Health Benefits of Choosing a Chiropractor in Salinas

How can you make a well informed decision when choosing a Salinas Chiropractor? It can be difficult unless you have a reference from family or friends. Before getting into that, however, it’s important to discuss the health benefits of having chiropractic work done in the first place!

Such appointments are known to improve and even restore the health of some individuals. Injuries can worsen over time and some to the point where a complete recovery becomes impossible. This is obviously something that should be avoided at all costs. Some cases, involving chronic pain, can also benefit from short term relief (as well as avoiding long term damage).

Beyond the health benefits, however, there are several other considerations that need to take place. For example, will the chiropractor take your insurance? This is crucial as, otherwise, the bills can tally up fairly quickly. Read More

Categories: Uncategorized

How To Find The Latest News

There are a lot of places you can look for the latest news. You need to know where these places are if you want to find news that is up to date and actually true. Here’s more information on finding the news you’re looking for.

The news that you’re going to find when you look online may or may not be the truth. When you are looking for news sites, make sure you stick with the top ones. And, when you read a story, make sure you find reference materials elsewhere that back up what you read. Some news stories will have links in them to where they got the information so you can look into that if need be. Either way, there are a lot of websites for local, national, and international news so use a search engine site to find the news sites that are out there.

If you’re going to get the local paper, you may be able to find it by going to a local gas station, grocery store, or anywhere that sells the paper. Some places have machines outside of them that sell it for a couple of quarters. You may also be able to call the company that makes the newspapers to sign up for a subscription that will be cheaper than if you were to buy the paper a day at a time. There are not as many paper publications out there due to the internet, but big and small cities sometimes still have their own newspapers they put out.

Finding the latest news is not that hard, especially now that the internet is so easy for everyone to access. You can find many website out there with news on them. You can also find local publications like newspapers that cover where you live if you’d like to go that route.

Categories: Uncategorized

Mueller facing new Republican pressure to resign in Russia probe

Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta now being investigated by Mueller

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is facing a fresh round of calls from conservative critics for his resignation from the Russia collusion probe, amid revelations that have called into question the FBI’s own actions and potentially Mueller’s independence.

This week’s bombshell that a controversial anti-Trump dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign has Republicans asking to what extent the FBI – which received some of the findings and briefly agreed to pay the same researcher to gather intelligence on Trump and Russia – used the politically connected material.

Hill investigators also are looking into a Russian firm’s uranium deal that was approved by the Obama administration in 2010 despite reports that the FBI – then led by Mueller – had evidence of bribery involving a subsidiary of that firm.

Critics question whether Mueller’s own ties to the bureau as well as fired FBI director James Comey now render him compromised as he investigates allegations of Russian meddling and collusion with Trump officials in the 2016 race.

“The federal code could not be clearer – Mueller is compromised by his apparent conflict of interest in being close with James Comey,” Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., who first called for Mueller to step down over the summer, said in a statement to Fox News on Friday. “The appearance of a conflict is enough to put Mueller in violation of the code. … All of the revelations in recent weeks make the case stronger.”

Outgoing New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., a former federal prosecutor who endorsed Trump last year, also suggested Friday that Mueller consider stepping aside.

“If the facts that you just laid out are true, then somebody with Bob Mueller’s integrity will step aside and should — if in fact those facts, as you laid them out, are true,” Christie said on “Fox & Friends,” in response to various conflict-of-interest allegations.

Christie on anti-Trump dossier: We all knew Dems did this

The special counsel’s office declined Fox News’ request for comment.

This is not the first time Mueller has faced calls to step down.

Congressional Republicans over the summer raised concerns over Mueller’s relationship with Comey, whom Trump ousted from the FBI director in May. Reps. Franks and Andy Biggs, both Republicans from Arizona, had called for Mueller’s resignation for that reason.

President Trump has called Mueller’s relationship with Comey “bothersome,” though hasn’t said much about Mueller’s role lately even as he seizes on the latest revelations about the Fusion GPS dossier to try and turn the tables on Democrats in the Russia scandal.

“It is now commonly agreed, after many months of COSTLY looking, that there was NO collusion between Russia and Trump. Was collusion with HC!” he tweeted Friday.

Congressional Republicans over the summer raised concerns over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s, at left, relationship with former FBI Director James Comey, at right.

But the Wall Street Journal editorial board cited the dossier development in calling for Mueller’s resignation on Thursday, saying the “troubling question is whether the FBI played a role” in aiding a “Russian disinformation campaign.”

“Two pertinent questions: Did the dossier trigger the FBI probe of the Trump campaign, and did Mr. Comey or his agents use it as evidence to seek wiretapping approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Trump campaign aides?” the editorial board wrote, before turning to Mueller’s role:

“The Fusion news means the FBI’s role in Russia’s election interference must now be investigated—even as the FBI and Justice insist that Mr. Mueller’s probe prevents them from cooperating with Congressional investigators. Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.”

Another potential issue is Mueller’s supervision of a bribery probe involving a subsidiary of Russia’s Rosatom, which eventually got approval from the U.S. to buy a Canadian mining company that controlled a swath of American uranium reserves. . At the time of the probe, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller as special counsel, was a U.S. attorney and Mueller was FBI director. Republicans want to know how that deal was approved despite the evidence gathered in the bribery probe.

“The whole reason for independent counsels is to have the public trust, the professionalism and the diligence of the investigation, but they have to guard against actual conflicts of interest and apparent conflicts of interest,” said former high-ranking Justice Department official James Trusty, who served under the Bush and Obama administrations. “There may be some tipping point, though, separating facts from rumors, and we may be close to the tipping point.”

Special Counsel Robert Mueller with security guards in June 2017. (Reuters)

Earlier this week, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, called for a separate special counsel to investigate the Uranium One deal.

Grassley, however, stopped short of suggesting he didn’t trust Mueller.

“There might be reasons to wonder his involvement because of his involvement with the previous administration during this period of time. There’s no way that I can make any accusations against Mr. Mueller because he is a man of high ethical standards,” Grassley told “Fox & Friends” on Thursday.

Other Republicans have sought to protect Mueller from interference.

There are currently two pieces of legislation in the Senate, with bipartisan sponsorship, that would ensure a judicial check on the executive branch’s ability to remove a special counsel. Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., are behind the bills, along with Democratic senators.

Comey’s attorney, David Kelley, also has disputed the characterizations of the Mueller-Comey relationship interviews in the past.

“Bob and Jim have a congenial relationship as former colleagues. Both served long legal careers that involved overlapping time spent within the Department of Justice, and that’s pretty well documented. But beyond that, they’re not close, personal friends,” Kelley told the Washington Post this summer. “They’re friends in the sense that co-workers are friends. They don’t really have a personal relationship.”

Kelley told Fox News on Friday that he stands by those comments.

Mueller, meanwhile, has been criticized by Republicans for the makeup of his investigate team, which includes several Democratic donors.

“As these various Russian related allegations swirl, I think Mueller increasingly regrets his decision to pick a staff in which half of the prosecutors had either given to, or participated, in Democratic causes,” Trusty said. “That was an unforced error.”

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

How To Keep Up With The Latest News

It is important to know what is going on in the world at any given time. One of the best ways to accomplish this is by checking the news. This includes local news, national news, and world news. Staying informed about current events can help you better understand what is happening around you.

These days, there are a ton of different methods that you can use to keep up with the latest news. Years ago, the only options were to subscribe to newspapers or to watch the news on TV. Both of those are still viable options. However, the Internet has made it easier than ever to gain access to the news.

One simple way to stay informed is by following reputable news organizations on social media. Keep in mind, a lot of fake news gets shared through social networks. You can avoid falling for any fake stories by sticking with news organizations that have a solid reputation within the industry. Avoid fringe news outlets or news shows that are opinion-based. Instead, look for news outlets that provide accurate, unbiased coverage.

If you want to be informed at all times, consider installing a news app on your phone. You can install apps from individual news outlets. Alternatively, there are also apps that are designed to allow you to read headlines from all of your favorite news organizations at a glance. This can be a convenient way to see everything that is happening right now without having to check multiple websites, saving you a lot of time in the process.

Keeping up with the latest news is an important part of being a responsible citizen. Staying informed about what is happening in your local community as well as in the world at large can help you better understand today’s society.

Categories: Uncategorized

Trump goes on rampage against the media, sitting Arizona senators at Phoenix rally

A defiant President Trump rallied with his base for more than hour Tuesday in Arizona, trashing the media over its coverage of his response to the recent violence in Charlottesville while criticizing the state’s Republican senators for not getting behind him.

The president also signaled during the rally he could soon pardon Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff in Maricopa County famous for his tough stance against illegal immigration, ahead of the sheriff’s upcoming sentencing.

But Trump was most animated when defending himself against accusations he wasn’t forceful enough in condemning the white supremacists and racists who were protesting in Charlottesville, Va., earlier this month. He blamed the media for distorting his comments.

At one point, the president pulled a piece of paper out of his coat and re-read his initial statements condemning the racists involved the protests.

“Did they report that I said that racism is evil?” Trump asked of the media. The crowd yelled, “no!”

“You know why?” Trump asked. “Because they are very dishonest people.”

A 32-year-old counter-protestor was killed in Charlottesville after police said a Nazi sympathizer rammed his car into a crowd. After the violence, the president faced criticism for blaming “both sides” for the unrest instead of just white nationalists.

As Trump continued to rail against the media’s coverage of him, the crowd began chanting: “CNN sucks.”

The events in Charlottesville cast a shadow over the rally, with Phoenix’s Democratic mayor, Greg Stanton, asking Trump last week to delay his rally in wake of the violence.

The Charlottesville violence led cities across the country to consider removing Confederate statues, something Trump railed against on Tuesday.

“They’re trying to take away our culture, they’re trying to take away our history,” he said.

A crowd of protesters formed outside the convention center on Tuesday, but the president bragged that there were far more Trump supporters in attendance.

“All week, they’re talking about the massive crowds that are going to be outside,” Trump said. “Where are they?”

He then mocked liberal protesters who have been demonstrating.

“You know, they show up in the helmets and the black masks and they’ve got clubs and they’ve got everything,” Trump said.

Referring to the far-left militant protest group, Trump exclaimed: “Antifa!”

Leading up to the rally, it was believed Trump could announce a pardon at the rally for Arpaio, the former Arizona sheriff convicted of a misdemeanor charge for not obeying a 2011 order from a judge to stop his anti-immigrant traffic patrols. Earlier Tuesday, the White House said the president would not be announcing a pardon at the rally.

But Trump suggested a pardon – which would be his first as president – could happen soon.

“I’ll make a prediction. I think he’s going to be just fine,” Trump said. “But I won’t do it tonight because I don’t want to cause any controversy. Is that OK?”

Without specifically naming them, Trump dinged the state’s two Republican senators, Jeff Flake and John McCain, with whom he has sparred recently.

McCain, a frequent Trump critic who was recently diagnosed with brain cancer, recently irked the president by voting against the Senate’s recent plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare.

“One vote away – I will not mention any names,” Trump said of McCain.

Flake, who has sparred with Trump on immigration, has been promoting a book that argues the GOP is in “denial” about the president.

Speaking of Flake, Trump said: “And nobody wants me to talk about your other senator, who’s weak on borders, weak on crime. So I won’t talk about him.”

During his speech, Trump vowed to follow through on his promise to crack down on illegal immigration. He also said he isn’t giving up on repealing ObamaCare and expressed optimism about reforming the country’s tax codes.

Tuesday’s rally came a day after he announced plans to send more troops to Afghanistan – an announcement he highlighted during his speech. “Did anybody watch last night?

High-ranking administration officials and other recognizable conservatives warmed up the crowd before the president spoke, including Mike Pence, the vice president, and Ben Carson, the secretary of the Housing and Urban Development.
Several of them painted a picture of a divided country.

"Our lives are too short to let our differences divide us," Carson said. "Our differences are nothing compared to our shared humanity and the values that unite us."

Alveda King, the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr., and evangelist Franklin Graham both delivered prayers before Trump’s speech.

"We come tonight as a troubled nation,” Graham said. “We’re broken spiritually, we’re divided politically, we’re divided racially."

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

Trump ‘entirely correct’ to blame both sides for Charlottesville violence, White House says

The White House is circulating talking points to sway conservatives to defend President Trump after his controversial remarks on Tuesday. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

The White House told allies Tuesday that President Trump was “entirely correct” to blame “both sides” for the protest violence in Charlottesville, fighting back at critics of his response, Fox News has learned.

A memo of talking points obtained by Fox News stated that during his remarks in the lobby of Trump Tower on Tuesday, the president was “entirely correct – both sides of the violence in Charlottesville acted inappropriately, and bear some responsibility.”

The memo also stated that Trump “with no ambiguity” condemned the hate groups that descended upon Charlottesville for the “Unite the Right” rally, and added the president has been “a voice for unity and calm,” and that he’s “taking swift action to hold violent hate groups accountable.”

It ended by saying both leaders and the media “should join the president in trying to unite and heal our country rather than incite more division.” The memo was distributed to allies of the White House in an effort to try to get conservatives on board to defend Trump.

While speaking to the media Tuesday during what were supposed to be brief remarks without questions from the press, Trump declared that “there is blame on both sides” for the deadly violence that took place on Saturday. He also said “there are two sides to a story.”

Placing blame “on many sides” was Trump’s initial response to Saturday’s events, but two days later, the president specifically condemned the KKK, neo-Nazis and white supremacists.

After Trump’s reiteration Tuesday that both protesters on the far left and far right were to blame, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke tweeted, “Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth.”

White House officials apparently were caught off guard by his remarks Tuesday. Trump had signed off on a plan to not answer questions from journalists during an event touting infrastructure policies, according to a White House official speaking to The Associated Press. Once behind the lectern and facing the cameras, Trump overruled the decision.

Trump’s advisers had hoped Tuesday’s remarks might quell a crush of criticism from Republicans, Democrats and business leaders. But the president’s retorts Tuesday suggested he had been a reluctant participant in that cleanup effort and renewed questions about why he seemed to struggle to unequivocally condemn white nationalists.

Members of his own Republican Party have pressured him to be more vigorous in criticizing bigoted groups, and business leaders have begun abandoning a White House jobs panel in response to his comments.

When asked to explain his Saturday comments about Charlottesville, Trump looked down at his notes and again read a section of his initial statement that denounced bigotry but did not single out white supremacists. He then tucked the paper back into his jacket pocket.

Fox News’ Ed Henry and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

What to know about Mueller’s use of a grand jury in the Russia probe

News broke yesterday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has begun using a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., as part of his investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible collusion with associates of President Donald Trump.

But what exactly does a federal grand jury do, and what does it mean that Mueller has started utilizing one in the nation’s capital?

Here’s what you need to know.

How is a grand jury different from a common jury?

Common juries –- the ones often depicted in dramatic movie scenes and TV shows –- are responsible for deciding whether a defendant is guilty of a crime. Grand juries, however, have a different role. They’re generally responsible for deciding whether a defendant should be charged with a crime in the first place.

Grand juries operate in secret, and prosecutors present their case by laying out evidence to support it, including by using in-person witness testimony.

Comprised of between 16 and 23 members of the public, grand juries usually last for 18 months, although that period can be extended under certain circumstances.

In order to indict a defendant on any charges, prosecutors must convince the grand jury that there is “probable cause” to believe a crime was committed.

What kind of authority does a grand jury have?

To help determine whether such “probable cause” exists, grand juries have special authority to take their own investigative steps, which are often guided by prosecutors.

Federal authorities can use grand juries as a tool in their investigations and use their authority to issue subpoenas to demand that uncooperative suspects, witnesses, and companies hand over private documents or testify behind closed doors.

It’s standard-operating procedure for a single grand jury to handle multiple matters over its lifespan. They may indict an alleged drug trafficker on a Monday, and then approve a subpoena for evidence in another case on Wednesday.

In some cases, prosecutors will use a grand jury for the sole purpose of collecting evidence in an investigation even when it’s not yet clear that a crime was likely committed.

Where does the Russia probe fit in?

Earlier this year, federal prosecutors were using a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, to collect evidence in the federal probe of Trump associates and any potential ties they could have to Russian operatives.

But in mid-May, after Mueller became special counsel and started putting together his team, the entire federal probe became based out of an office building in downtown Washington, D.C.

Then, weeks ago, Mueller’s prosecutors began using a federal grand jury that sits in the federal courthouse in Washington, just a few blocks away from their offices.

In certain circumstances, federal authorities might seek to impanel a special grand jury to focus on one specific matter.

There is no indication, however, that Mueller has been using a special grand jury for the Russia probe.

There is also no indication that the grand jury his team is now using in Washington was specifically impaneled for the Russia investigation.

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

We Provide You With The Latest News

Welcome to our website, where we cover the latest news. If you are looking for a site that covers news, then you’ve come to the right place. Here’s why you should visit our website to receive your news.

The Latest News
We cover the latest news, which means we update our website regularly so you know what’s going on. Many websites don’t publish the latest news or they do it in away that isn’t effective or efficient, but we do it in an effective way and an efficient way. What this means for you is our news articles are published promptly, are of high quality and they can be viewed on your favorite mobile devices. When the latest news breaks, you want to be the first to know about it, and by visiting out website, you will be one of the first to know.

Breaking News
There’s a difference between the latest news and breaking news. The main difference is breaking news happens from out of nowhere or it’s a developing story, but it is news that is happening very fast. We cover breaking news and we try to get it on our website as fast as we can. If you want to stay on top of breaking news and be informed as it happens, then visit our website frequently.

News You Should Know About
You can rest assure we cover the news you care about and should know about. By visiting our website often, you will learn about stuff that may affect you or potentially affect you in the future. We provide our readers with news they care about, and we are confident we publish stories you too will care about.

We encourage you to visit our website as often as possible. News is a fast paced industry and you want to get it quickly. By visiting our website often, you can rest assure you will receive the latest news.

Categories: Uncategorized

California high speed rail likely to face more environmental challenges after high court ruling

The Cedar Viaduct of California’s high-speed rail project is under construction in Fresno. (Gary Reyes / TNS)

California’s high-speed train project is likely to continue to be buffeted by environmental challenges as a result of a decision by the state’s top court.

In a 6-1 ruling last week written by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, the California Supreme Court decided that federal rail law does not usurp California’s tough environmental regulation for state-owned rail projects.

The decision has broad significance, lawyers in the case said.

It clears the way for opponents of the $64-billion bullet train to file more lawsuits as construction proceeds and also allows Californians to challenge other rail uses, such as the movement of crude oil from fracking.

A federal court could later decide the matter differently, ruling that U.S. law trumps state regulation.

But lawyers in the field said they expect a similar case pending in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to be dismissed and expressed doubt that the U.S. Supreme Court would review last week’s ruling.

The high-speed rail line is supposed to run between San Francisco and Anaheim.

So far there have been about a half a dozen lawsuits challenging environment impact reports for two rail segments in the Central Valley. Three of the suits are still pending.

More lawsuits are expected when the rail authority finalizes plans for construction in the San Francisco Bay Area and Southern California.

The Central Valley litigation already has been unexpectedly contentious, involving farmers who lost large portions of their fields.

But legal experts expect an even bigger firestorm of lawsuits when environmental impact reports are released for the Silicon Valley and parts of Los Angeles, possibly next year. The reports will reveal where the lines will be built.

“There are likely to be a lot of people bent out of shape in those areas,” said Stuart Flashman, who has represented several groups and individuals fighting high-speed rail. “There are already threats of lawsuits involving the Angeles National Forest. It means the High-Speed Rail Authority is nowhere near out of the woods.”

Rail authority spokeswoman Lisa Marie Alley said the agency is reviewing what the Supreme Court ruling would mean for the project.

The matter of whether the bullet train project must abide by the California Environmental Quality Act has lingered for years.

In 2014, the state asked the federal Surface Transportation Board, which regulates railroads, to exempt the project from any legal injunctions that could stop construction.

The board went even further, saying that the project was exempt from state law. The decision triggered a federal lawsuit by rail opponents, the case now pending in the 9th Circuit.

The rail authority in the meantime has followed both federal and state environmental laws.

The California Supreme Court ruling came in lawsuits filed by two environmental advocacy groups — Friends of the Eel River and Californians for Alternatives to Toxics — against the North Coast Railroad Authority and the Northwestern Pacific Railroad Co., a private company that contracts with the authority.

Mitch Stogner, executive director of the North Coast Railroad Authority, said the group has not decided whether to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

He also said he did not know whether the High-Speed Rail Authority, which lacks standing to appeal the decision, would be inclined to help finance a fight to the high court. The High-Speed Rail Authority weighed in as a friend of the court.

State lawmakers created the North Coast Railroad Authority in 1989 to provide freight service on a 314-mile line of decayed tracks in Napa, Sonoma and Humboldt counties.

The railroad now hauls livestock feed, building materials, wood products and liquefied petroleum gas, Stogner said, on just 62 miles of the line, from Lombard to Windsor in Sonoma County.

Amy Bricker, who represented the river group in the case, said it was concerned that restarting rail operations in the Eel River canyon would pollute the wild and scenic waterway and encourage gravel mining.

But Stogner said there have been no plans to run freight through the canyon because the tracks there would be too costly to repair.

“It is a red herring,” he said

Golden Gate University Law School professor Helen Kang, who runs an environmental law clinic that represented the anti-toxics group, said the ruling means that ”you have to be able to comply with federal and state law at the same time.”

“If there is no conflict, there is no preemption,” she said.

In general, federal laws take precedence over, or preempt, state laws — a doctrine based on the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

In a dissent to the Supreme Court’s ruling, Justice Carol Corrigan said the majority had created a novel legal theory to get around the fact that states may not impose regulations that interrupt rail service.

The decision “will displace the longstanding supremacy of federal regulation in the area of railroad operations by allowing third party plaintiffs to thwart or delay public railroad projects,” Corrigan wrote.

UC Davis Law Professor Richard Frank said the California Supreme Court almost always decides that state laws are not preempted by federal ones, while federal courts are more likely to say the opposite.

He called last week’s ruling “very obtuse” and “turgid” and said it probably will not end the legal fight over whether federal rail regulations supersede state laws because the decision provided “little guidance to policy makers and practitioners.”

The court said that federal law trumps state law only for privately owned railroads, not those owned by California, Frank noted.

“It is going to generate more time consuming litigation,” Frank said.

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

It’d Be Pretty Easy For Trump To Pardon His Family Members. He Could Even Tweet It.

WASHINGTON ― There’s a normal process for your average federal convict seeking a presidential pardon. There are petitions to prepare, letters to solicit, character affidavits to notarize, background checks to be conducted and federal prosecutors to be consulted. The whole process, controlled by the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney, can take years, and there’s a very slim chance the president will ultimately grant a pardon.

However, if your dad is the president and you’re hoping to head off a potential indictment, you could just ask him to send a tweet.

President Donald Trump has, via Twitter, floated the possibility that he’ll use pardons as a means of shutting down indictments that may grow out of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Trump campaign and Russian interference with the 2016 election. If Trump is learning more about the process, as media reports indicate, he may be surprised by how easy it would be for him to pardon his family members or former campaign aides.

Trump pardoning his own family members before they’ve even been indicted would be virtually unprecedented in the modern era. Former officials in the Office of the Pardon Attorney who spoke with HuffPost this week pointed to President Gerald Ford’s pardon of former President Richard Nixon after the Watergate scandal as the most relevant pre-indictment presidential pardon in recent U.S. history.

“Nixon is the most high-profile one, where no charges had even been brought, and I think that would be the most logical analogue,” said Margaret Love, who served as U.S. pardon attorney from 1990 to 1997.

But constitutionally, experts say, it’s all aboveboard. The consequences of those pardons would be political, not legal. Normally it would be “political suicide to pardon a family member,” in the words of Ohio State University law professor Peter Shane. But the normal rules of politics don’t seem to apply to President Trump.

“You just have to stand up against the political storm that would result,” Love said.

Other presidents have pardoned their family members and aides. President Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother Roger for selling cocaine to an undercover officer, while President George W. Bush commuted the sentence of former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, sparing him a stint in federal prison. But neither Clinton’s pardon nor Bush’s clemency grant came before an indictment. Roger Clinton had already served a year in prison in the 1980s, and Libby’s commutation came after he was convicted and sentenced to 30 months in prison.

While there have been some pre-indictment pardons, those have typically affected entire groups of people, like when President Ronald Reagan granted amnesty for undocumented immigrants or when President Jimmy Carter pardoned hundreds of thousands of draft dodgers.

While all agree the U. S. President has the complete power to pardon, why think of that when only crime so far is LEAKS against us.FAKE NEWS

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 22, 2017

The pardon clause of the Constitution gives the president very wide authority. While the president can seek advice on pardons from any source he wants, the Office of the Pardon Attorney has handled most such cases since 1893.

The Office of the Pardon Attorney plays a crucial role in typical cases. One of the major benefits for presidents is that OPA vets all of the pardon applications for the White House, reducing the risk that a pardon could backfire.

“In the normal case, the White House won’t touch a case unless it’s gone through that administrative process at DOJ,” says Samuel Morison, a former lawyer in the Office of the Pardon Attorney. “It protects them from being embarrassed if it goes through DOJ, and it also gives them some political cover. If there’s criticism, they can say, well, DOJ told us to do it.”

Love said that the process at DOJ has served presidents well dating back to the 19th century.

“It’s always thought that it’s protective of the president,” she said. “The only time the president has gotten into trouble is when he avoids the process.”

If Trump does decide to preemptively pardon his son Donald Trump Jr., or his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, it’s highly unlikely their cases would be vetted by the Office of the Pardon Attorney. The cases would more likely be handled entirely by the White House Counsel.

“If anybody like that who is closely related to Trump wants a pardon, I doubt very much they’re going to bother filing a pardon application with the Office of the Pardon Attorney,” Morison said. “I don’t represent any of those people in a pardon matter, but if I did, I would tell them, ‘Why would you do that? Just go straight to the White House.’”

OPA doesn’t even accept applications from individuals who haven’t been convicted of a crime, Morison said.

There’d be very little required of Trump if he decided to grant any pardons. The White House could issue a fairly short statement, and the form wouldn’t really matter, Love said. Trump could do it in a tweet if he wanted, as USA Today wrote in January. (The biggest restriction might be Twitter’s character limit: The key portion of Ford’s letter pardoning Nixon ran to 442 characters. If Trump were to write something similar, he’d need to split it into a few tweets.)

“The president can do this pretty much in any form he wants, as long as it’s a public announcement,” Love said. The pardon doesn’t even need to be a written document, she added: “Stick your head out the window, yell it out in the street.” It just needs to be a matter of record that the pardon was issued.

Of course, the really remarkable thing is not that the words “Twitter” and “presidential pardon” are being mentioned in the same sentence. It’s the fact that Trump would consider issuing a preemptive pardon for a member of his family at all.

“We truly are in uncharted waters here,” Love said.

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

Why Trump probably won’t be able to replace Jeff Sessions

President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions seem to be in a bad relationship lately, right?

Oh yes. Mr. Trump has been quite public with his criticisms over the past few weeks. He has been upset with Sessions for recusing himself from the Russia investigation and the subsequent naming of a special counsel to take over the CIA probe. At the same time, the Republican-controlled Senate has made it quite clear that they want Sessions to stay, with Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley saying there’s no way they’ll confirm a replacement.

Everybody in D.C. Shld b warned that the agenda for the judiciary Comm is set for rest of 2017. Judges first subcabinet 2nd / AG no way

— ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) July 27, 2017
Why is the Senate so against Sessions’ removal?

A couple of reasons. The first is that Sessions was popular with his colleagues in the Senate before he left for the Trump administration. He’s well-liked, even among those who disagree with him.

The second and more important reason is that firing Sessions would likely be a prelude to the firing of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the former FBI director tasked with investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Because Sessions recused himself from the investigation, it means he can’t fire Mueller, but a new attorney general could. The conventional wisdom in Washington supposes that this is the real reason Mr. Trump seems so anxious to get Sessions out of the way.

If Mr. Trump replaces Sessions with someone who fires Mueller, it could provoke a constitutional crisis, which the Senate appears anxious to avoid. So, for the moment at least, it looks like they’re more than willing to stand up to Mr. Trump.

So what happens the president just fires Sessions?

He’d need to get a new attorney general, one Grassley says the Senate won’t confirm. That means that the man who appointed Mueller in the first place, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, would become acting attorney general. This doesn’t really solve any of Mr. Trump’s problems, however, as it is essentially impossible to imagine Rosenstein ever fires Mueller.

Is there any way the president could appoint someone else?

Here’s where it gets a little tricky. Presidents typically can and do make recess appointment when Congress is not in session. This is a way for the executive branch to fill vacancies, such as those created by firings, without consulting with the legislature.

The Senate will be in recess in August, which in theory means that Mr. Trump could fire Sessions and appoint someone new while all the senators are out of town. This recess appointment would last only until the new congressional term begins in January, at which point the new attorney general to be confirmed. But that’s long enough for the Sessions replacement to fire Mueller.

The thing is, though, Congress knows a way to block such appointments.

And how do they do that?

By holding what are called pro forma sessions during the recess. Basically, it works like this: The senators all still leave town, but every three days or so someone shows up to say that Congress is still in session. So even though Congress isn’t really doing anything, it is legally not in recess, meaning the president can’t make a recess appointment.

Pro forma sessions are the reason there have been no recess appointments since 2012. They don’t need to be announced much in advance, as all the Senate leadership needs to do is schedule the sessions.

A pro forma session usually lasts only a matter of minutes – they just gavel in and gavel out, once they figure out who’s in Washington to do the honors. They typically happen every three days of the recess because the Constitution states that neither house of Congress can go on break for more than three days without the consent of the other.

Is that what they’ll do this time?

Presumably, yes, as the Senate has stayed in pro forma session in the most recent recesses, such as Memorial Day and the 4th of July. That means that Mr. Trump won’t get to make his recess appointment, and that he’s stuck with Sessions for the foreseeable future. It also means that recess appointments are well on their way to becoming relics.

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized

John Kelly takes command as Trump slams back at accusations of ‘White House chaos’

Retired general John Kelly took command Monday of President Trump’s White House staff, in a shakeup that could serve to restore discipline and focus to a White House that’s been gripped by internal power struggles that have been played out in the press.

Kelly’s reputation as a straight shooter has many in the Oval Office and in the Republican Party optimistic as he takes the reins as chief of staff. They see Kelly as the ideal candidate to dial back the drama that’s plagued White House in recent weeks.

Kelly was sworn in Monday morning.

“He’s going to have to reduce the drama, reduce both the sniping within and reduce the leaks, and bring some discipline to the relationships,” Republican strategist Karl Rove, said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Trump, though, on Monday downplayed the palace intrigue and said his White House is not in "chaos."

“Highest Stock Market EVER, best economic numbers in years, unemployment lowest in 17 years, wages rising, border secure, S.C.: No WH chaos!” he tweeted.

Kelly’s appointment as chief of staff was announced Friday. The Homeland Security secretary and retired Marine Corps general takes over for Reince Priebus, whose management style was seen as a far cry from Kelly’s. The move could serve to dampen an escalating set of nasty internal battles among the president’s closest advisers.

The infighting at the White House has frequently been leaked, creating another distraction for a team struggling to notch any significant legislative achievement.

The tensions escalated further more than a week ago, when White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer resigned after six months on the job, in protest over the hiring of Wall Street financier Anthony Scaramucci as the new communications director.

Scaramucci made headlines almost immediately after a conversation he had with a reporter from the New Yorker was printed in full. In that conversation, Scaramucci went on an expletive-laced rant about Priebus and Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, both of whom purportedly opposed his hiring.

In his call, Scaamucci vowed to get Priebus canned and threatened to fire the White House communication staff one by one.

Source Article

Categories: Uncategorized