside the Supreme Court.
'This is a huge victory for the rule of law and for democracy. As regards Mr Boris Johnson, the highest court in the United Kingdom has unanimously found that his advice given to Her Majesty the Queen was unlawful.
'His position is untenable and he should have the guts for once to do the decent thing and resign.'
The Supreme Court judgment will have seismic consequences over whether the political power of the Prime Minister built up over centuries can be neutered by the courts;
There were four possible outcomes for the PM with the best case scenario for him being that he won and the Commons remains shut as he decided until October 14. 
Judges could also choose to find against him but do nothing - or find against him and demand the Queen's Speech is brought forward by days or weeks.
The worst case scenario was that judges would find he deliberately lied to Her Majesty, broke the law and MPs would return to Parliament this week because his prorogation was 'void'.   
The Prime Minister has insisted said that he would comply with the Supreme Court's ruling.
But he has repeatedly refused to rule out going back to the Queen and proroguing again for a second time, this time within the law.
Mr Johnson addressed the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York last night, and afterwards denied he had closed down Parliament to stymie MPs wanting to discuss Brexit.
Breaking into cod-French he said: 'Donnez-moi un break is my message to those who say there will be no parliamentary scrutiny. It is absolute nonsense.' 
Mr Johnson said the suspension was ordered to allow for a Queen's Speech on October 14 when he will unveil a new legislative agenda. 
Asked if his position would be untenable if the court rules against him, he said: 'No, I think the reasons for wanting a Queen's Speech are extremely good.' 
He went on: 'When it comes to parliamentary scrutiny, what are we losing? Four or five days of parliamentary scrutiny when they've had three years to discuss these issues.'  
Eleven justices were asked to determine whether his advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament, for what opponents describe as an 'exceptionally long' period, was unlawful.
[size=18]Gina Miller speaks out against Johnson after Supreme Court ruling




Lo[/size]



+13


Protesters gathered in the London rain outside the Supreme Court in Parliament Square today ahead of the historic judgment


+13


Boris Johnson has been accused of misleading the Queen by asking her to shut down Parliament
[size=18]Cross-party MPs lambaste Boris Johnson for 'unlawful' proroguing




Lo[/size]





Mr Johnson was asked whether he was nervous about the Supreme Court judgment in an interview in New York, and replied: 'It takes a lot to make me nervous these days.

[size=34]The key findings of the Supreme Court[/size]

• The suspension of Parliament IS a matter for the courts.
  

Lady Hale said: 'The first question is whether the lawfulness of the Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty is justiciable. This Court holds that it is.'

• The suspension of Parliament DID frustrate democracy.
  

Lady Hale said: 'This prolonged suspension of Parliamentary democracy took place in quite exceptional circumstances: the fundamental change which was due to take place in the Constitution of the United Kingdom on 31st October.
'Parliament, and in particular the House of Commons as the elected representatives of the people, has a right to a voice in how that change comes about. The effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme.
'No justification for taking action with such an extreme effect has been put before the court.'

• The suspension of Parliament WAS unlawful.
  

Lady Hale said: 'The Court is bound to conclude, therefore, that the decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification.'

• The suspension is VOID and effectively never happened.
  

Lady Hale said: 'This Court has already concluded that the Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty was unlawful, void and of no effect. This means that the Order in Council to which it led was also unlawful, void and of no effect and should be quashed.'

• Parliament should be recalled as soon as possible, with John Bercow deciding when.
  

Lady Hale said: 'It is for Parliament, and in particular the Speaker and the Lord Speaker to decide what to do next. Unless there is some Parliamentary rule of which we are unaware, they can take immediate steps to enable each House to meet as soon as possible.'



'All I can tell you is that I have the highest regard for the judiciary in this country, I will look at the ruling with care.'
He was questioned by reporters on the flight to New York over whether he would resign if the Government lost.
'I will wait and see what the justices decide, the Supreme Court decides, because as I've said before I believe that the reasons for … wanting a Queen's speech were very good indeed,' he said.
Asked whether he would rule out proroguing Parliament again before the current October 31 Brexit deadline, the PM replied: 'I'm saying that Parliament will have bags of time to scrutinise the deal that I hope we will be able to do.'
The Prime Minister advised the Queen on August 28 to prorogue Parliament for five weeks, and it was suspended on September 9  until October 14.
Mr Johnson says the five-week suspension is to allow the Government to set out a new legislative agenda in a Queen's Speech when MPs return to Parliament.
But those who brought legal challenges argued the prorogation is designed to prevent parliamentary scrutiny of the UK's impending exit from the EU on October 31.
The Supreme Court heard appeals over three days arising out of separate legal challenges in England and Scotland, in which leading judges reached different conclusions.
At the High Court in London, Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett and two other judges rejected campaigner and businesswoman Gina Miller's challenge, finding that the prorogation was 'purely political' and not a matter for the courts.
But in Scotland, a cross-party group of MPs and peers led by SNP MP Joanna Cherry QC won a ruling from the Inner House of the Court of Session that Mr Johnson's prorogation decision was unlawful because it was 'motivated by the improper purpose of stymieing Parliament'.
Mrs Miller has appealed against the decision of the High Court, asking the Supreme Court to find that the judges who heard her judicial review action 'erred in law' in the findings they reached.
The justices have been asked to determine whether Mr Johnson's advice to the Queen was 'justiciable' – capable of challenge in the courts – and, if so, whether it was lawful.
During last week's hearing, Lord Pannick QC, for Mrs Miller, told the packed court that Mr Johnson's motive for a five-week suspension was to 'silence' Parliament, and that his decision was an 'unlawful abuse of power'.
[size=18]Supreme Court's full ruling on Boris Johnson proroguing Parliament




Lo[/size]

















+13


Gina Miller's star QC Lord Pannick arrives for the judgment having argued Parliament should be recalled now








+13



Boris Johnson's QC Sir James Eadie told the court last week that the PM's decision to prorogue Parliament was his political right
He argued that Mr Johnson's reasons for advising on a suspension of that length 'were improper in that they were infected with factors inconsistent with the concept of Parliamentary sovereignty'.
But Sir James Eadie QC argued on the Prime Minister's behalf that the suggestion the prorogation was intended to 'stymie' Parliament ahead of Brexit was  'untenable'.
Mrs Miller's case is supported by former prime minister Sir John Major, shadow attorney general Baroness Chakrabarti, the Scottish and Welsh governments, and Northern Irish victims' campaigner Raymond McCord.
The justices were also asked by the Westminster Government to allow an appeal against the decision in Scotland.
Documents submitted to the court revealed three possible scenarios in the event the court rules the suspension was unlawful, two of which could see the Prime Minister make a fresh decision to prorogue Parliament.
The other outcome could see the court order Parliament to be recalled.
But Mr Johnson's lawyers urged the judges to consider the 'very serious practical consequences' involved in this option, as it would require a new Queen's Speech and State Opening of Parliament.
[size=18]PM: 'I have the greatest respect for the judiciary in this country'




Lo[/size]

 

The full, withering judgement of the Supreme Court judges who found Boris Johnson DID break the law and Parliament should be recalled IMMEDIATELY
This is the full judgement delivered by Lady Hale, president of the Supreme Court, with the backing of 10 other judges; Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin, Lord Sales.
Lady Hale said: 'We have before us two appeals, one from the High Court of England and Wales and one from the Inner House of the Court of Session in Scotland. It is important, once again, to emphasise that these cases are not about when and on what terms the United Kingdom is to leave the European Union. They are only about whether the advice given by the Prime Minister to Her Majesty the Queen on 27th or 28th August, that Parliament should be prorogued from a date between 9th and 12th September until 14th October, was lawful and the legal consequences if it was not. The question arises in circumstances which have never arisen before and are unlikely to arise again. It is a 'one-off'.
'Briefly, the Scottish case was brought by a cross party group of 75 members of Parliament and a QC on 30th July because of their concern that Parliament might be prorogued to avoid further debate in the lead up to exit day on 31st October. On 15th August, Nikki da Costa, Director of Legislative Affairs at No 10, sent a memorandum to the Prime Minister, copied to seven people, civil servants and special advisers, recommending that his Parliamentary Private Secretary approach the Palace with a request for prorogation to begin within 9th to 12th September and for a Queen's Speech on 14th October. The Prime Minister ticked 'yes' to that recommendation.
'On 27th or 28th August, in a telephone call, he formally advised Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament between those dates. On 28th August, Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord President of the Privy Council, Mr Mark Harper, chief whip, and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park, Leader of the House of Lords, attended a meeting of the Privy Council held by the Queen at Balmoral Castle. An Order in Council was made that Parliament be prorogued between those dates and that the Lord Chancellor prepare and issue a commission for proroguing Parliament accordingly. A Cabinet meeting was held by conference call shortly after that in order to bring the rest of the Cabinet 'up to speed' on the decisions which had been taken. That same day, the decision was made public and the Prime Minister sent a letter to all Members of Parliament explaining it. As soon as the decision was announced, Mrs Miller began the English proceedings challenging its lawfulness. 


+13




Lady Hale, the President of the Supreme Court, delivers the verdict of the 11 senior judges this morning
'Parliament returned from the summer recess on 3rd September. The House of Commons voted to decide for themselves what business they would transact. The next day what became the European Union (Withdrawal) (No 2) Act passed all its stages in the Commons. It passed all its stages in the House of Lords on 6th September and received royal assent on 9th September. The object of that Act is to prevent the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement on 31st October.
'On 11th September, the High Court of England and Wales delivered judgment dismissing Mrs Miller's claim on the ground that the issue was not justiciable in a court of law. That same day, the Inner House of the Court of Session in Scotland announced its decision that the issue was justiciable, that it was motivated by the improper purpose of stymying Parliamentary scrutiny of the Government, and that it, and any prorogation which followed it, were unlawful and thus void and of no effect.
'Mrs Miller's appeal against the English decision and the Advocate General's appeal against the Scottish decision were heard by this court from 17th to 19th September. Because of the importance of the case, we convened a panel of 11 Justices, the maximum number of serving Justices who are permitted to sit. This judgment is the unanimous judgment of all 11 Justices.
'The first question is whether the lawfulness of the Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty is justiciable. This Court holds that it is. The courts have exercised a supervisory jurisdiction over the lawfulness of acts of the Government for centuries. As long ago as 1611, the court held that 'the King [who was then the government] hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him'. However, in considering prerogative powers, it is necessary to distinguish between two different questions. The first is whether a prerogative power exists and if so its extent. The second is whether the exercise of that power, within its limits, is open to legal challenge. This second question may depend upon what the power is all about: some powers are not amenable to judicial review while others are. However, there is no doubt that the courts have jurisdiction to decide upon the existence and limits of a prerogative power. All the parties to this case accept that. This Court has concluded that this case is about the limits of the power to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament.


+13




The ruling has delivered a hammer blow to Boris Johnson's leadership and leaves the path forward more uncertain than ever
'The second question, therefore, is what are the limits to that power? Two fundamental principles of our Constitution are relevant to deciding that question. The first is Parliamentary sovereignty - that Parliament can make laws which everyone must obey: this would be undermined if the executive could, through the use of the prerogative, prevent Parliament from exercising its power to make laws for as long as it pleased. The second fundamental principle is Parliamentary accountability: in the words of Lord Bingham, senior Law Lord, 'the conduct of government by a Prime Minister and Cabinet collectively responsible and accountable to Parliament lies at the heart of Westminster democracy'. The power to prorogue is limited by the constitutional principles with which it would otherwise conflict.
'For present purposes, the relevant limit on the power to prorogue is this: that a decision to prorogue (or advise the monarch to prorogue) will be unlawful if the prorogation has the effect of frustrating or preventing, without reasonable justification, the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions as a legislature and as the body responsible for the supervision of the executive. In judging any justification which might be put forward, the court must of course be sensitive to the responsibilities and experience of the Prime Minister and proceed with appropriate caution.
'If the prorogation does have that effect, without reasonable justification, there is no need for the court to consider whether the Prime Minister's motive or purpose was unlawful. 
'The third question, therefore, is whether this prorogation did have the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification. This was not a normal prorogation in the run-up to a Queen's Speech. It prevented Parliament from carrying out its constitutional role for five out of the possible eight weeks between the end of the summer recess and exit day on 31st October. Proroguing Parliament is quite different from Parliament going into recess. While Parliament is prorogued, neither House can meet, debate or pass legislation. Neither House can debate Government policy. Nor may members ask written or oral questions of Ministers or meet and take evidence in committees. In general, Bills which have not yet completed all their stages are lost and will have to start again from scratch after the Queen's Speech. During a recess, on the other hand, the House does not sit but Parliamentary business can otherwise continue as usual. This prolonged suspension of Parliamentary democracy took place in quite exceptional circumstances: the fundamental change which was due to take place in the Constitution of the United Kingdom on 31st October. Parliament, and in particular the House of Commons as the elected representatives of the people, has a right to a voice in how that change comes about. The effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme.
'No justification for taking action with such an extreme effect has been put before the court. The only evidence of why it was taken is the memorandum from Nikki da Costa of 15th August. This explains why holding the Queen's Speech to open a new session of Parliament on 14th October would be desirable. It does not explain why it was necessary to bring Parliamentary business to a halt for five weeks before that, when the normal period necessary to prepare for the Queen's Speech is four to six days. It does not discuss the difference between prorogation and recess. It does not discuss the impact of prorogation on the special procedures for scrutinising the delegated legislation necessary to achieve an orderly withdrawal from the European Union, with or without a withdrawal agreement, on 31st October. It does not discuss what Parliamentary time would be needed to secure Parliamentary approval for any new withdrawal agreement, as required by section 13 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.
'The Court is bound to conclude, therefore, that the decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification.
'The next and final question, therefore, is what the legal effect of that finding is and therefore what remedies the Court should grant. The Court can certainly declare that the advice was unlawful. The Inner House went further and declared that any prorogation resulting from it was null and of no effect. The Government argues that the Inner House could not do that because the prorogation was a 'proceeding in Parliament' which, under the Bill of Rights of 1688 cannot be impugned or questioned in any court. But it is quite clear that the prorogation is not a proceeding in Parliament. It takes place in the House of Lords chamber in the presence of members of both Houses, but it is not their decision. It is something which has been imposed upon them from outside. It is not something on which members can speak or vote. It is not the core or essential business of Parliament which the Bill of Rights protects. Quite the reverse: it brings that core or essential business to an end.
'This Court has already concluded that the Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty was unlawful, void and of no effect. This means that the Order in Council to which it led was also unlawful, void and of no effect and should be quashed. This means that when the Royal Commissioners walked into the House of Lords it was as if they walked in with a blank sheet of paper. The prorogation was also void and of no effect. Parliament has not been prorogued. This is the unanimous judgment of all 11 Justices. 
'It is for Parliament, and in particular the Speaker and the Lord Speaker to decide what to do next. Unless there is some Parliamentary rule of which we are unaware, they can take immediate steps to enable each House to meet as soon as possible. It is not clear to us that any step is needed from the Prime Minister, but if it is, the court is pleased that his counsel have told the court that he will take all necessary steps to comply with the terms of any declaration made by this court.
'It follows that the Advocate General's appeal in the case of Cherry is dismissed and Mrs Miller's appeal is allowed. The same declarations and orders should be made in each case.'
 
 
 

[size=34]The 11 Supreme Court judges who ruled on the key Brexit case [/size]

[size=14]Lady Hale, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Hodge, Lord Wilson, Lady Arden, Lady Black, Lord Sales, Lord Kerr and Lord Kitchin will make the final ruling in the Supreme Court (pictured top left to bottom right)
These are the 11 Supreme Court judges who considered the legal challenges to Prime Minister Boris Johnson's decision to suspend Parliament:
- Lady Hale, 74, was appointed the first female president of the Supreme Court in 2017 after a varied career as an academic lawyer, law reformer and judge.
A long-standing champion of diversity in the judiciary, she became the first female justice of the court in October 2009, and was appointed deputy president in June 2013.
During her time as deputy president, Yorkshire-born Lady Hale ruled on numerous high-profile cases, including the Brexit appeal.
- Lord Reed, 63, was appointed deputy president of the Supreme Court in June last year and will replace Lady Hale when she retires in January.
One of the court's two Scottish justices, he previously served as a judge in Scotland and sometimes sits as a judge at the European Court of Human Rights and the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal.
He was educated at the universities of Edinburgh and Oxford before qualifying as an advocate in Scotland and a barrister in England and Wales.
- Lord Kerr, 71, is the first justice of the court to come from Northern Ireland, where he served as Lord Chief Justice from 2004 to 2009.
Educated at St Colman's College, Newry, and Queen's University, Belfast, he was called to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 1970, and to the Bar of England and Wales in 1974.
- Lord Wilson, 74, was appointed in 2009, having previously been a judge in the High Court's family division and the Court of Appeal.
- Lord Carnwath, 74, studied at Cambridge and was called to the Bar in 1968. He served as Attorney General to the Prince of Wales from 1988 to 1994.
While a judge of the Chancery Division, he was also chairman of the Law Commission and, between 2007 and 2012, was Senior President of Tribunals.
- Lord Hodge, 66, the court's other Scottish justice, was previously the Scottish judge in Exchequer Causes, one of the Scottish intellectual property judges, a judge in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court and a commercial judge.
- Lady Black, 65, a justice since 2017, carried out a broad range of civil and criminal work during her early career as a barrister before specialising in family law.
She has served as a High Court judge and Lady Justice of Appeal.
Lady Black taught law at Leeds Polytechnic in the 1980s, was a founding author of the definitive guide to family law practice in England and Wales, and continues to serve as a consulting editor.
- Lord Lloyd-Jones, 67, was born and brought up in Pontypridd, South Wales, where his father was a school teacher, and is the court's first justice to come from Wales.
A Welsh speaker, he was appointed to the High Court in 2005, and acted as adviser to the court in the Pinochet litigation before the House of Lords.
- Lady Arden, 72, who grew up in Liverpool, began her judicial career in 1993 after working as a barrister, QC, and Attorney General of the Duchy of Lancaster.
She became a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague in 2011, and sits as a judge of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
- Lord Kitchin, 64, was called to the Bar in 1977 and his practice covered intellectual property, including patents, trademarks, copyright, designs and trade secrets.
He has also served as a High Court judge and as a Lord Justice of Appeal.
- Lord Sales, 57, is the youngest of the court's justices and was appointed in January, having worked as a barrister and QC before his appointment to the High Court in 2008.
He was vice-president of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, served as deputy chairman of the Boundary Commission for England and was appointed as a Lord Justice of Appeal.
[/size]

I was impressed at the way the Supreme Court acted so quickly to condemn Boris’s actions. Equally impressed that it seems the UK’s Supreme Court hasn’t been politicized and acts as it should - independent of Parliament. Maybe someday I can say the same of our Supreme Court.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7499749/NYT-publisher-reveals-Trump-planned-NOT-warn-paper-Egypt-arrest-reporter.html

[size=34]New York Times publisher reveals how Trump administration planned NOT to warn paper Egypt was about to arrest their reporter - and dismissed another journalist's arrest saying 'what did you expect - he made the government look bad'[/size]

• A. G. Sulzberger said the Trump administration has given up on the U.S. 'historical' role of defending freedom of the press  
  
  
• The New York Times publisher said Donald Trump sat on information that one of their reporters in Egypt was going to be arrested  
  
  
• 'Rather than trying to stop the Egyptian government... the Trump administration intended to sit on the information and let the arrest be carried out,' he said
  
  
• Sulzberger revealed the never-before-told story during a talk at Brown University on Monday
  
  
• He said the U.S. official who informed him of the imminent arrest 'feared being punished for even alerting us to the danger'
  
  
• He also said after another reporter was detained and deported at an Egypt airport 18 months later, but an official at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo dismissed it
  
  
• 'What did you expect would happen to him?' Sulzberger remembers the official said. 'His reporting made the government look bad'
  
  

By KATELYN CARALLE, U.S. POLITICAL REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 14:29 EDT, 24 September 2019 | UPDATED: 16:54 EDT, 24 September 2019

     








The New York Times' publisher revealed a never-before told story on Monday where he said Donald Trump intentionally withheld knowledge that one of their reporters was going to be arrested in Egypt.
A. G. Sulzberger, while delivering a speech at Brown University, claimed that Trump decided two years ago not to relay the information to the Times when he found out about the looming arrest of one of their Egypt- based reporters.
'Two years ago, we got a call from a United States government official warning us of the imminent arrest of a New York Times reporter based in Egypt named Declan Walsh' Sulzberger said in his speech, which was converted to text and published as an op/ed in the Times Monday.
He said the call wasn't initially unusual, considering the newspaper would often receive these types of warnings regarding abroad reporters.

'Though the news was alarming, the call was actually fairly standard,' he said. 'But this particular call took a surprising and distressing turn. We learned the official was passing along this warning without the knowledge or permission of the Trump administration.'
'Rather than trying to stop the Egyptian government or assist the reporter, the official believed, the Trump administration intended to sit on the information and let the arrest be carried out,' Sulzberger continued. 'The official feared being punished for even alerting us to the danger.'


+3


The New York Times publisher A. G. Sulzberger revealed Monday that Donald Trump never planned to reveal that he had knowledge that one of their reporters in Egypt was going to be arrested


+3


Sulzberger said an official called and told them Egypt planned to arrest Declan Walsh (pictured) – an Irish native. 'Rather than trying to stop the Egyptian government or assist the reporter, the official believed, the Trump administration intended to sit on the information and let the arrest be carried out'
Sulzberger used the story as an anecdote when illustrating how the Trump administration, he asserts, has 'retreated' from the U.S. government's historical role of defending the First Amendment – mainly the free press.
'This isn't just a problem for reporters,' he said, 'it's a problem for everyone, because this is how authoritarian leaders bury critical information, hide corruption, even justify genocide.'
He invoked words from the late Republican Senator John McCain, who said 'the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press.'
The Times ended up contacting Walsh's native country of Ireland for assistance, and Sulzberger said within an hour Irish diplomats traveled to his home in Egypt and escorted him to the airport.
Sulzberger detailed another instance during his remarks about a second reporter in Egypt.
A year-and-a-half after they were able to stop Walsh from being detained by Egyptian forces, journalist David Kirkpatrick was detained at an airport in Egypt upon arriving there.
He said Kirkpatrick was deported because Cairo felt he exposed information embarrassing to the Egyptian government.
Sulzberger said 'a senior official at the United States Embassy in Cairo openly voiced the cynical worldview behind the Trump administration's tolerance for such crackdowns' when he expressed his protest over Egypt's actions.


+3


Sulzberger said Donald Trump hatred of the media's coverage of him has caused the president and his administration to abandon defending a free press. He claimed an official at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo said, 'What did you expect would happen to him? His reporting made the government look bad,' when another Times reporter was deported from the Egypt airport 

'What did you expect would happen to him?' Sulzberger remembers the official said. 'His reporting made the government look bad.'
Trump often refers to media outlets as the 'fake news' and claims the 'mainstream media' covers him and his administration unfairly.
Even though he put an end to daily press briefings in March, Trump insists that he is the most accessible U.S. presidents ever. Senior officials cite both the amount of times Trump personally speaks to the press and his Twitter account as ways he keeps the lines of communication open between him and the media.
But others don't see his Twitter account so positively.
Sulzberger said that 'since assuming office, President Trump has tweeted about 'fake news' nearly 600 times.'
Trump claims to be an avid defender of the First Amendment – specifically freedom of speech.
While addressing the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, Trump warned a room of foreign leaders and a global audience that even 'free nations' are facing challenges to liberty through social media platforms.
'A small number of social media platforms are acquiring immense power over what we can see and over what we are allowed to say,' he said.
He also blasted the media sites – which is likely referencing Facebook, Twitter and Google – for 'blacklisting' voice that aren't popular in Silicon Valley.
ADVERTISEMENT

Another shocking decision tho many have predicted it.........but also very interesting comments about Facebook etc

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7500889/Donald-Trump-tries-cash-impeachment-Twitter-text-appeal.html

[size=34]Donald Trump tries to cash in on his impeachment with Twitter and text appeal to his supporters to hand over cash[/size]

• Donald Trump tried to cash in on the impeachment inquiry against him by appealing to supporters to donate to his re-election bid 
  
  
• 'I need you on my impeachment defense team,' he wrote in a text to supporters
  
  
• He also posted a video on Twitter showing some of his most prominent critics in the Democratic Party talking about impeachment and asking for support
  
  
• His campaign launched 'the Official Impeachment Defense Task Force'
  
  
• The group will be made up of 'President Trump's most LOYAL supporters'
  
  
• Trump is going all-in on his response to Pelosi's announcement 
  
  

By EMILY GOODIN, U.S. POLITICAL REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 18:39 EDT, 24 September 2019 | UPDATED: 20:54 EDT, 24 September 2019




Donald Trump tried to cash in on the impeachment inquiry against him on Tuesday by appealing to supporters to donate to his re-election bid.
'I need you on my impeachment defense team,' he wrote in a text to supporters. 'Donate NOW.'
The president also posted a video on Twitter showing some of his most prominent critics in the Democratic Party - Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representatives Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff and Ilhan Omar - talking about impeachment and asking for support.
'While Democrats' "SOLE FOCUS" is fighting Trump, President Trump is fighting FOR YOU,' the video concludes.  

[size=10][size=18]Trump 2020 campaign ad attacks Democrats aiming to impeach him




Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
Mute

[/size][/size]

Fullscreen
Need Text













+9


Donald Trump tried to cash in on the impeachment inquiry against him by appealing to supporters to donate to his re-election bid


+9


Trump is going all-in on his response to Speaker Pelosi's impeachment  announcement
Before Pelosi formally called for an impeachment inquiry to begin, Trump argued such a move would help him win re-election next year.
'The good news is the voters get it. This is why they say it's good for the election,' he told reporters during a meeting at the United Nations General Assembly Tuesday afternoon.
His campaign launched 'the Official Impeachment Defense Task Force' in response and noted it will be 'made up of only President Trump's most LOYAL supporters' before asking supporters to donate to the president. 
Trump personally went on a Twitter rant shortly after Pelosi announced the inquiry and stuck back with his favorite term for inquiries against him 'witch hunt.'
'Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage. So bad for our Country!,' he tweeted.
'They never even saw the transcript of the call. A total Witch Hunt!,' he wrote, adding 'PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!'



President Trump fired off a series of angry tweets as Pelosi addressed impeachment









[size=18]McCarthy says Pelosi 'does not speak for America' on impeachment




Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
Mute

[/size]

Fullscreen
Need Text











Pelosi announced the formal inquiry Tuesday afternoon on Capitol Hill. The speaker was slow to move to this point, arguing Democrats needed the public to back them before they made such a move.
But she conceded after facing pressure from the left wing lawmakers in her party and several Democratic presidential candidates, including Joe Biden, who joined the call for impeachment Tuesday afternoon. 
'This week the president has admitted to asking the president of Ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically. The actions of the Trump presidency revealed dishonorable fact [sic] of the president's betrayal of his Oath of Office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our national elections,' Pelosi said.
'Therefore, today I'm announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. I'm directing our six committees to proceed with their investigation under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry. The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law.'   


+9


Trump will meet with newly-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Wednesday
[size=18]Pelosi: 'No one is above the law' as Trump impeachment inquiry begins




Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
Mute

[/size]

Fullscreen
Need Text











Allegations President Trump asked newly-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, who sat on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, are what proved to be the breaking point for many Democrats. 
Trump originally denied making such a move before conceding Biden came up in the July 25th phone call.
On Tuesday, before Democrats met on Capitol Hill to hear Pelosi's decision on impeachment, the president announced he would release a full, unredacted transcript of his call with Zelensky.
He and Zelensky are scheduled to meet Wednesday afternoon in New York City as both leaders are in town for United Nations General Assembly week.  
Hours before his announcement, Trump admitted he had held up millions in security aid to Ukraine before holding the call with Zelensky.
'I am currently at the United Nations representing our Country, but have authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript of my phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine,' the president tweeted.
'You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call. No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!' 
Whatever the transcript may show, it's likely to be only one piece of a puzzle laid out in a Whistle-blower complaint filed with the Director of National Intelligence's office about the Trump-Zelensky call.
The U.S. Senate voted unanimously on Tuesday to demand a copy of the report from the DNI, who has maintained that its contents are beyond his authority to release. Democrats point to a section of law that requires it. 
The House will vote Wednesday on a resolution disapproving of the administration's decision to block the whistleblower complaint. 


+9




A new report reveals that Donald Trump ordered a military aid freeze of almost $400 million to Ukraine days ahead of his July phone call with Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelensky


+9




The unnamed whistle-blower whose letter led to the week-long frenzy over the Trump call offered on Tuesday to talk with House Democrats. They quickly accepted, according to Intelligence chairman Adam Schiff


+9




Schiff's committee will likely be one of six, all helped by the president's adversaries, participating in what's being called an impeachment 'inquiry'
[size=18]House Democrats react to impeachment inquiry against Trump




L[/size]
The unnamed whistle-blower offered on Tuesday to talk with House Democrats. They quickly accepted.
'We have been informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so,' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff tweeted. 
'We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week,' the California Democrat added.
Separately, Republicans in charge of the Senate Intelligence Committee pushed on Tuesday to schedule an interview with the whistle-blower.  
The committee is asking the person's lawyer to arrange a 'closed, bipartisan interview' with staff attorneys on Friday. 
In New York at the United Nations, Trump acknowledged holding up hundreds of millions of dollars in security funds for Ukraine, but insisted he wasn't trying to apply pressure to generate a Biden investigation.
He was perturbed, he claimed, that European powers weren't themselves willing to 'put up money' to support Ukraine's military defense. 
'I think it's unfair that we put up the money. Then people called me. They said, "Oh, let it go," and I let it go. But we paid the money. The money was paid. But very importantly, Germany, France, other countries should put up money and that's been my complaint from the beginning,' Trump said. 
European nations also have provided support to Ukraine, and in July, weeks before Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukraine, provided $17.7 million Euros in humanitarian assistance. 
Describing his phone call, which is now the subject of three congressional investigations as Democratic calls for his impeachment rise, Trump said: 'It couldn't have been nicer and even the Ukrainian government put out a statement that that was a perfect call, there was no pressure put on them whatsoever.' 
'But there was pressure put on with respect to Joe Biden. What Joe Biden did for his son, that's something they should be looking at,' Trump said – renewing his call for an investigation of his political rival.     
[size=18]Trump says he'll release transcript of 'perfect' Ukraine call




[/size]


The president once again ripped calls by Democrats for his impeachment and demands that his administration hand over a whistle-blower's complaint. 
'I think it's ridiculous. It's a witch hunt. I'm leading in the polls. They have no idea how they stop me. The only way they can try is through impeachment,' Trump vented. 
'This has never happened to a president before. There's never been a thing like this before. It's nonsense,' he said.
He once again mentioned the transcript of the call, which he said he assumes the public will see. 


+9




President Trump said he would release a 'fully declassified and unredacted transcript' of his call with the president of Ukraine, and said there was 'NO quid pro quo!'
'When you see the call, when you see the readout of the call, which I assume you'll see at some point, you'll understand,' he told reporters. That call was perfect. It couldn't have been nicer. Even the Ukrainian government put out a statement that that was a perfect call.'
He continued his Monday denial of applying 'pressure' for Ukraine to investigate political rival former Vice President Joe Biden.
'There was no pressure put on them whatsoever. But there was pressure put on with respect to Joe Biden. What Joe Biden did for his son, that's something they should be looking at,' he said. 
Trump withheld almost $400 million in military aid from Ukraine just days before a July phone call where he is accused of pressuring the nation's president to prosecute Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden.


+9


Reports emerged last week that a whistle-blower is alleging Trump's July phone call with Zelensky included pressuring the Ukrainian leader to investigate Biden's son Hunter for his involvement in a Ukrainian natural gas firm
The president ordering his staff to freeze the funds, which two people familiar with private conversations confirmed, is the latest revelation related to his conversation with Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelensky.
New reports emerged last week that reveal a whistle-blower, who does not have direct knowledge of the leaders' phone call this summer, alleged that Trump tried to pressure Zelensky into probing his 2020 political rival's son Hunter Biden regarding his involvement in a natural gas firm in Ukraine.
Trump admitted he mentioned the Biden's in his call with Zelensky, but said it was in regards to helping keep out foreign corruption from Ukraine.
In the days before that call, Trump ordered the aid to Ukraine be frozen, but Trump asserts he did nothing wrong and has denied that any requests for help in procuring damaging information about the former vice president and 2020 presidential candidate were tied to the aid freeze.
[size=18]Biden calls for impeachment if Trump does not complies with congress




L[/size]




+9




Joe Biden said Tuesday that Congress will have no choice but to impeach Donald Trump, if he refuses to comply with every line of inquiry and all document production demands
Biden weighed in on the matter Tuesday afternoon from his home state of Delaware. 
'We have a president who believes there's no limit to his power. We have a president who believes he can do anything and get away with it. We have a president who believes he's above the law,' he said.
'Pursing the leader of another nation to investigate a political opponent to help win his election is not the conduct of an American president,' he added.
'If the president does not comply with such a request from Congress, if he continues to obstruct Congress and flaunt the law, Donald Trump will leave Congress, in my view, no choice but to initiate impeachment. 
He added, 'That would be a tragedy. But a tragedy of his own making.'
Several other presidential candidates - including Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Beto O'Rourke - have called on Trump to be impeached. 

[size=34]WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? THE VERY COMPLICATED STEPS INVOLVED IN IMPEACHING DONALD TRUMP[/size]

Nancy Pelosi announcing a formal impeachment investigation is only the start of what will be an epic legal and constitutional clash.
Here is how impeachment goes from here.
1) Investigations step up
Six committees are now tasked by Pelosi with investigating Donald Trump with the intention of deciding whether he should be impeached. They are the House Judiciary, Oversight, Intelligence, Ways and Means, Financial Services and Foreign Affairs committees. All of them are now likely to issue a flurry of subpoenas which is certain to lead to a new: 
2) Court battle over subpoenas - which could go to the Supreme Court
The Trump administration has so far resisted subpoenas by claiming executive privilege and is certain to continue to do so. Federal judges are already dealing with litigation over subpoenas for Trump's tax and financial records and many more cases are likely to follow. But the courts have never settled the limits of executive privilege and whether an impeachment inquiry effectively gives Congress more power to overcome it. If Trump fights as hard as he can, it is likely to make its way to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, expect: 
3) More hearings
Democrats know they need to convince the public that Trump needs to be put on trial and the best way to do that is hearings like those which electrified the nation during Watergate. They botched the Mueller hearing but if they produce question and answer sessions with people from Trump-world which cause public outrage, they are on their way to:
4) Drawing up formal articles of impeachment in committee 
The charge sheet for impeachment - the 'articles' - set out what Trump is formally accused of. It has no set format - it can be as long or as short as Congress decides. Three such set of articles have been drawn up - for Andrew Johnson on 1868, Richard Nixon in 1974, and Bill Clinton in 1998. Johnson's were the most extensive at 11, Nixon faced three, and Bill Clinton four but with a series of numbered charges in each article. Once drawn up, the judicial committee votes on them and if approved, sends them to the House for:
5) Full floor vote on impeachment
The constitution says the House needs a simple majority to proceed, but has to vote on each article. Nixon quit before such a vote so Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only precedent. The House passed two out of the three articles against Clinton and all 11 against Johnson. Passing even one article leads to:
6) Senate impeachment trial
Even if the Senate is clearly not in favor of removing the president, it has to stage a trial if the House votes for impeachment. The hearing is in not in front of the full Senate, but 'evidentiary committees' - in theory at least similar to the existing Senate committees. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over it, but the procedures are set by senators. Members of the House prosecute Trump as 'managers,' bringing witnesses and presenting evidence to set out their case against the president. The president can defend himself, or, as Clinton did, use attorneys to cross-examine the witnesses. The committee or committees report to the full Senate. Then it can debate in public or deliberate in private on the guilt or innocence of the president. It holds a single open floor vote which will deliver:
7) The verdict
Impeachment must be by two-thirds of the Senate. Voting for impeachment on any one article is good enough to remove the president from office. There is no appeal. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7503623/Transcript-Donald-Trumps-call-Ukraines-president-published.html

[size=34]Transcript of Donald Trump's call to Ukraine's president is published and reveals he DID ask leader to investigate Joe Biden and work with Rudy Giuliani but did NOT tie it to aid - and Bill Barr's Justice Department has ALREADY cleared him[/size]

• The White House on Wednesday released the bombshell transcript of President Donald Trump's phone call with the president of Ukraine
  
  
• Trump urged Volodymyr Zelensky to work with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani after the new Ukrainian leader said his aide had met the former New York mayor
  
  
• Trump brought up former VP Joe Biden and his son Hunter, saying there was 'a lot of talk about Biden's son' 
  
  
• He tried to connect Zelensky directly with Giuliani and Attorney General Bill Barr
  
  
• Zelensky said he wanted to 'drain the swamp' and called Trump a 'great teacher'  
  
  
• Trump appeared to reference the the hacked DNC  server, asking Zelensky to 'find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine' 
  
  
• Zelensky told Trump he had stayed at Trump Tower in the past and said: 'You have nobody but friends around us.'
  
  
• The call is part of a whistle-blower complaint to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
  
  
• Both he and the acting Director of National Intelligence passed it to the DOJ for possible criminal investigation - but it declined to order one 
  
  
• A defiant Trump called the furor over the call 'a political war' and a 'witch hunt' and said it had been 'built up as the call from hell' 
  
  
• Hillary Clinton called for his impeachment 
  
  
• SCROLL DOWN FOR THE FULL DOCUMENT 
  
  

By GEOFF EARLE, DEPUTY U.S. POLITICAL EDITOR FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 10:07 EDT, 25 September 2019 | UPDATED: 14:00 EDT, 25 September 2019

     



The White House on Wednesday released the bombshell transcript of President Donald Trump's phone call with the president of Ukraine where Trump urges his counterpart to investigate Joe Biden and work directly with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani – and even brings up the DNC's hacked email server. 
But the transcript does not show Trump tying the investigation to aid for Ukraine as he spoke to Volodymyr Zelensky, the quid pro quo which some reports had suggested it contained.
The call forms part of the whistle-blower complaint from an unknown intelligence official which alleges a pattern of wrongdoing by the president in his dealings with Ukraine, but which has been blocked from being given to Congress. 
The unprecedented publication of a transcript of a president's call to a foreign leader is unprecedented was accompanied by two bombshell revelations from the Department of Justice, where officials said:  

• The acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire, and the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, Michael Atkinson, referred the whistle-blower complaint to the Department of Justice for possible criminal investigation into Trump's actions;
  
• The Justice Department, led by Attorney General Bill Barr, has already declined to criminally investigate the call - effectively clearing the president.
  

At the United Nations Donald Trump called Democratic plans to impeach him 'a political war,' and trashed critics who had suggested the phonecall was evidence of wrongdoing.



[size=3]L[/size]





+12



Donald Trump announced Tuesday that he had directed the release of a 'complete' transcript of the July 25 phone call


+12


Ftriends: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tweeted a photo of himself and his wife Olena with President Trump and Melania Trump at a diplomatic reception Tuesday night
'There was no pressure, the way you had that built up, that call, it was going to be the call from hell,' he said.
'It turned out to be a nothing call other than a lot of people said, I never knew you could be so nice.' 
But Adam Schiff, Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, compared the call to a 'classic mob shakedown.' 
In the Senate, Republican Mitt Romney said it was 'deeply troubling,' but Trump ally Lindsey Graham aggressively defended it and said: 'To impeach any president over a phone call like this would be insane.'
But Hillary Clinton, Trump's opponent in 2016, tweeted her endorsement of America's harshest political penalty. 
'The president of the United States has betrayed our country. That’s not a political statement—it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,' she said. 'He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.' 
In the call, the president mentions political rival Biden by name, seeks an inquiry into a company tied to Biden's surviving son, Hunter, and predicts Ukraine's economy will do 'better and better' - but does not explicitly tie the United States' aid to the country to the investigation he demands.


+12


Ukraine links: Joe Biden made multiple trips there and demanded action on corruption; Hunter was on the board of a natural gas firm which faced money-laundering accusations


+12


How Trump reacted: As well as speaking at the United Nations, he tweeted a link to a story by ultra-conservative news website Breitbart which accuses the Democrats of tying Ukraine aid to investigating him


+12


2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton said Trump has 'betrayed our country' and called for his impeachment
He urges the president to contact Giuliani, who this summer called off a planned mission to Ukraine after bringing up a Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden served on the board. 
'There is a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great,' Trump says, according to the transcript.
'Biden went about bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... it sounds horrible to me,' the president told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. 
The Ukrainian president assured Trump: 'The next prosecutor general will be 100 per cent my person, my candidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and will start. As a new prosecutor in September. 

THE FIVE KEY QUOTES FROM THE TRUMP-ZELENSKY PHONE CALL 

Trump: 'I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are 'doing and they should be helping you more than they are.'
Trump: 'I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it.'
Trump: 'There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.'
Trump: 'I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it.'
Zelensky: 'I also wanted to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation.' 



'He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation.'
Ukraine's president Zelensky said he wanted to 'drain the swamp' and called Trump a 'great teacher for all of us,' according to the transcript.
Trump told his counterpart: 'I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved.'
'Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great,' Trump said.  
Democrats were already planning to scour the transcript for any suggestion of a quid-pro-quo – which Trump has explicitly denied offering.
The transcript shows no such direct linkage – although Trump does appear to mention a variety of ways in which Ukraine might benefit from acceding to his requests.
He tells Zelensky 'I would like you do us a favor though' when he asks him to find out what happened with the Democratic National Committee's server - immediately after Zelensky thanked him for U.S. defense support and said he was about to buy American weaponry.
He appears to reference an unnamed oligarch when he says 'I guess you have one of your wealthy people …' without apparently finishing the thought.
Trump does not appear to mention $250 million in security aid to Ukraine that the president later said he held up before making the call.
He does, however, say the U.S. does 'a lot' for Ukraine, and trashes Germany's and the Europeans' efforts.
'I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are. Germany does almost nothing for you. All they do is talk and I think it's something that you should really ask them about,' Trump said.
He adds that German Chancellor Angela Merkel 'doesn't do anything.' He said the U.S. 'has been very, very good to Ukraine.'
He also trashes the Obama-nominated ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovich, who stayed over into his own administration. She is a career diplomat and remains a State Department employee. 
[size=18]Democrats say summary of Trump's call raises more questions




Lo[/size]
'The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news,' Trump said, and the people she was dealing with in Ukraine 'were bad news.'
In response, Zelenksy tells Trump that the new prosecutor will be '100 per cent my person, my candidate' and promises: 'He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned' – meaning the one affiliated with Hunter Biden.
Zelensky also bashes Yovanovich, prompting Trump to answer: 'Well, she's going to go through some things.' 
He also appeared to reference the the DNC server which was hacked before the 2016 election, asking Zelensky to 'find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine.' 
He asked Zelensky 'to do us a favor' by investigating whether Ukraine is in possession of computer data linked to hacking of a Democratic National Committee server in 2016.


+12



In the hot seat: Volodymyr Zelensky addressed the United Nations General Assembly Wednesday as his call to Donald Trump was unveiled


+12


Cleared: Bill Barr's Justice Department declined to order a full criminal investigation into the president after both the Director of National Intelligence and the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community referred the whistle-blower complaint to the attorney-general's department
He mentioned Crowdstrike, a company that helped the Democratic National Committee manage its computer network when Russian agents penetrated it.
Trump has vented at his political rallies that the FBI in 2016 never made an effort to seize the server and analyze its contents.
'I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it,' Trump said in the July call with Zelensky.

WHAT THE CALL TRANSCRIPT REVEALS TRUMP SAID ON... 

Robert Mueller in front of Congress:
[size=16] – "An incompetent performance"
His own attorney Rudy Giuliani:
 – "Very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy"
Joe Biden's boast about firing previous Ukraine prosecutor:
 – "It sounds horrible to me"
Fired U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovich:
 – "The woman, was bad news"
Prosecutor fired after Biden intervened:
 – "I heard... he was a very fair prosecutor" [/size]



'I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it.'  
The only person to directly bring up U.S. security aid for Ukraine at a time it was being held up is Zelensky – who says Ukraine is 'ready to continue to cooperate for next steps.'
Ukraine desperately wants the aid as it continues to clash with Russia following its 2014 invasion and annexation of Crimea.
'The United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine. Much more than the European Union especially when we are talking about sanctions against the Russian Federation,' Zelensky said, mentioning U.S. imposed sanctions that Trump resisted when Congress tightened them after his election.
'I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense,' Zelensky continues. 'We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. Specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes,' he said, mentioning Javelin missiles, a portable anti-tank munition.  
Zelensky flattered Trump and told him on his last trip to New York he stayed at Trump Tower.  
He assured Trump: 'We will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation.' 
The two men talked about meeting on Trump's then-planned trip to Poland. Zelensky suggested a joint trip to Ukraine. 'We can either take my plane and go to Ukraine or we can take your plane, which is probably much better than mine,' Zelensky said.  
Trump's presidential campaign immediately teed off on the release of the transcript, accusing Democrats of acting out of 'pure hatred.'
[size=18]Lindsay Graham calls transcript of Ukraine call 'underwhelming'




Lo[/size]


'Because of their pure hatred for President Trump, desperate Democrats and the salivating media already had determined their mission: take out the President,' said Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale.
'The fact is that the President wants to fight the corruption in Washington, where the Bidens, the Clintons, and other career politicians have abused their power for personal gain for decades. The facts prove the President did nothing wrong,' he said. 'This is just another hoax from Democrats and the media, contributing to the landslide re-election of President Trump in 2020.'
Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, however, saw no reason to back off his statement that the information is 'troubling.'
'This remains deeply troubling and we'll see where it leads but the first reaction is, troubling,' he said at a forum hosted by the Atlantic magazine. But he declined to say whether it was an 'impeachable offense.'
Asked about the quid pro quo issue, Romney said: 'I don't know that I've focused so much on the quid pro quo element … There's just the question of… if the president of the United States asks or presses the leader for a foreign country to carry out an investigation of a political nature, that's troubling. And I feel that. If there were a quid pro quo, that would take it to an entirely more extreme level,' Romney said.
 
The transcript became a political hot potato this week as Democrats clamored for its release with predictions that it would show Trump committing impeachable offenses.
They argue that Trump's request for a new investigation into the Bidens was motivated by a desire to politically cripple the former vice president, who was then thought of as his main rival in the 2020 presidential election. 
Trump released the call transcript the morning after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House was conducting a formal impeachment inquiry of the president. 
READ THE FULL DOCUMENT


+12




+12




+12




+12

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7505845/Teacher-allegedly-told-students-write-funny-photos-enslaved-people.html

[size=34]Eighth grade teacher in New York is removed from the classroom and put under investigation after she 'asked her students to 'write something funny' under photos of black slaves for an assignment[/size]

• Darlene McCurty took to her Facebook on Friday and said that her granddaughter raised concerns with a class assignment 
  
  
• McCurty shared that the teacher worked at John W. Dodd Middle School in Freeport, New York, but added that her granddaughter was not in the class 
  
  
• She identified the teacher as Shelly Scully 
  
  
• In a statement shared online, superintendent Dr. Kishore Kuncham said that the students were to write captions for Reconstruction Era photos
  
  
• Kuncham added that the teacher was removed from the classroom while an investigation was being conducted 
  
  

By MATTHEW WRIGHT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM 
PUBLISHED: 22:26 EDT, 25 September 2019 | UPDATED: 01:33 EDT, 26 September 2019

     




A New York grandmother took to her social media on Friday to voice her displeasure with her granddaughter's middle school after a teacher assigned classwork where students were to 'write something funny' about slavery. 
Darlene McCurty took to her Facebook on Friday and said that her granddaughter - who is in the eighth grade - raised concerns with a class assignment that one of the social studies teachers had handed out. 
McCurty shared that the teacher worked at John W. Dodd Middle School in Freeport, New York, but added that her granddaughter was not in the educator's class.  


+6


Darlene McCurty took to her Facebook on Friday and said that her granddaughter raised concerns with a class assignment


+6


Shared in the post were images of the assignment, which showed photographs of African American slaves with what appears to be overseers and out on the cotton fields
Shared in the post were images of the assignment, which showed photographs of African American slaves with what appears to be overseers and out on the cotton fields. The assignment asked for students to provide a title and caption to the images and also included cartoons depicting slavery. 

'She said her friend’s social studies teacher gave a class assignment to “write something funny”about these pictures on slavery - and make it real funny because she didn’t want to be bored,' the grandmother said in the post that has been shared just under 2,000 times.
'My granddaughter’s friend refused to write anything “funny”.' 
The grandmother continued: 'My granddaughter was and still is very upset and she asked me how can this racist teacher be reprimanded. I told her that I would handle it.'


+6


The assignment asked for students to provide a title and caption to the images and also included cartoons depicting slavery


+6


McCurty shared that the teacher worked at John W. Dodd Middle School in Freeport, New York, but added that her granddaughter was not in the educator's class


McCurty identified the teacher as Shelly Scully, adding that she is a white woman. The concerned grandmother declared that Scully be 'removed for her blatant insensitivity and racism towards teaching this lesson on slavery'. 
Scully was named as one of 16 educators honored by the Freeport Public School district for 20 years of service in 2017. On the school district's website, she is listed as the lead teacher. 
In a statement shared on the district's website, superintendent Dr. Kishore Kuncham described that the students were to write captions for Reconstruction Era photos. 


+6


McCurty identified the teacher as Shelly Scully. The concerned grandmother declared that Scully be 'removed for her blatant insensitivity and racism towards teaching this lesson on slavery'
Kuncham added that the teacher was removed from the classroom while an investigation was being conducted. 
'Our investigation has determined that this lesson was poorly conceived and executed,' the superintendent added. 
'The teacher instructed three separate classes of students to develop captions for photos of post-war sharecroppers. We understand from our investigation that she told students to "make it funny" and "don’t bore me." Aside from the fact that this is a poor lesson, it is an insensitive trivialization of a deeply painful era for African Americans in this country, and it is unacceptable.'
Kuncham shared a message said to have been an apology from the teacher.  
'It is with the deepest sense of respect that I apologize to the students, families and larger Freeport community for my insensitive words and actions last week,' Scully said in her message.
'As a teacher and fellow member of this school community, it is my responsibility to exercise the highest degree of care and thought in all of my student and staff interactions. I failed to do so last week, and I fully accept that I must work hard to rebuild trust from my students, colleagues and the community.' 
Kuncham added that the union is working on its options with the teacher. 


+6


In a statement shared on the district's website, superintendent Dr. Kishore Kuncham described that the students were to write captions for Reconstruction Era photos

This shows ignorance has no bounds.

It truly doesn't sadly.

Annemarie, understanding that, why post this article?

Why not? Ignoring it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I post what I think is important so that it can be discussed or to let others know what is going on .

Let's discuss.  Why do you think this article is important?

LizzyNY wrote:Why not? Ignoring it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Ignoring the article? or Ignoring slavery?

It shows the ignorance that is in our world. There may be those who don't know that this sort of thing happens in school.

If you don't have children or read certain articles you would have no idea. We have many people from different places on this site.

People don't know "what sort of thing happens in school"?

A.  There are teachers in our schools who view slavery as a joke?

B.  How does this article show the ignorance that is in our world?  

C. Are you saying the institution of slavery was an ignorant way of life?

What I wrote was straight forward . I answered and told you why I posted the article.

I understand my questions are piercing to the core.  

You stated you posted the article to discuss it.  I'm trying to engage in a discussion about the article you posted, to discuss.  If you don't want to discuss the article, I will stop asking the questions.

ladybugcngc wrote:

LizzyNY wrote:Why not? Ignoring it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Ignoring the article? or Ignoring slavery?

Both.

LizzyNY wrote:

ladybugcngc wrote:

LizzyNY wrote:Why not? Ignoring it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Ignoring the article? or Ignoring slavery?

Both.

Why is it important for us to know the situation with this teacher happened?

Why do you feel acknowledging slavery as it relates to this article is important?

Abuses of the Human Rights Act according to the Geneva Convention which the USA signed up to.

Look it up

Pan, unfortunately this article is not about the Human Rights Act signed by the USA at the Geneva Convention.  

This article is about a student's assignment (imposed by a teacher in this country) to view the institution of slavery imposed in this country, as a joke.

Correct and my helpful answer to you answers your second question. 

What do you think the answer to your own questions is?

I'm sorry PAN.

I did not find where Human Rights Act, was apart of the teachers lesson.  Did I miss something?

Ladybug, the fact that you're insisting on discussing it is the reason it is important. Slavery is an abuse of human rights. Publicising it brings the issue to light - and whatever your opinion, it is an issue that shouldn't be ignored (both the teacher's actions and the effects of slavery itself in the US, and the continuing existence of slavery throughout the world).

PAN,

Your right, that's why I asked the questions and persisted in the discussion.

The truth is some people in this country and abroad will view this teacher as a hero.

An article posted about a teacher, with a twisted mindset of this magnitude can't go without discussion.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7510773/Rudy-Giuliani-says-Presidents-lawyer-working-State-Department-Ukraine.html

[size=34]Rudy Giuliani says he was President Trump's lawyer AND working for the State Department when it came to Ukraine and he should CONGRATULATED for being 'a legitimate whistleblower'[/size]

• President Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani reiterated previous claims that the State Department asked him to reach out to Ukraine
  
  
• But the whistleblower complaint alleged that the State Department was 'deeply concerned' about Giuliani's communications with Ukrainian leaders
  
  
• During an interview with Fox News, Laura Ingraham noted that people were 'extremely confused' about Giuliani's relationship with the State Department
  
  
• Giuliani lashed out at the State Department, demanding its representative for Ukraine negotiations 'step forward' to say they directed him
  
  
• 'I have no idea if [Secretary of State[ Mike Pompeo is unhappy with me or not,' Giuliani said at one point. 'Frankly, I don't care. I'm the president's lawyer!' 
  
  

By DAILYMAIL.COM REPORTER and ASSOCIATED PRESS
PUBLISHED: 02:08 EDT, 27 September 2019 | UPDATED: 02:40 EDT, 27 September 2019

     





President Donald Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani has been making the rounds, conducting ranting TV and magazine interviews in the aftermath of the House launching an impeachment inquiry into the president.   
Giuliani criticized the anonymous intelligence official who claims President Trump abused his power, before he praised himself for his supposed efforts to uncover alleged corruption in Ukraine: 'I'm the legitimate whistleblower,' he said.
Giuliani called out the State Department to demand its representative for Ukraine negotiations 'step forward' and admit he was working for the department. 


+4


Rudy Giuliani reiterated previous claims that the State Department asked him to reach out to Ukraine to inquire about Ukrainian investigations, including into Joe and Hunter Biden
Appearing on Laura Ingraham's Fox News show for the third night, Giuliani attempted to deny reports that he was at the center of President Trump's attempt to pressure Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden. 

He insisted that he had in fact been working for the State Department during calls and meetings with Ukrainian government officials.  
Ingraham appeared to have trouble understanding exactly what Giuliani was implying during the frenetic interview and why Trump's lawyer was acting on behalf of the State Department. 
She asked him if Giuliani was acting as Trump's 'personal representative interfacing with State' or as a 'kind of a pseudo-government emissary working to ferret out corruption in the Ukraine.' 
'As a lawyer though, I think it's confusing. I just want to understand it, it's confusing to people,' Ingraham said. 'Were you acting as the president's personal representative interfacing with state? Or were you working as kind of a pseudo-government emissary working to ferret out corruption in the Ukraine? Where they dual roles? I think that gets confusing.'


+4


Laura Ingraham, left, noted that people were 'extremely confused' about Giuliani's relationship with the State Department
'Let me tell you the facts,' Giuliani said with a grin.
'They asked me if I would take a call from [Ukraine presidential aide Andriy] Yermak and if I would meet with him and I did and I reported it back to them and the conversation was completely normal and there was no bribery, there was no extortion. Nothing like what Biden did. I didn't do that in the president and Biden do that.'
Ingraham then asked Giuliani about a report in the New York Times brought up a post from New York Times report that suggested Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was 'unhappy' at Giuliani for his role in the Ukraine scandal.
One of the allegations contained in the whistleblower complaint also suggested that the State Department was 'deeply concerned' about Giuliani's communications with Ukrainian leaders. 
Once again, Giuliani brushed off any criticism and said the State Department asked him to reach out to Ukraine to inquire about Ukrainian investigations, including into former Vice President Joe Biden and his family.
'I actually think they should all congratulate me, because if it weren't for me nobody would have uncovered and faced massive corruption by the Vice President of the United States,' Giuliani said as he praised himself once again.




+4


Donald Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani insisted: 'It is impossible that the whistle-blower is a hero and I'm not. And I will be the hero! These morons—when this is over, I will be the hero'
'In fact, I'm a legitimate whistleblower. I have uncovered corruption that this Washington swamp has been covering up, effectively, for years. And his State Department, you know, asked me to do this. So Mike, if you're unhappy with me, I'm sorry, but I accomplished my mission.' 
'I have no idea if he is unhappy with me or not. I, frankly, don't care. I'm the president's lawyer,' Giuliani continued, despite having insisted moments earlier that he was working for the State Department.  
'The reality is that Joe Biden did everything that these stupid fools accuse the president of doing which he didn't do, and now they are doubling down on a whistleblower complaint that is falling apart. He's not even a whistleblower. A hearsay witness is not a witness under the law. The Inspector General decided the hearsay witness was credible. How could he possibly decide that unless he had some kind of severe bias?'.


+4


When it comes to Ukraine, Rudy Giuliani became President Donald Trump's courier, attack dog, fixer and a self-described meddler in another country's affairs 
When it comes to Ukraine, Rudy Giuliani became President Donald Trump's courier, attack dog, fixer and a self-described meddler in another country's affairs. 
His purpose was single-minded: get information 'very, very helpful to my client.'
Earlier on Thursday, the intelligence-community whistleblower described Giuliani as a one-man wrecking ball, breaking things in a complex international landscape and leaving actual diplomatic envoys to clean up his 'damage.'
In a separate interview with The Atlantic magazine Giuliani said: 'I will be the hero' in this episode and those who criticize him now are 'morons.' 
'I'm not acting as a lawyer. I'm acting as someone who has devoted most of his life to straightening out government,' a winded Giuliani said in his interview with The Atlantic. 'Anything I did should be praised.'
Officials revealed earlier this week that after former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation concluded this Spring, Giuliani turned his attention to Ukraine – including pushing for personnel changes at the embassy and requesting meetings with those working for the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky. 
[size=18]Director of National Intelligence testifies on whistleblower complaint




L[/size]

What a mess! From what I heard yesterday, the State Department is claiming they did not ask Giuliani to get involved. He claims they did. At this point I don't believe anything that comes out of this administration.

True Lizzy I know I don't believe anyone that has anything to do with the idiot especially his chosen crew.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7512741/Family-shot-dead-cops-told-no-rights-illegal-immigrant.html

[size=34]Family of man shot in the back of the head by cops who targeted the wrong house in Mississippi are told the city is not liable for damages because he was an undocumented migrant with no constitutional rights[/size]

• Ismael Lopez, 41, was shot dead in the back of the head in Mississippi in 2017
  
  
• Police in Southaven had mistakenly gone to his trailer park home while responding to a domestic dispute
  
  
• There is no body camera footage and the officers have never been named or indicted 
  
  
• They claim he poked a gun out of his door before they opened fire - which his wife denies
  
  
• She sued the city of Southaven in a $20million wrongful death lawsuit 
  
  
• In response, the city has argued that because Lopez - a mechanic - was not legally living in the US, he has no rights 
  
  
• They also questioned whether he and his widow were ever legally married and called her a 'bigamous paramous' who they said had other husbands
  
  
• The widow refuted their allegations and called them 'chilling'  
  
  

By JENNIFER SMITH FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 13:14 EDT, 27 September 2019 | UPDATED: 14:08 EDT, 27 September 2019

     





The family of a man who was shot in the head by Mississippi police officers after they went to the wrong house to investigate a domestic dispute has been told that the state is not liable for his death because he was an illegal immigrant. 
In a shockingly blunt legal brief filed earlier this month, lawyers for the city of Southaven also accuse the man's widow of being married to multiple men. 
They say that even if it was the city's fault that he died, the pair have no protection under the 14th amendment of the US constitution because neither is a US citizen. 
Ismael Lopez was shot and killed by unnamed police officers who showed up at his door, pounding on it, in July 2017. 

They had received a call reporting a domestic violence incident and they went to Lopez's home mistakenly. 


+7


Ismael Lopez, 41, was shot dead last year. His widow Claudia Linares, pictured with him, is suing the city of Southaven for wrongful death 
What exactly happened next is in dispute. The man's widow, Claudia Linares, denies the police's claim that her husband stuck a gun out of the door then closed it. 
At the time, neighbors said the cops shot through the door and struck him in the back of the head. He was pronounced dead shortly afterwards.


The cops involved have never been named. They were not required to wear body cameras and a grand jury decided not to indict them after looking at the evidence of the shooting. 
Frustrated, Lopez's widow filed a wrongful death lawsuit last year seeking $20million. 
[size=18]Family speaks out after city says man shot by cops has no rights




%
P[/size]






+7


The family's trailer in Southaven, Mississippi. Police showed up there in July 2017 to respond to a domestic incident but they got the wrong home and knocked on Ismael's door


+7


The cops were not wearing body cameras which would have captured the shooting. They claimed Lopez poked his gun through a crack in the door then retreated, slamming it in their face. His widow disputes it


+7


Bullet holes show where shots were fired through the door last July. Neighbors say Lopez was on the other side 


+7


The killing sparked protest Southaven, Mississippi, last year. The two cops were never indicted 

Cox Media Group Privacy Policy
The city filed an argument on September 3, disputing that they are liable. 
Throughout it, lawyer Katherine S. Kerby called Linares  the victim's 'alleged wife' and described an 'alleged shooting'. 
She questioned that they had ever been married, alleging that Linares had been married to two other men, and called the victim a 'fugitive' who had ignored several deportation orders. 
'If he ever had Fourth Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment civil rights, they were lost by his own conduct and misconduct. 
'Ismael Lopez may have been a person on American soil but he was not one of the "We, the People of the United States" entitled to the civil rights invoked in this lawsuit,' Kerby wrote. 
Linares' lawyers said on Thursday they were stunned by the language used in the filing. 


+7




+7



Katherine S. Kerby (left), the lawyer for the city, called the man's widow his 'alleged wife' throughout the legal filing and questioned if they were ever married - something she says is 'chilling and offensive' 
'We’re stunned that someone put this in writing,' her lawyer Murray Wells said, describing it as 'chilling'. 
He said their argument might as well have been that 'stormtroopers can come into your house and kill you' if you are undocumented immigrant. 
'It’s a real shame that they have to use these tactics to soil someone’s name when she lost her partner, the love of her life, in a tragic accident,' Aaron Neglia, another one of the woman's lawyers, said.
Linares produced a marriage certificate dated 2003 to prove their claims that she and Lopez were not legally married wrong.
The Supreme Court has routinely ruled that people in the US are protected and entitled to basic human rights regardless of their immigration status.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7509995/Judge-blocks-deal-bar-LGBT-discrimination-adoptions.html

[size=34]Michigan judge rules Christian adoption agencies CAN refuse to place children with LGBT couples[/size]

• Religious-based adoption agencies in Michigan will be allowed to refuse to place children in LGBT homes
  
  
• The practice was banned after Attorney General Dana Nessel brought a case on behalf of two lesbian couples arguing it was discriminatory 
  
  
• But a judge said the action conflicted with state law and was not discriminatory
  
  
• LGBT campaigners say restrictions against families are a 'policy of bigotry' 
  
  

By ASSOCIATED PRESS and LEAH MCDONALD FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 18:27 EDT, 26 September 2019 | UPDATED: 14:08 EDT, 27 September 2019

     



Religious-based adoption agencies in Michigan will be allowed to refuse to place children in LGBT homes under a preliminary injunction issued by a federal judge Thursday.
State Attorney General Dana Nessel reached a settlement earlier this year barring faith-based agencies from excluding same-sex couples from adoption services.  
However on Thursday a federal judge in Grand Rapids overturned that decision. 
In 2017, Nessel, a Democrat who is Michigan's first openly gay statewide officeholder, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan sued the state on behalf of two lesbian couples. 


+4


Religious-based adoption agencies in Michigan will be allowed to refuse to place children in LGBT homes under a preliminary injunction issued by a federal judge Thursday


+4


The practice was banned after Attorney General Dana Nessel brought a case on behalf of two lesbian couples arguing it was discriminatory
The couples claimed they were turned away from agencies and could not adopt because they are gay. 

Nessel argued the practice amounted to illegal discrimination and later reached a settlement overturning the policy in March 2019.  
District Judge Robert Jonker in Grand Rapids said her action conflicted with state law, existing contracts and established practice.  
Michigan, like most states, contracts with private agencies to place children from troubled homes with new families.
Jonker, in issuing a preliminary injunction, said Lansing-based St. Vincent Catholic Charities' longstanding practice of adhering to its religious beliefs and referring same-sex and unmarried couples to other agencies is not discriminatory.
Wanting to cancel the contract 'strongly suggests the State's real goal is not to promote non-discriminatory child placements, but to stamp out St. Vincent's religious belief and replace it with the State's own.


'It would disrupt a carefully balanced and established practice that ensures non-discrimination in child placements while still accommodating traditional Catholic religious beliefs on marriage,' he wrote.
A spokeswoman for Nessel said her office was reviewing the decision to determine next steps.
Nessel in March announced an agreement with the American Civil Liberties Union to resolve a 2017 lawsuit filed by two lesbian couples. 
The settlement said a 2015 Republican-backed law that lets child-placement agencies not provide any services that conflict with their sincerely held religious beliefs does not apply if they are under contract with the state.
'Today's ruling requires the state to put the individual religious beliefs of foster care agencies ahead of the welfare of children,' said Jay Kaplan, staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan's LGBT Project. 


+4


District Judge Robert Jonker, (pictured), in Grand Rapids blocked Democratic state Attorney General Dana Nessel from barring the faith-based agencies from excluding LGBT couples from services


+4


A judge claimed that a settlement allowing LGBT couples to adopt from faith-based adoption agencies targets the religious beliefs of centers such as Lansing-based St. Vincent Catholic Charities (pictured)
'This will not facilitate foster and adoptive placements for children in need. Instead, it will allow agencies to turn away same-sex foster parents who are able to provide supportive and loving homes for these children.'
In April, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty challenged Nessel's deal, suing on behalf of St. Vincent, two adoptive parents and a former foster child who was adopted. 
The complaint alleges violations of the plaintiffs' First Amendment rights and the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act - claims on which the plaintiffs will likely prevail, according to the judge.
Jonker, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, also declined to dismiss Nessel from the suit, saying she 'targeted' St. Vincent. 
He said she is at the 'very heart' of the case after she made past statements referring to proponents of the 2015 law as 'hate-mongers' and calling the measure indefensible during her 2018 campaign.
The decision was cheered by one of the adoptive parents, Melissa Buck of Holt, near Lansing. St. Vincent helped her and her husband, Chad, adopt five special needs children who were in the state's foster care system.
'St. Vincent brought our family together, and I'm happy to know they can keep doing their great work helping children find homes,' she said.
Faith-based agencies claimed they would have had to close their adoption and foster care services rather than violate their religious beliefs. 
But Democrats and LGBT campaigners said restrictions on gay families represented a 'policy of bigotry.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7517653/Black-student-tearfully-describes-three-white-classmates-cut-dreadlocks.html

[size=34]Black student, 12, tearfully describes being 'ambushed and pinned down by three white male classmates who cut her dreadlocks' at $12K-a-year Christian private school in Virginia where Karen Pence works[/size]

• Amari Allen says three white male sixth-grade classmates attacked her during recess last Monday at Immanuel Christian School in Fairfax, Virginia 
  
  
• The 12-year-old broke down in tears as she recounted the humiliating ordeal 
  
  
• Amari claimed the boys pinned her armed behind her back and covered her mouth before using scissors to lop off several of her dreadlocks  
  
  
• She said they laughed at her and called her 'ugly' and 'an attention seeker'  
  
  
• Amari didn't tell anyone about the incident until two days later when her grandmother noticed her hair was uneven
  
  
• Her family demanded that the unidentified bullies be expelled from the school 
  
  
• School administrators said they contacted police and an investigation is ongoing
  
  
• Vice President Mike Pence's wife Karen teaches at ICS part-time 
  
  

By MEGAN SHEETS  and RALPH R. ORTEGA FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 11:20 EDT, 29 September 2019 | UPDATED: 11:39 EDT, 29 September 2019

     





A black 12-year-old broke down in tears as she described how three white male classmates allegedly pinned her down and cut off her dreadlocks on the playground at a private Christian school in Virginia. 
The humiliating ordeal took place last Monday while Amari Allen was at recess at the $12,000-per-year Immanuel Christian School in Fairfax, where Vice President Mike Pence's wife Karen teaches part-time.   
The sixth-grader said she was about to go down a slide when the three bullies 'ambushed' her.  
'One of them put my hands behind my back. One of them covered my mouth. They kept laughing and calling me names,' Amari told WUSA9 as tears streamed down her face.  

'They called me ugly and said I shouldn't have been born. They called me an attention-seeker.'


+9


Amari Allen, 12, says three white male classmates pinned her down and cut off her dreadlocks during recess last Monday at Immanuel Christian School in Fairfax, Virginia


+9


Amari broke down in tears as she recounted the humiliating incident during an interview alongside her grandparents, Cynthia and Dewuane Allen


+9


'They called me ugly and said I shouldn't have been born. They called me an attention-seeker,' Amari said of the sixth-grade boys who allegedly attacked her

TEGNA Inc. Privacy Policy
Amari said the boys brandished a pair of scissors, 'took big chunks of my hair and just cut'.  
The bullies lopped off several of Amari's locs before running off laughing, she said.  
Fearing what the boys might do if she tattled, the pre-teen didn't tell anyone what had happened until two days later when her grandmother, Cynthia Allen, noticed her hair was uneven. 
Amari said that she's been bullied by the same unidentified sixth-graders for weeks.    
Describing the bullying to WUSA9, Amari said: 'Sometimes I think that I don't deserve to be at a Christian school and that I'm ugly.' 


Allen questioned where the teachers have been during the bullying incidents and demand consequences for the boys who allegedly terrorized her granddaughter.  
'It's very painful,' Allen told WUSA9. 'I want to see them dismissed from the school. I want to see something done.'


+9


Amari said she was about to go down a slide on the playground (pictured) when the three bullies 'ambushed' her


+9




+9



Amari didn't tell anyone about the attack until days later when her grandmother noticed her hair was uneven. The pre-teen's dreadlocks are seen before (left) and after (right) the incident


+9


Amari's grandmother, Cynthia Allen, is seen fixing the girl's locs in the Facebook photo above

Officials at the Immanuel Christian School told DailyMail.com that they were in touch with the family and had asked police to conduct a thorough investigation.  
'We take seriously the emotional and physical well-being of all our students, and have a zero-tolerance policy for any kind of bullying or abuse,' Head of School Stephen Danish said in a statement. 
'We are deeply disturbed by the allegations being made, and are in communication with the family of the alleged victim to gather information and provide whatever support we can.
'We have also reached out to law enforcement to ask them to conduct a thorough investigation, and further inquiries should be directed to the Fairfax County Police.' 
A Fairfax County Police spokeswoman confirmed that an investigation was underway but declined to provide additional information to DailyMail.com because the victim is a juvenile.      


+9


Officials at Immanuel Christian School (pictured) said they were in touch with Amari's family and had asked police to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident


+9


Vice President Mike Pence's wife Karen (above together earlier this month) teaches at Immanuel Christian School part time 

https://news.sky.com/story/shamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516

[size=48]Shamima Begum: IS bride can never return to UK, says Home Secretary Priti Patel

The British teenager, who joined Islamic State in 2015, wants to come back to the UK for therapy after her three children died.

[/size]

Alix Culbertson

News reporter @alixculbertson

Sunday 29 September 2019 15:18, UK



Image:Shamima Begum says she wants therapy in the UK

• [url=https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fshamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516&t=Shamima Begum%3A IS bride can never return to UK%2C says Home Secretary Priti Patel][/url]
  
  [url=https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fshamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516&t=Shamima Begum%3A IS bride can never return to UK%2C says Home Secretary Priti Patel][/url] 
  
• [url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Shamima Begum%3A IS bride can never return to UK%2C says Home Secretary Priti patel&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fshamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516][/url]
  
  [url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Shamima Begum%3A IS bride can never return to UK%2C says Home Secretary Priti patel&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fshamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516][/url] 
  
• [url=whatsapp://send?text=Shamima Begum%3A IS bride can never return to UK%2C says Home Secretary Priti Patel - https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fshamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516][/url]
  
  [url=whatsapp://send?text=Shamima Begum%3A IS bride can never return to UK%2C says Home Secretary Priti Patel - https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fshamima-begum-is-bride-can-never-return-to-uk-says-home-secretary-priti-patel-11822516][/url] 
  
  
  
  

Why you can trust Sky News 
Home Secretary Priti Patel has said Islamic State bride Shamima Begum will never be allowed to return to the UK.
Begum, who fled to join the terror group with two school friends in 2015, has begged to be allowed back in Britain for therapy after all three of her children died in Syria.
[size=18][ltr]Sponsored link[/ltr]







[/size]

• 
  
  
  
  The Early Signs of COPDYahoo Search
  
  

[size]

But Ms Patel said there was "no way" she could return and it was "quite reassuring" to see the 19-year-old still in the war-torn country.










[size=13][size=18]February 2019: Shamima Begum asks politicians for 'mercy'[/size][/size]
"Our job is to keep our country safe," the home secretary told the Sun on Sunday.
"We cannot have people who would do us harm allowed to enter our country - and that includes this woman.

Advertisement
"Everything I see in terms of security and intelligence, I am simply not willing to allow anybody who has been an active supporter or campaigner of IS in this country."
Ms Patel added that she will "stop goldplating" the UK's international obligations and "endangering the British public in the process".
[/size]

• 
  

  SAS could be sent to bring children of Islamic State fighters back to Britain

  
  
• 
  

  Shamima Begum: Police lose bid to seize notes about IS bride from British journalists

  
  
• 
  

  Shamima Begum was 'groomed' and UK 'failed to protect her'

  
  
• 
  

  IS bride Shamima Begum appealing for legal aid to fight for UK citizenship

  
  
• 
  

  Shamima Begum: IS bride says she was 'brainwashed' and wants 'a second chance'

  
  
• 
  

  Sky Views: Stripping IS brides of UK citizenship is not the solution

  
  

[size]


Image:Begum spoke to Sky News in February, days after her third baby was born
Begum, from Bethnal Green, east London, has been stripped of her British citizenship and is currently living in a Syrian internment camp.
Authorities in Bangladesh, where she is believed to be able to claim citizenship, said she would not be able to enter the country.
Begum married Dutch IS fighter Yago Riedijk when she was 15 years old and had three children with him during her three years living with the terror group.


Image:Begum married Dutch IS fighter Yago Riedijk in Syria
All three children died at a young age, with the last child born in February in a refugee camp.
Begum now claims to hate IS and said this week she was only there to "make babies".[/size]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7519129/Trump-I-want-meet-accuser.html

[size=34]'It will cause a Civil War-like fracture from which our Country will never heal': Trump reposts evangelical pastor's tweets warning of the perils of impeachment and demands to meet his whistleblower 'accuser'[/size]

• Original comment was made by Pastor Robert Jeffress on Fox News Channel 
  
  
• Jeffress appeared on the morning show Fox & Friends on Sunday 
  
  
• Trump quoted Jeffress in a series of posts on Twitter late Sunday evening
  
  
• Jeffress is a pastor at the 13,000-member First Baptist Church in Dallas 
  
  
• Earlier on Sunday, Trump said he wanted to meet Ukraine scandal whistleblower
  
  
• Democrats launched official impeachment inquiry in Congress last week
  
  
• They accuse Trump of 'mafia-style shakedown' of Ukrainian leader
  
  
• Trump pressed President Volodymyr Zelensky to probe Joe Biden and his son 
  
  

By AFP and ARIEL ZILBER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 21:42 EDT, 29 September 2019 | UPDATED: 02:27 EDT, 30 September 2019

     


President Trump on Sunday tweeted a quote from a Baptist pastor who said that his removal from office would ‘cause a Civil War like fracture... from which our country will never heal.’
Trump’s tweet was quoting Pastor Robert Jeffress, who appeared early Sunday morning on the Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends show.
Jeffress, an evangelical who is a staunch supporter of the president, is the Southern Baptist pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas.
The church, whose congregation numbers 13,000, is considered one of the more influential in the American evangelical community. 

‘Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats can’t put down the Impeachment match,’ Jeffress told Fox News.




Pastor Robert Jeffress (left) told Fox News on Sunday that America risks 'civil war like fracture' if the Democrats succeed in removing President Trump (right) from office
‘They know they couldn’t beat him in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, and they’re increasingly aware of the fact that they won’t win against him in 2020, and Impeachment is the only tool they have to get rid of Donald J. Trump.
‘And the Democrats don’t care if they burn down and destroy this nation in the process.’
When asked about the reaction from evangelical Christians to the possibility of an impeachment inquiry against Trump, Jeffress responded: ‘I have never seen the evangelical Christians more angry over any issue than this attempt to illegitimately remove this president from office, overturn the 2016 election, and negate the votes of millions of evangelicals in the process.
‘They know the only impeachable offense that President Trump has committed was beating Hillary Clinton in 2016.
‘That’s the unpardonable sin for which the Democrats will never forgive him.
‘If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this nation from which our country will never heal.’


+7


The president quoted Jeffress' comments on Fox & Friends word for word late Sunday evening


+7




+7





[size=10][size=18]Trump impeachment inquiry 'greatest scam in history'




L[/size][/size]








Jeffress has been known to make controversial remarks.
During an appearance last month on a Fox News radio show hosted by Todd Starnes, he said Jews and their children would be cursed by God if they vote for Democrats.
Jeffress was commenting about a remark Trump made in August when he said Jews who voted for Democratic candidates were ‘disloyal’ - presumably to Israel.
In 2017, Jeffress was quoted as saying that Catholicism is a ‘cult-like pagan religion’ and that the success of the religion is due to ‘the genius of Satan.’
During the 2016 campaign, Jeffress joined the evangelical advisory board, a group of influential Christian figures who offered spiritual and religious guidance to then-candidate Trump. 
A Republican member of Congress slammed Trump for tweeting Jeffress’ comments about the prospect of a civil war in America.
‘I have visited nations ravaged by civil war,’ tweeted House Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.



House Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a Republican member of Congress, slammed Trump for tweeting Jeffress’ comments about the prospect of a civil war in America
‘I have never imagined such a quote to be repeated by a President.
‘This is beyond repugnant.’ 
Earlier on Sunday, Trump said he wants and deserves to meet the anonymous whistleblower at the center of the fast-moving scandal that has triggered an impeachment probe against him.
The whistleblower, who could testify soon before Congress, fears for their safety if their identity is revealed, according to a lawyers' letter released by CBS News.
Battling the deepest crisis of his presidency, Trump in a series of tweets railed against accusations that he should be impeached for urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, his potential 2020 White House challenger.
'Like every American, I deserve to meet my accuser, especially when this accuser, the so-called "Whistleblower," represented a perfect conversation with a foreign leader in a totally inaccurate and fraudulent way,' Trump said.
Trump accused top Democratic lawmaker Adam Schiff of lying to Congress last week about what Trump said to Zelensky in the July phone call.


+7


Jeffress (seen above in Dallas in June) counts himself as a supporter and adviser to Trump on religious matters. He has been quoted as saying Catholicism is a 'cult-like pagan religion' and that Jews and their children will receive eternal damnation for voting for Democrats
'He wrote down and read terrible things, then said it was from the mouth of the President of the United States. I want Schiff questioned at the highest level for Fraud & Treason,' he wrote.
Trump's Republican aides have sought to turn the tables on Democrats pushing for his impeachment, insisting that the president was the true 'whistleblower' as he had asked Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son for corruption.
'This individual is a saboteur trying to undermine a democratically elected government,' Trump advisor Stephen Miller insisted on Fox News Sunday.
'Getting to the bottom of a corruption scandal in Ukraine is in the American national interest.'
Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani - who has emerged as his point man in the Ukraine scandal - led the charge along with Miller in combative Sunday talk show appearances.
Brandishing what he said were affidavits incriminating Biden's son Hunter over his work at a Ukrainian company, Giuliani said Trump was duty bound to raise the issue with Kiev.
'If he hadn't asked them to investigate Biden, he would have violated the constitution,' Giuliani told ABC's This Week, charging that 'Donald Trump was framed by the Democrats.'


The Democratic-led House of Representatives launched an official impeachment inquiry last week accusing Trump of a 'mafia-like shakedown' of Zelensky aimed at damaging Biden.
Trump and his allies claim Biden, as Barack Obama's vice president, pressured Kiev to fire the country's top prosecutor to protect his son Hunter, who sat on the board of a gas company, Burisma Holdings, accused of corrupt practices.


+7


Trump  (right) faces the prospect of impeachment by Democrats after a whistleblower came forward to reveal that he pressed the president of Ukraine to open an investigation against Joe Biden (left)


+7


'Like every American, I deserve to meet my accuser, especially when this accuser, the so-called "Whistleblower," represented a perfect conversation with a foreign leader in a totally inaccurate and fraudulent way,' Trump said
Those allegations have largely been debunked and there has been no evidence of illegal conduct or wrongdoing in Ukraine by the Bidens.
But a transcript of the July call shows Trump pushing for Kiev to revisit the matter, saying both Giuliani and US Attorney General Bill Barr would be in touch.
For Democrats, that amounted to a smoking gun, leading Speaker Nancy Pelosi to finally approve an impeachment process she opposed as a risky distraction from the 2020 battle.
Pelosi on Sunday called for Trump to 'speak the truth. Honor your oath of office to the Constitution of the United States.'
'Don't make this any worse than it already is,' she said.
Democrats have charged aggressively into the inquiry, ordering Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to turn over Ukraine-related documents and scheduling witness testimony.
On NBC's Meet the Press, Schiff said he expected the whistleblower to testify 'very soon' - with all precautions taken to protect their identity.
CBS News released a letter from the whistleblower's lawyers to the acting director of national intelligence expressing concern that their 'client will be put in harm's way.'


+7


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says Democrats had 'no choice' but to investigate Trump for abuse of power
[size=18]Pelosi says public opinion is for impeachment against Trump




L[/size]





'We expect this situation to worsen and become even more dangerous,' the letter said, calling for 'appropriate resources to ensure their safety.'
Democrats have said articles of impeachment - formal charges - against Trump could be completed in as little as a month and swiftly voted on in the House, where the party has a majority.
The Biden campaign sent a letter Sunday to US TV networks to demanding they stop booking Giuliani for interviews, accusing him of 'knowingly and willingly' lying.
Polls suggest public support is growing for the impeachment inquiry, with a new CBS survey showing 55 percent of Americans - and nine in 10 Democrats - approve.
But even if impeachment is approved in the House, Trump would be tried in the Senate - where, for the moment, he appears able to count on a Republican majority to prevent conviction.

So is he playing the fear-mongering card this early?!

He is really delusional. He knows his base will buy the crap people with any common sense know this is not true.

I just want to know what it would take for his "evangelical" base to stop singing his praises. Seems to me he could shoot Jesus on Fifth Avenue and they'd find some excuse for him. What kind of Christians are these people? Do they have any understanding of what Christ stood for?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/top-bodyguard-to-2-saudi-kings-is-shot-dead/ar-AAI1IVk?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=BHEA000








BEIRUT, Lebanon — A longtime personal bodyguard to two Saudi kings was shot and killed by a friend during a personal dispute, the Saudi state news media said on Sunday.
:copyright: Pool photo by Yoan Valat Gen. Abdulaziz al-Faghem, left, in 2015 with King Salman of Saudi Arabia, whom he often guarded. General al-Faghem also guarded the previous king.
The report provided no details on why the friend shot the bodyguard, Gen. Abdulaziz al-Faghem, who often appeared with King Abdullah, who died in 2015, and Saudi Arabia’s current monarch, King Salman.



General al-Faghem was a well-known figure in the Saudi royal court, a tall, fit man who oversaw the king’s security and often appeared near him in his heavily decorated black Royal Guard uniform and beret.

According to the state-run Saudi Press Agency, General al-Faghem was visiting a friend in the Red Sea port city of Jeddah on Saturday night when another friend dropped by. After an apparent argument or dispute, the second friend stepped out and returned with a gun, opening fire and wounding General al-Faghem and two others, the agency said.



Sign Up For the Morning Briefing Newsletter



Saudi security forces surrounded the house, but the friend refused to surrender. A gunfight broke out in which the friend was killed and five security officers were wounded. General al-Faghem died later in the hospital.

It was not immediately clear what motivated the gunman, but around the time of the killing on Saturday night, Saudi officials reached out to regional intelligence sources to ask for urgent help in gathering and analyzing information about a number of Saudi citizens, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

The push for information came from King Salman and his powerful son and crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, the person said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the news media.

It was not clear who the Saudis were seeking information about and whether that effort might have been related to the shooting of General al-Faghem.

Ronen Bergman contributed reporting from Tel Aviv.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7520805/GOP-lawmaker-rebukes-Trump-posting-claim-impeachment-cause-Civil-War-like-fracture.html

[size=34]Republican congressman issues rare rebuke of Donald Trump for posting claim by evangelical pastor that impeachment would cause 'Civil War-like fracture in the nation'[/size]

• Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger said one of the president's reactions to the impeachment inquiry is 'repugnant' 
  
  
• Donald trump tweeted a quote that claimed if impeachment were successful it would cause a 'Civil War like fracture' in the U.S. 
  
  
• The claim came from pastor and Fox News contributor Robert Jeffress
  
  
• Kinzinger said he 'never imagined' the president would post something like this
  
  
• The reposted quote comes as the president continues to defend himself against a formal impeachment
  
  
• Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the chamber was  launching an impeachment inquiry into the president
  
  
• The inquiry came to fruition after details of Trump's July call with the Ukrainian president was revealed earlier this month
  
  

By KATELYN CARALLE, U.S. POLITICAL REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 10:02 EDT, 30 September 2019 | UPDATED: 10:08 EDT, 30 September 2019
 

     



A Republican congressman, in a rare move, had some criticism for Donald Trump, claiming he 'never imagined' the president would compared impeachment to a civil war.
'I have visited nations ravaged by civil war,' Adam Kinzinger, a GOP representative from Illinois, tweeted Sunday night. 'I have never imagined such a quote to be repeated by a President. This is beyond repugnant.'
Kinzinger's rebuke of the president came about an hour after the president posted a Twitter thread that quoted pastor and Fox News contributor Robert Jeffress.
The televangelist said while on Fox News that impeachment was the only tool Democrats could think of using to try and keep Trump from winning reelection in 2020.

Jeffress also compared the divide in the country to the Civil War era and implied if the impeachment efforts were successful it would lead to a 'Civil War like fracture' in the nation.


+4


Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger criticized the president as 'repugnant' on Sunday after he compared the impeachment divisiveness to a 'Civil War-like fracture'


+4


As part of the GOP, Kinzinger's (pictured) public criticism of Trump is rare, especially as the House pursues an impeachment inquiry against the president


+4


The president posted in a thread of four tweets Sunday night a quote from Pastor and Fox News contributor Robert Jeffress that said if impeachment were successful it would cause the nation to split even further
'Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats can't put down the Impeachment match. They know they couldn't beat him in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, and they're increasingly aware of the fact that they won't win against him in 2020, and Impeachment is the only tool they have to get rid of Donald J. Trump,' Jeffress said and the president posted to his Twitter.
'And the Democrats don't care if they burn down and destroy this nation in the process,' he continued. 'I have never seen the Evangelical Christians more angry over any issue than this attempt to illegitimately remove this President from office, overturn the 2016 Election, and negate the votes of millions of Evangelicals in the process.
'They know the only Impeachable offense that President Trump has committed was beating Hillary Clinton in 2016. That's the unpardonable sin for which the Democrats will never forgive him.
'If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.'
Trump doesn't usually receive public criticism from lawmakers within his party, so Kinzinger's public disapproval helps exhibit the divisiveness that the last two weeks have caused. 


+4


Trump's tweet was continued defense after the House opened an impeachment inquiry following revelations of the nature of his July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (left) were exposed earlier this month
[size=10][size=18]Trump says there 'should be a way of stopping' impeachment inquiry




Loa[/size][/size]


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced last Tuesday that the lower chamber of Congress was officially launching an impeachment inquiry into the president as several Democrats who were on-the-fence finally called for impeachment the past few days.
The final straw for many, including the top Democrat who has been hesitant to utter the 'I-word,' was revelations earlier this month of the nature of a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
A whistle-blower alleged that in the conversation Trump attempted to dig up political dirt on Joe Biden by setting a quid pro quo of military aid for Ukraine government opening an investigation into the former vice president and his son's business dealings in the country.
Trump released on Wednesday a transcript of the July 25 call, claiming the focus of the conversation was keeping foreign corruption – including from the U.S. – out of Ukraine.
The transcript, however, did show that the president urged Zelesnky to probe the Biden's.
Hunter Biden in 2014, while his father was still vice president, accepted a position with Burisma Holdings, a Ukraine natural gas firm.
The move raised eyebrows in Washington for potential conflicts of interest, but the Obama administration dismissed it since Hunter is a private citizen. Biden also claimed he never spoke with his son about his links to the foreign company.
But Hunter contradicted that earlier this summer by detailing a conversation he had with Biden in 2015 about his $50,000 per month position.

[size=34]What it would take for Congress to impeach Trump? [/size]

Some of U.S. President Donald Trump's critics in the House of Representatives are calling for an impeachment investigation following a whistleblower complaint that has roiled Washington.
The complaint, which came from inside the intelligence community, focused on a July phone call in which Trump repeatedly pressured Ukraine´s president to investigate Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, who is one of Trump´s chief political rivals, according to reports by the Wall Street Journal and other U.S. media outlets.
Some Democratic lawmakers have said they have no choice but to try to impeach Trump if he pressured a foreign leader to influence a U.S. election.
The majority of the 235 Democrats in the House already supported an impeachment inquiry based on former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report, which declined to make a judgment on whether Trump obstructed justice but outlined 10 instances in which Trump tried to have Mueller fired or otherwise impede the investigation.
Trump on Sunday acknowledged that he discussed Biden with Ukraine´s president but defended the call as perfectly appropriate.
"The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, with largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place and largely the fact that we don´t want our people like Vice President Biden and his son creating to the corruption already in the Ukraine," Mr. Trump told reporters.
Opinion polls continue to show voters sharply divided over removing Trump from office through impeachment, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has opposed impeachment as a politically risky move unless investigators find powerful evidence of misconduct by Trump that can unify public opinion.
Here is how the impeachment process works.
WHY IMPEACHMENT?
The founders of the United States created the office of the presidency and feared that its powers could be abused. So they included impeachment as a central part of the Constitution.
They gave the House "the sole power of impeachment;" the Senate, "the sole power to try all impeachments;" and the chief justice of the Supreme Court the duty of presiding over impeachment trials in the Senate.
The president, under the Constitution, can be removed from office for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." What exactly that means is unclear. Historically, it can encompass corruption and other abuses, including trying to obstruct judicial proceedings.
No president has ever been removed as a direct result of impeachment. One, President Richard Nixon, resigned before he could be removed. Two, presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, were impeached by the House, but not convicted by the Senate.
HOW DOES IT WORK?
Impeachment begins in the House, the lower chamber, which debates and votes on whether to bring charges against the president via approval of an impeachment resolution, or "articles of impeachment," by a simple majority of the House's 435 members.
If the House approves such a resolution, a trial is then held in the Senate. House members act as the prosecutors; the senators as jurors; the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court presides. A two-thirds majority vote is required in the 100-member Senate to convict and remove a president. This has never happened.
CAN THE SUPREME COURT OVERTURN?
No. Trump has said on Twitter that he would ask the Supreme Court to intervene if Democrats tried to impeach him. But the founders explicitly rejected allowing appeal of a Senate conviction to the federal judiciary.
PARTY BREAKDOWN IN CONGRESS?
The House has 235 Democrats, 199 Republicans, and one independent. As a result, the Democrats could impeach Trump with no Republican support.
In 1998, when Republicans had a House majority, the chamber voted largely along party lines to impeach Clinton, a Democrat.
The Senate now has 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two independents who usually vote with the Democrats. Conviction and removal of a president would require 67 votes. So, for Trump to be removed from office via impeachment, at least 20 Republicans and all the Democrats and independents would have to vote against him.
WHO BECOMES PRESIDENT IF TRUMP IS REMOVED?
In the unlikely event the Senate convicted Trump, Vice President Mike Pence would become president for the remainder of Trump's term, which ends on January 20, 2021.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7520895/19-women-freed-Nigerian-baby-factory.html

[size=34]19 pregnant women are freed from Nigerian 'baby factory' where abducted women were raped so their children could be sold for £1,000 each[/size]

• Police raided four buildings in Lagos, Nigeria, being used as a 'baby factory' 
  
  
• 19 women, all of whom were pregnant, were rescued along with four children  
  
  
• Officers say male children would be sold for £1,000 and females for £700 
  
  
• Two women who worked as untrained nurses at the 'factory' were arrested 
  
  

By CHRIS PLEASANCE FOR MAILONLINE 
PUBLISHED: 09:45 EDT, 30 September 2019 | UPDATED: 10:30 EDT, 30 September 2019

     


Nineteen pregnant women and four children have been rescued from a suspected baby factory in Nigeria. 
Police in Lagos, Nigeria's largest city, raided four properties on Monday and discovered the women - aged between 15 and 28 - along with the infants, one of whom was just a day old, according to local reports. 
Officers also arrested Happiness Ukwuoma, aged 40 and Sherifat Ipeya, 54, who are thought to have worked as untrained nurses at the factory. 


+4


Nineteen pregnant women have been rescued from a suspected baby factory in Nigeria along with four infants, one of whom was reported to be one day old


+4


Police say a majority of the women were brought to Lagos with promises of domestic work before being abducted and forced to have children so they could be sold 
However, police are still searching for the main suspected - a woman they identified as Madam Oluchi, a mother-of-five. 

Investigators say the children were going to be trafficked and sold for £1,000 for a boy and £700 for a girl.
A majority of the women were tricked into leaving their home villages with promises of domestic work in Lagos before being forced into pregnancy, police said. 


Men then took it in turns to rape and impregnate the women, officers added.
A few of the women joined the syndicate voluntarily believing they would be paid - but told police they had not been given any money, The Guardian Nigeria reported.
Officers were alerted to the presence of the factory on September 19 after receiving a tip-off from neighbours about a lot of pregnant women in their street.


+4


Officers arrested two women - Happiness Ukwuoma, aged 40 and Sherifat Ipeya, 54 - who worked as untrained nurses at the factory


+4


Raids happened on Monday in the coastal city of Lagos after officer received a tip-off last week from a neighbour who became suspicious of the number of pregnant women in their street
One of the rescued women told the Vanguard newspaper that she borrowed money to travel from her home village to Lagos on the promise of house work.
When she arrived at the city's bus stop her phone was taken from her and she was brought to the 'factory' where she was told she would remain for up to a year.
The woman said that, at first, she was used as a prostitute and slept with 'customers' each night before falling pregnant.
She was then moved to a different building and told that, if she carried the baby to term, she would be 'paid handsomely' and allowed to leave.
Police said the women are now undergoing rehabilitation so they can be resettled in the city, and the investigation is ongoing. 
Baby factories are not uncommon in Nigeria - last week a one-week-old baby was saved from an illegal trade syndicate in Lagos, while another huge raid last year rescued 160 children.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7520125/A-Presidents-farewell-World-leaders-gather-Paris-pay-final-respects-Jacques-Chirac.html

[size=34]Jacques Chirac's daughter stands alone by her father's grave as she says her last goodbye to the French president following funeral attended by world leaders and France's elite[/size]

• Claude Chirac bowed her head towards the tombstone at the Paris cemetery where Chirac was laid to rest 
  
  
• Emmanuel Macron earlier stood over the former President's flag-draped coffin during a military tribute
  
  
• Past and present world leaders including Vladimir Putin and Bill Clinton gathered for a Paris memorial service
  
  
• Chirac, who was twice Prime Minister, then President from 1995 to 2007, died on Thursday at the age of 86  
  
  
• Previous memorials have been held at Notre Dame cathedral but it is unavailable after April's disastrous fire 
  
  

By SOPHIE TANNO  and TIM STICKINGS FOR MAILONLINE and AFP
PUBLISHED: 05:51 EDT, 30 September 2019 | UPDATED: 11:02 EDT, 30 September 2019






Jacques Chirac's daughter stood alone by her father's grave today as she said her last goodbye to the former French President.
Claude Chirac bowed her head towards the tombstone at the Paris cemetery where France's former head of state was laid to rest today. 
The private mourning at Montparnasse followed a very public farewell in the centre of Paris where a solemn Emmanuel Macron led a military salute before world leaders past and present gathered for a funeral service.   
Draped in a French flag, Chirac's coffin was placed near the site of Napoleon's tomb before it was driven to the service at Saint-Sulpice church - chosen because the fire-ravaged Notre Dame is unavailable. 

Vladimir Putin, Bill Clinton and Nicolas Sarkozy were among the mourners along with celebrities including Carla Bruni and Salma Hayek.  
On a national day of mourning, a minute of silence was held in schools and public buildings across France to remember Chirac, who served as President from 1995 to 2007 and died last Thursday at the age of 86.  


+62


Claude Chirac, at the back, bows her head towards her father's tombstone at the Montparnasse cemetery in Paris today as she says her last goodbye to former President Jacques Chirac 


+62


Draped in a French flag, Chirac's coffin is brought to its final resting place at Montparnasse as Claude Chirac puts her hand on the casket ahead of the final burial 


+62


French President Emmanuel Macron bows his head over the coffin of former leader Jacques Chirac during a military tribute in Paris today, as France pays its last respects to its former leader 


+62


Inside the Saint-Sulpice church in Paris, President Macron speaks to Chirac's daughter Claude Chirac (second left) while her husband Frederic Salat-Baroux (second right) and son Martin Rey-Chirac (right) look on 


+62


Brigitte Macron, the wife of current French leader Emmanuel Macron, arrives for the memorial service in Paris this morning


+62




+62



Nicolas Sarkozy, Chirac's former ally-turned-rival who eventually succeeded him as French President in 2007, arrives at the funeral today with his former supermodel wife Carla Bruni  


+62


Chirac's daughter Claude (right), 56, and her son Martin Rey-Chirac, 23, hold hands as they leave the service on Monday


+62


A sombre Macron, who spoke warmly of Chirac in a televised address on Thursday, walks away from the former President's Tricolore-draped coffin during a military ceremony near the site of Napoleon's tomb today 


+62


Russian leader Vladimir Putin, who took over as President in 2000 and overlapped with Chirac for most of his time as French President, stands in the Saint-Sulpice church during the service today


+62




+62



The high-profile guests included actress Salma Hayek (left with her French businessman Francois-Henri Punault) and former U.S. President Bill Clinton (right) who overlapped in office with Chirac from 1995 to 2001


+62


Chirac's daughter Claude Chirac (centre), her husband Frederic Salat-Baroux (right), her son Martin Rey-Chirac (second left) and other relatives arrive at the memorial service at Saint-Sulpice in Paris today


+62


The Tricolore-draped coffin is carried into the church in Paris today for a memorial service after the earlier military tribute


+62


France falls silent: People hold a minute's silence to honour Chirac outside the National Assembly building in Paris today


+62


Jacques Chirac (pictured in 2002) served as President from 1995 to 2007 and died last Thursday at the age of 86
[size=10][size=18]Emmanuel Macron pays tribute to former President Jacques Chirac




L[/size][/size]
The last three French Presidents to die - Charles de Gaulle in 1970, Georges Pompidou in 1974 and Francois Mitterrand in 1996 - were honoured with services at Notre Dame cathedral. 
But the Paris landmark was ravaged by fire in April this year and will need years of repairs, so is not available for Chirac's memorial.   
Chirac's widow Bernadette, who is said to be in frail health, attended a private service earlier but was not present at the main ceremony. 
Bernadette stood by Jacques Chirac throughout their 63-year-marriage despite his reputation for womanising and philandering.  


+62


Claude Chirac stands by the grave and newly erected tombstone at Montparnasse which reads 'Jacques Chirac 1932-2019' 


+62


Macron stands over the flag-draped coffin at Les Invalides this morning as France pays its final respects to Jacques Chirac


+62


Actress Salma Hayek and husband Francois-Henri Pinault hold hands as they leave the funeral service in Paris on Monday


+62


Emmanuel Macron shakes hands with Bill Clinton while Brigitte Macron looks on during a lunch for world leaders at the presidential Elysee Palace in the centre of Paris


+62


Back at his former stomping ground: Former French leader Nicolas Sarkozy at the Elysee Palace during the Chirac farewell


+62


Ex-President Francois Hollande waves as he leaves the Saint-Sulpice church in Paris following Monday's memorial service


+62


The French President and first lady (left) and Chirac's family (right) watch the former President's coffin arriving in the church


+62


Emmanuel Macron speaks to Claude Chirac while the current President's wife Brigitte, 66, looks on behind her husband


+62


Nicolas Sarkozy and his wife Carla Bruni are greeted by Macron's current Prime Minister Edouard Philippe outside the church


+62




+62



Chirac's successor-but-two Francois Hollande (left) - whom Chirac reportedly said he would vote for in the 2012 election - arrives at the church, where Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron (right) are seen inside during the service 


+62


Afghanistan's former President Hamid Karzai, senior EU figure Guy Verhofstadt, Britain's Prince Edward, and Luxembourg's Grand Duc Henri and his wife Maria Teresa Mestre arrive at the church today


+62


Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron are welcomed to the Saint-Sulpice church in Paris. Previous Presidents have been honoured at Notre Dame cathedral but it is unavailable this year after April's disastrous fire 


+62




+62



Carla Bruni (left), who became the French first lady when she married Nicolas Sarkozy in 2008, and current first lady Brigitte Macron (right), attend the memorial service in Paris today


+62


French police on motorcycles escort Chirac's funeral procession as it leaves Les Invalides (in the background), a monument which contains Napoleon's tomb, on its way to a memorial service at the Saint-Sulpice church 


+62


Former U.S. President Bill Clinton waves as he arrives at the church to honour Chirac, who was his counterpart for six years


+62


French President Emmanuel Macron stands in front of the flag-draped coffin of late French President Jacques Chirac during a military funeral honors ceremony at the Invalides monument


+62




+62



Actress Salma Hayek (left) and Claude and Martin Rey-Chirac (right) at the funeral service for the former President today


+62


French Republican guards carry the flag-draped coffin of late French President Jacques Chirac during a military ceremony at Invalides 
[size=18]Dignitaries arrive at former President Jacques Chriac's funeral




L[/size]





'This former president ... had a true love for people, equally at home in the salons of the Elysee or the living room of a farmer,' Archbishop of Paris Michel Aupetit told the roughly 2,000 people gathered in the church.
He said Chirac embodied a love for his fellow man that is missing from today's society. 'Goodbye, and thank you Monsieur Chirac,' Aupetit added.  
Chirac's immediate successors, Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande, were both present, as, in a rare public appearance, was former President Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who is 93. 
Former supermodel Carla Bruni joined her husband Sarkozy at the ceremony, while Hollywood actress Salma Hayek - who invited Chirac to her 2009 wedding - was also there. 
Far-right leader Marine Le Pen pulled out after the Chirac family opposed her presence. 
Chirac won a second term in 2002 after Le Pen's father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, shocked France by reaching the second round, prompting a landslide for Chirac.  
Other world leaders attending included Russia's Vladimir Putin, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani as well as European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker.
Putin worked with Chirac in his own first spell as President and the pair were notably united in their opposition to the invasion of Iraq.   


+62


Jacques Chirac's grandson Martin Rey-Chirac, daughter Claude Chirac and son-in-law Frederic Salat-Baroux leave the church after Monday's memorial service 


+62


French clergymen escort the coffin of late President Jacques Chirac as it is carried out of the Saint-Sulpice church


+62


Three former Presidents: Francois Hollande (left), Nicolas Sarkozy (centre, with his wife Carla Bruni second left), and Valery Giscard d'Estaing (right), with his wife Anne-Aymone leaning down, attend the funeral today


+62


Francois Hollande (right) is welcomed back to the Elysee by his successor Emmanuel Macron and first lady Brigitte Macron


+62


Russian President Vladimir Putin, who was in office with Chirac in the early 2000s, inside the church in Paris this morning


+62


Pall-bearers carry Chirac's coffin from the Les Invalides monument in Paris this morning where world leaders past and present are gathering to pay their respects to the long-serving French politician 


+62


The view down the aisle at Chirac's memorial service today with his Tricolore-draped coffin near the altar at Saint-Sulpice 


+62


People gather outside the church where the memorial service was being held, one of them holding a portrait of Chirac 


+62


Former Valery Giscard d'Estaing (centre), who is 93, arrives at the funeral today alongside Qatar's emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, second right, and Prince Albert of Monaco, right


+62


Claude Chirac, the daughter of France's former President Jacques Chirac (right), and her step-daughter Esther Salat-Baroux (left) arrive to attend a church service for former president Chirax at the Saint-Sulpice church 
Standing outside the Invalides, Nathalie Kabongo, whose husband worked on Chirac's 1995 and 2002 campaigns, said Chirac reminded her of 'a politics closer to the people.'
'Apart from being president, he was a man (...), a warm man, a man close to people, smiling and with a heart,' she said. 'We need that sometimes.'
Those assembled took pictures, shed tears and held signs reading 'Thank you for saying no to the war in Iraq' as they watched the flag-draped coffin onscreen. 
A poll in Le Journal du Dimanche newspaper showed that the French consider Chirac their best president of the modern era, alongside Charles de Gaulle. 
The tributes will continue into Wednesday, when the France rugby team will don black armbands in a sign of mourning for Chirac during their World Cup clash with the United States. 
A private family church service for Chirac was celebrated prior to the military tribute and a private funeral was taking place later at the Montparnasse cemetery in southern Paris. 
Chirac will be buried next to his daughter Laurence who died in 2016 aged 58 following a battle with anorexia.   


+62


The coffin is carried outside, escorted by French clergymen, after the end of the memorial service in Paris on Monday


+62


Mourners look on as the coffin is carried out of the Saint-Sulpice church following Monday's memorial service for Chirac 


+62


Pall-bearers place the coffin in a hearse in front of the church as it leaves for its final, private family burial today


+62


A crowd of Parisians gathers outside the church where the memorial service for Jacques Chirac was being held this morning


+62


French TV host Patrick Sebastien (right) and his wife Nathalie Boutot arrive for the memorial service in Paris on Monday


+62


Macron embraces his predecessor, former Socialist President Francois Hollande, as Brigitte looks on at the Elysee today 


+62


Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron are welcomed at the entrance to the church, which is standing in for Notre Dame cathedral


+62




+62



Lionel Jospin (left), who was defeated by Chirac for the French presidency in 1995 and 2002 and was later one of his Prime Ministers, and Germany's ceremonial head of state Frank-Walter Steinmeier (right), arrive at the church today


+62


The hearse transporting Chirac's coffin leaves the Invalides for the Saint Sulpice church for the funeral service


+62


French journalist Valerie Trierweiler, a former partner of ex-President Francois Hollande, arrives to attend the church service


+62


Guests face the altar with Chirac's coffin in front of them, with Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron in the front row on the right


+62


Alain Juppe, who was Prime Minister for two years under Chirac in the 1990s, arrives at the church with his wife Isabelle


+62


Honour guards carry the flag-draped coffin of Jacques Chirac during a military ceremony near the site of Napoleon's tomb


+62


President Macron follows French Republican guards as they carry the coffin through the courtyard at Les Invalides

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7521717/Black-high-school-student-said-bullies-cut-dreadlocks-admits-up.html

[size=34]Black high school student, 12, who accused three of her male white classmates of pinning her down and cutting off her dreadlocks, admits that she made it up[/size]

• Amari Allen claimed three white classmates held her down and cut her dreadlocks off in the playground
  
  
• She said it happened at their private Christian school in Virginia last week
  
  
• Now, she has recanted her claims and her family has apologized to the boys
  
  
• The school has also issued a statement to say that her claims were untrue
  
  

By JENNIFER SMITH FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 12:59 EDT, 30 September 2019 | UPDATED: 13:39 EDT, 30 September 2019

     

• tudent who accused three white male classmates of pinning her down and cutting off her dreadlocks has 'acknowledged' that she made the allegation up, according to her school. 
  

Amari Allen, 12, claimed she was held down by three boys who cut her hair off at their $12,000-a-year school.  She also gave a tearful interview about it afterwards and said they called her hair 'ugly' and 'nappy', a racist term that is used to derogatorily describe African American women's hair. 
They also shared photos of her uneven hair after the alleged incident. 
On Monday, however, the child's family issued a statement to it was false and to apologize to the boys. 

Why the claims were fabricated remains unclear. 
The family asked for forgiveness in their statement and said they had 'betrayed the wider community.' 
'To those young boys and their parents, we sincerely apologize for the pain and anxiety these allegations have caused.  


+6


Amari Allen, 12, claimed that three white boys pinned her down and cut her dreadlocks off. Her family admitted on Monday that she had made it up 
'To the administrators and families of Immanuel Christian School, we are sorry for the damage this incident has done to trust within the school family and the undue scorn it has brought to the school.

GIRL'S FAMILY STATEMENT 

[size=13]To those young boys and their parents, we sincerely apologize for the pain and anxiety these allegations have caused.
To the administrators and families of Immanuel Christian School, we are sorry for the damage this incident has done to trust within the school family and the undue scorn it has brought to the school.
To the broader community, who rallied in such passionate support for our daughter, we apologize for betraying your trust.
We understand there will be consequences, and we’re prepared to take responsibility for them. We know that it will take time to heal, and we hope and pray that the boys, their families, the school and the broader community will be able to forgive us in time.



'To the broader community, who rallied in such passionate support for our daughter, we apologize for betraying your trust.
'We understand there will be consequences and we're prepared to take responsibility for them. We know that will take time to heal, and we hope and pray that the boys, their families, the school and the broader community will be able to forgive us in time,' they said in the statement to DailyMail.com.
The school issued its own statement. 
'We can now confirm that the student who accused three of her classmates of assault has acknowledged that the allegations were false.
'We're grateful to the Fairfax County Police Department for their diligent work to investigate these allegations. While we are relieved to hear the truth and bring the events of the past few days to a close, we also feel tremendous pain for the victims and the hurt on both sides of this conflict.
'We recognize that we now enter what will be a long season of healing,' the school said.  
They would not answer any additional questions. 
Because the girl is a minor, the police department will not say any more. 


+6


Amari broke down in tears as she recounted the humiliating incident during an interview alongside her grandparents, Cynthia and Dewuane Allen


+6


'They called me ugly and said I shouldn't have been born. They called me an attention-seeker,' Amari said of the sixth-grade boys who allegedly attacked her during an interview with her family last week 

TEGNA Inc. Privacy Policy
Amari last week appeared on local news networks to tell her story. 
She said she was about to go down a slide when the three bullies 'ambushed' her. 
'One of them put my hands behind my back. One of them covered my mouth. They kept laughing and calling me names,' Amari told WUSA9 as tears streamed down her face.  
'They called me ugly and said I shouldn't have been born. They called me an attention-seeker.'
Amari said the boys brandished a pair of scissors, 'took big chunks of my hair and just cut'.  
She said she did not tell anyone until two days later after her grandmother noticed that her hair was uneven.  
'Sometimes I think that I don't deserve to be at a Christian school and that I'm ugly,' she said. 
She also said she felt compassion for the alleged attackers, and said: 'Something could have happened that made them do this, cause I know that's like the source of most bullying.'  


+6




+6



Amari said she didn't tell anyone about the attack until days later when her grandmother noticed her hair was uneven. The pre-teen's dreadlocks are seen before (left) and after (right) the alleged incident
Officials at the Immanuel Christian School told DailyMail.com last week that they were in touch with the family and had asked police to conduct a thorough investigation.  
'We take seriously the emotional and physical well-being of all our students, and have a zero-tolerance policy for any kind of bullying or abuse,' Head of School Stephen Danish said in a statement. 
'We are deeply disturbed by the allegations being made, and are in communication with the family of the alleged victim to gather information and provide whatever support we can.
'We have also reached out to law enforcement to ask them to conduct a thorough investigation, and further inquiries should be directed to the Fairfax County Police.' 
A Fairfax County Police spokeswoman confirmed that an investigation was underway but declined to provide additional information to DailyMail.com because she was a juvenile. 


+6


Officials at Immanuel Christian School (pictured) said they were in touch with Amari's family and had asked police to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident[/size]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7522133/I-trying-whistle-blower-says-Donald-Trump.html

[size=34]I AM trying to find out who the whistle-blower is says Donald Trump despite warnings from CIA agent's attorney that his life is at risk[/size]

 

• 'We're trying to find out about a whistle-blower' 
  
  
• Intelligence whistle-blower reported Trump's call in which he pressured Ukraine's president to investigate Joe Biden's son Hunter 
  
  
• Trump described the act as 'close to treason' and suggested the death penalty 
  
  
• Whistleblower's lawyer claims $50,000 bounty has been offered for information
  
  
• Legal team say they have 'serious concerns for our client's personal safety'
  
  

By GEOFF EARLE, DEPUTY U.S. POLITICAL EDITOR FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and CHRIS PLEASANCE FOR MAILONLINE 
PUBLISHED: 15:59 EDT, 30 September 2019 | UPDATED: 16:16 EDT, 30 September 2019

     




President Donald Trump confirmed Monday that he and his team are seeking to uncover the identity of a whistle-blower who accused him of an abuse of power – even as a lawyer representing the official has warned of threats on his life.
The president unloaded on the whistle-blower from the Oval Office on Monday, after turning up the heat over the weekend by warning of a 'civil war' if he is forced out of office, accusing a top Democrat of potential treason, and saying the whistle-blower's sources were like spies and referencing the death penalty. 
'We're trying to find out about a whistle-blower,' Trump said, when asked by a reporter whether he knew the whistle-blower's identity. 
Then he tore into the person's account – which included the sensational allegation that Trump tried to pressure the president of Ukraine into aiding his own reelection campaign by investigating the Bidens. 


+6


President Donald Trump said he and other officials were seekign to learn the identify of a whistle-blower who charged he abused his office
W'e have a whistleblower that reports things that were incorrect,' said Trump. 'As you know and you probably now have figured it out, the statement I made to the president of Ukraine, a good man, a nice man, new, was perfect,' Trump said.

'It was perfect. But the whistle-blower reported a totally different statement like a statement was not even made. I guess statement – you could say with call. I made a call. The call was perfect. When the whistle-blower reported it, he made it sound terrible.'
Then Trump once again tore into House Intelligence chairman Rep. Adam Schiff for having 'made up' words by him. Schiff said after a hearing last week that he meant it as a parody. In his comments, Trump used a similar paraphrasing device as he sought to describe how Schiff was behaving. 
'And then you had Adam Schiff who, even worse, made up my words, which I think is just a horrible – I've never even seen a thing like that.
'Adam Schiff, representative, congressman, made up what I said. He actually took words and made it up,' said Trump, eschewing the 'Liddle' moniker he uses for Schiff when he tweets about him.
'The reason is, when he saw my call to the president of Ukraine, it was so good that he couldn't quote from it because there was nothing done wrong. It was perfect. So Adam Schiff decided 'I can't let this happen. So let me make up' – do you ever hear of this one … So Adam Schiff made up a phony call and he read it to Congress and he read it to the people of the United States,' Trump said.
'And it's a disgrace. This whole thing is a disgrace. There's been tremendous corruption and we're seeking it. It's called Drain the Swamp,' Trump said.
He also referenced his statement on the Ukraine call to have the Ukrainians probe his belief that the Democratic server was in the possession of Ukraine.  
'There was a lot of corruption having to do with the 2016 election against us,' Trump said.  
The intelligence whistleblower who helped expose Trump's call with Ukraine's president that sparked a political firestorm now fears for his life, his lawyer has said. 
Andrew Bakaj, lead attorney for the whistleblower, said he has 'serious concerns for our client's personal safety' after Trump compared the act of exposing him to 'treason' and suggested using the death penalty. 
He also revealed the existence of a $50,000 'bounty' that has been offered for 'any information' about the whistleblower, who is known to be a CIA agent who at one time worked at the White House. 
In a letter to Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire, Bakaj suggests that the whistleblower has received some form of security assistance from federal authorities, and thanks the director for 'ensuring their safety.'
The lawyer disputed an earlier claim made Sunday night by CBS News' 60 Minutes that the whistleblower was actually in federal protection.
The existence of the call prompted Democrats to launch an impeachment inquiry into Trump, with House committees due to depose State Department officials linked to Trump's dealings with Ukraine this week.


+6



In a letter addressed to Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire, the legal team also revealed the existence of a $50,000 bounty for 'information' on their client


+6


Lawyers for the whistleblower who highlighted a call between Donald Trump and Ukraine's Vlodomir Zelensky say they are in fear of their life and under federal protection after the President described the act as 'treason' and suggested using the death penalty

Bloomberg Privacy Policy
He wrote: 'The purpose of this letter is to formally notify you of serious concerns we have regarding our client's personal safety. 
'We appreciate your office's support thus far to activate appropriate resources to ensure their safety.
'The events of the past week have heightened our concerns that our client's identity will be disclosed publicly and that, as a result, our client will be put in harm's way. On September 26, 2019, the President of the United States said the following:
'I want to know who's the person that gave the Whistleblower, who's the person that gave the Whistleblower the information, because that's close to a spy. You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? With spies and treason, right? We used to handle them a little differently than we do now.'
'The fact that the President's statement was directed to 'the person that gave the Whistleblower the information' does nothing to assuage our concerns for our client's safety. 
'Moreover, certain individuals have issued a $50,000 'bounty' for 'any information' relating to our client's identity. 
'Unfortunately, we expect this situation to worsen, and to become even more dangerous for our client and any other whistleblowers, as Congress seeks to investigate this matter.'
However, Mark S Zaid, part of the legal team representing the whistleblower, accused 60 Minutes of 'completely misinterpreting the contents of our letter' without saying which parts of the report he disputes.
'Nor have we, as we stated earlier today, reached any agreement with Congress on contact with the whistleblower. Discussions remain ongoing,' he added.




The House Intelligence Committee has said it will be ready to hear from the whistleblower 'very soon' at a private meeting to hide their identity. 
The existence of the letter was first revealed by CBS's 60 Minutes after Trump said he has a right to meet the person who triggered an impeachment probe against him.

Trump reposts pastor saying impeachment will cause 'a Civil War-like fracture' 

President Trump on Sunday tweeted a quote from a Baptist pastor who said that his removal from office would 'cause a Civil War like fracture... from which our country will never heal.'
Trump's tweet was quoting Pastor Robert Jeffress, who appeared early Sunday morning on the Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends show.
Jeffress, an evangelical who is a staunch supporter of the president, is the Southern Baptist pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas.
The church, whose congregation numbers 13,000, is considered one of the more influential in the American evangelical community.
'Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats can't put down the Impeachment match,' Jeffress told Fox News.
'They know they couldn't beat him in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, and they're increasingly aware of the fact that they won't win against him in 2020, and Impeachment is the only tool they have to get rid of Donald J. Trump.
'And the Democrats don't care if they burn down and destroy this nation in the process.'



Battling the deepest crisis of his presidency, Trump has railed against assertions that he should be impeached for urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, his potential 2020 White House challenger.
'Like every American, I deserve to meet my accuser, especially when this accuser, the so-called 'Whistleblower,' represented a perfect conversation with a foreign leader in a totally inaccurate and fraudulent way,' Trump wrote in a tweet Sunday.
Trump accused top Democratic lawmaker Adam Schiff of lying to Congress last week about what Trump said to Zelensky in the July phone call.
'He wrote down and read terrible things, then said it was from the mouth of the President of the United States. I want Schiff questioned at the highest level for Fraud & Treason,' he wrote.
Trump's Republican aides have sought to turn the tables on Democrats pushing for his impeachment, insisting that the president was the true 'whistleblower' as he had asked Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son for corruption.
'This individual is a saboteur trying to undermine a democratically elected government,' Trump advisor Stephen Miller insisted on Fox News Sunday.
'Getting to the bottom of a corruption scandal in Ukraine is in the American national interest.'
Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani - who has emerged as his point man in the Ukraine scandal - led the charge along with Miller in combative Sunday talk show appearances.


+6


In the call, Trump can be heard telling Zelensky (left) to look into corruption claims involving Joe Biden's son Hunter who once served as senior manager of a gas company in the country
[size=18]Trump bashes Pelosi and Democrats after impeachment inquiry




Lo[/size]









Brandishing what he said were affidavits incriminating Biden's son Hunter over his work at a Ukrainian company, Giuliani said Trump was duty bound to raise the issue with Kiev.
'If he hadn't asked them to investigate Biden, he would have violated the constitution,' Giuliani told ABC's This Week, charging that 'Donald Trump was framed by the Democrats.'
The Democratic-led House of Representatives launched an official impeachment inquiry last week accusing Trump of a 'mafia-like shakedown' of Zelensky aimed at damaging Biden.
Trump and his allies claim Biden, as Barack Obama's vice president, pressured Kiev to fire the country's top prosecutor to protect his son Hunter, who sat on the board of a gas company, Burisma Holdings, accused of corrupt practices.
Those allegations have largely been debunked and there has been no evidence of illegal conduct or wrongdoing in Ukraine by the Bidens.
But a transcript of the July call shows Trump pushing for Kiev to revisit the matter, saying both Giuliani and US Attorney General Bill Barr would be in touch.
For Democrats, that amounted to a smoking gun, leading Speaker Nancy Pelosi to finally approve an impeachment process she opposed as a risky distraction from the 2020 battle.


+6


Trump has also demanded to meet his accuser, after information from the complaint sparked an impeachment inquiry against him


+6


The President has also been demanding the identity of people who spoke to the whistleblower, describing them as 'something close to a spy'
Pelosi on Sunday called for Trump to 'speak the truth. Honor your oath of office to the Constitution of the United States.'
'Don't make this any worse than it already is,' she said.
Democrats have charged aggressively into the inquiry, ordering Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to turn over Ukraine-related documents and scheduling witness testimony.
On NBC's Meet the Press, Schiff said he expected the whistleblower to testify 'very soon' - with all precautions taken to protect their identity.
CBS News released a letter from the whistleblower's lawyers to the acting director of national intelligence expressing concern that their 'client will be put in harm's way.'
'We expect this situation to worsen and become even more dangerous,' the letter said, calling for 'appropriate resources to ensure their safety.'
Democrats have said articles of impeachment - formal charges - against Trump could be completed in as little as a month and swiftly voted on in the House, where the party has a majority.
The Biden campaign sent a letter Sunday to US TV networks to demanding they stop booking Giuliani for interviews, accusing him of 'knowingly and willingly' lying.
Polls suggest public support is growing for the impeachment inquiry, with a new CBS survey showing 55 percent of Americans - and nine in 10 Democrats - approve.
But even if impeachment is approved in the House, Trump would be tried in the Senate - where, for the moment, he appears able to count on a Republican majority to prevent conviction.



Pastor Robert Jeffress (left) told Fox News on Sunday that America risks 'civil war like fracture' if the Democrats succeed in removing President Trump (right) from office
Elsewhere on Sunday President Trump tweeted a quote from a Baptist pastor who said that his removal from office would 'cause a Civil War like fracture... from which our country will never heal.'
Trump's tweet was quoting Pastor Robert Jeffress, who appeared early Sunday morning on the Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends show.
Jeffress, an evangelical who is a staunch supporter of the president, is the Southern Baptist pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas.
The church, whose congregation numbers 13,000, is considered one of the more influential in the American evangelical community.
'Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats can't put down the Impeachment match,' Jeffress told Fox News.
'They know they couldn't beat him in 2016 against Hillary Clinton, and they're increasingly aware of the fact that they won't win against him in 2020, and Impeachment is the only tool they have to get rid of Donald J. Trump.
'And the Democrats don't care if they burn down and destroy this nation in the process.'
When asked about the reaction from evangelical Christians to the possibility of an impeachment inquiry against Trump, Jeffress responded: 'I have never seen the evangelical Christians more angry over any issue than this attempt to illegitimately remove this president from office, overturn the 2016 election, and negate the votes of millions of evangelicals in the process.
'They know the only impeachable offense that President Trump has committed was beating Hillary Clinton in 2016.
'That's the unpardonable sin for which the Democrats will never forgive him.
'If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this nation from which our country will never heal.'
[size=18]Trump lashes out at Dems and 'spies' over whistleblower complaint




L[/size]

[size=34]WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? THE VERY COMPLICATED STEPS INVOLVED IN IMPEACHING DONALD TRUMP[/size]

Nancy Pelosi announcing a formal impeachment investigation is only the start of what will be an epic legal and constitutional clash.
Here is how impeachment goes from here.
1) Investigations step up
Six committees are now tasked by Pelosi with investigating Donald Trump with the intention of deciding whether he should be impeached. They are the House Judiciary, Oversight, Intelligence, Ways and Means, Financial Services and Foreign Affairs committees. All of them are now likely to issue a flurry of subpoenas which is certain to lead to a new: 
2) Court battle over subpoenas - which could go to the Supreme Court
The Trump administration has so far resisted subpoenas by claiming executive privilege and is certain to continue to do so. Federal judges are already dealing with litigation over subpoenas for Trump's tax and financial records and many more cases are likely to follow. But the courts have never settled the limits of executive privilege and whether an impeachment inquiry effectively gives Congress more power to overcome it. If Trump fights as hard as he can, it is likely to make its way to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, expect: 
3) More hearings
Democrats know they need to convince the public that Trump needs to be put on trial and the best way to do that is hearings like those which electrified the nation during Watergate. They botched the Mueller hearing but if they produce question and answer sessions with people from Trump-world which cause public outrage, they are on their way to:
4) Drawing up formal articles of impeachment in committee 
The charge sheet for impeachment - the 'articles' - set out what Trump is formally accused of. It has no set format - it can be as long or as short as Congress decides. Three such set of articles have been drawn up - for Andrew Johnson on 1868, Richard Nixon in 1974, and Bill Clinton in 1998. Johnson's were the most extensive at 11, Nixon faced three, and Bill Clinton four but with a series of numbered charges in each article. Once drawn up, the judicial committee votes on them and if approved, sends them to the House for:
5) Full floor vote on impeachment
The constitution says the House needs a simple majority to proceed, but has to vote on each article. Nixon quit before such a vote so Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only precedent. The House passed two out of the three articles against Clinton and all 11 against Johnson. Passing even one article leads to:
6) Senate impeachment trial
Even if the Senate is clearly not in favor of removing the president, it has to stage a trial if the House votes for impeachment. The hearing is in not in front of the full Senate, but 'evidentiary committees' - in theory at least similar to the existing Senate committees. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over it, but the procedures are set by senators. Members of the House prosecute Trump as 'managers,' bringing witnesses and presenting evidence to set out their case against the president. The president can defend himself, or, as Clinton did, use attorneys to cross-examine the witnesses. The committee or committees report to the full Senate. Then it can debate in public or deliberate in private on the guilt or innocence of the president. It holds a single open floor vote which will deliver:
7) The verdict
Impeachment must be by two-thirds of the Senate. Voting for impeachment on any one article is good enough to remove the president from office. There is no appeal. 

The New York Times have an extension story of this tonight and report that Australia are now involved as well as the Attorney General

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1178766231115063297

...maybe that explains the Australian Prime Minister's welcome last week?

The stupidity in this country is down right amazing. Some one on twitter stated that Obama helped and allowed 9-11.

The problem with that is he wasn't President.