Another Victory For 'Wonder Woman' As 'The Mummy' Gets Buried At The Box Office

“The Mummy” is no match for “Wonder Woman.”

During its first weekend in theaters, the Tom Cruise monster movie debuted at No. 2, earning a tepid $32 million in North American grosses. “Wonder Woman” retained the top spot, collecting an impressive $57.2 million.

That “Wonder Woman” figure is especially noteworthy because superhero flicks tend to see steep declines ― about 60 percent ― during their second weekend in theaters, once the most faithful fanboys and -girls have already scurried to the multiplexes. The first major comic-book adaptation directed by a woman, Patty Jenkins’ film fell by only 45 percent, the least of any modern superhero movie.

“Woman” has now accrued about $205 million domestically and another $230.2 from foreign markets. 

This weekend’s tallies are as much a victory for “Wonder Woman” as they are a defeat for the critically derided “Mummy.” Other recent big-screen iterations of the character ― 1999’s “The Mummy” (starring Brendan Fraser), 2001’s “The Mummy Returns,” 2002’s “The Scorpion King” and 2008’s “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” ― premiered to heftier sums.

Universal Pictures has a lot riding on this latest reboot, as it is meant to launch the Dark Universe, an expensive franchise that’s slated to span several movies. Stateside audiences were largely uninterested in the inaugural installment, putting the Dark Universe in a precarious position. That said, major studios often rely on international grosses to support tentpole releases nowadays, and this weekend’s $141.8 million in overseas revenue means Universal can, on some level, ignore domestic patrons’ ambivalence. 

Holdovers “Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie” ($12.3 million), “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales” ($10.7 million) and “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” ($6.2 million) round out the Top 5. 

Another winner: “It Comes at Night,” a low-budget horror film that trendy indie studio A24 released nationwide. The post-apocalyptic chiller collected $6 million, a decent total for a low-budget title costing $5 million. 

“Baywatch” ($4.6 million), “Megan Leavey” ($3.8 million), “Alien: Covenant” ($1.8 million) and “Everything, Everything” ($1.6 million) complete the Top 10. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

For 'NBA Live 18,' it's about bringing 'the magic' back

Long after its groundbreaking launch in 1995, EA’s flagship basketball game has had a troubled run this decade but NBA Live 18 shows that it may be able to turn things around. After missing last year entirely (following a hiatus between the 2010 and…

Watch Microsoft's Xbox E3 2017 event live right here at 5PM ET

Microsoft is getting down to business a little early this year and kicking off its E3 announcements on Sunday. We’re on the scene in Los Angeles ready to bring you all of the news as its announced — including the latest on Project Scorpio. However,…

We're live from Microsoft's E3 2017 media briefing!

Microsoft will answer three important questions today: How much Project Scorpio, its high-powered Xbox One, will cost; what the console’s name will be; and when we can actually buy it. Lucky for you, you can follow along with your favorite members of…

Donald Trump's Son Suggests His Dad Did Tell James Comey To Lay Off Flynn Probe

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

WASHINGTON ― Donald Trump’s eldest son seemed to confirm fired FBI director James Comey’s testimony that the president requested Comey end the FBI investigation into former national security adviser Mike Flynn’s contacts with Russian officials, contradicting his father’s repeated denials.

In a Fox News interview with Judge Jeanine Pirro, a Trump ally, the younger Trump said there was “no ambiguity” in the president’s request to Comey, made during a Feb. 14 Oval Office meeting.  

“When he tells you to do something, guess what? There’s no ambiguity in it, there’s no, ‘Hey, I’m hoping,’” Donald Trump Jr. told Pirro on Saturday. “You and I are friends: ‘Hey, I hope this happens, but you’ve got to do your job.’ That’s what he told Comey.”

Comey immediately detailed the meeting in a memo, writing that Trump told him: “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

Comey’s account is central to the question of whether Trump obstructed justice by asking Comey to end the investigation and then fired him when he did not.

The former FBI director on Thursday testified that he “took it as a direction,” given that the president had dismissed everyone else from the room to meet with Comey alone, before making the request. It also followed a previous one-on-one encounter in which Trump asked Comey to pledge his “honest loyalty.”

Trump’s son attacked Comey for not taking action if he “felt threatened” by the president.

“For this guy, as a politician, to then go back and write a memo: ‘Oh, I felt threatened.’ He felt so threatened, but he didn’t do anything,” Trump Jr. said.

Comey testified that he asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to not allow Trump to meet with him alone. But he did not feel it was appropriate to tell Sessions about Trump’s request, fearing it would impede the larger FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russian officials.

Sessions, who met at least twice with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak last year, later recused himself from matters involving the Russia investigation. Comey revealed Thursday that at the time, he and FBI colleagues knew that Sessions would have to recuse himself because they may have discovered even more compromising information involving Sessions.

The president has repeatedly denied Comey’s account of the Feb. 14 conversation.

In response to his testimony, Trump and his allies have continued to dispute Comey’s detailed recollections and attack the fired FBI director’s character, while simultaneously claiming that his testimony vindicated the president. On Friday, Trump accused Comey of committing perjury, and said he would be “100 percent” willing to testify under oath to dispute Comey.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Comey Bolsters Case For Obstruction Of Justice By Trump

Without ever stating that President Donald Trump obstructed justice, former FBI director James Comey methodically laid out the case for charging Trump with the crime of obstruction of justice, an impeachable offense.

In written and oral testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey provided an explosive account of an attempted cover-up by the president.

Obstruction of justice requires the attempt to halt an investigation with a corrupt intent. Trump corruptly tried to block the pending criminal investigation of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. The day after Flynn resigned, the president allegedly warned Comey, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey testified, “I took it as a direction” that “this is what he wants me to do…. [I] replied only that ‘[Flynn] is a good guy.’”

According to Comey, Trump asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Jared Kushner and others to step out of the Oval Office before the president requested that Comey drop the “open FBI criminal investigation” of Flynn for “his statements in connection with the Russian contacts, and the contacts themselves.” Clearly, the president didn’t want anyone else to hear what he had to say to Comey. This is evidence for the case that Trump made the request to Comey for a corrupt purpose.

Comey felt so uncomfortable after the exchange with Trump, he later asked Sessions not to leave him alone with the president.

Two weeks earlier, Trump had invited Comey to a private dinner at the White House: just the two of them. Comey said the president asked him whether he liked his job and wanted to keep it, twice demanding “loyalty” from the FBI director. Comey testified that the president said, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” Pressed by Trump, Comey said he finally assured the president he would get “honest loyalty” from the FBI director.

Comey testified that he was puzzled by the fact that the president had, on “multiple” occasions, told him he was doing a great job and hoped he would remain at the post. Comey, who had repeatedly told Trump he intended to stay, said he thought the president was trying to create a “patronage” relationship by hinting that Comey’s job depended on pledging loyalty to Trump. “I got the sense my job would be contingent upon how he felt I conducted myself and whether I demonstrated loyalty,” Comey testified.

On two subsequent occasions, Trump called Comey and told him the Russia investigation was “’a cloud’ impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country.” Trump asked Comey to “lift the cloud.”

Trump repeatedly urged Comey to “get that fact out” that Trump wasn’t personally being investigated. Comey testified, “The FBI and the Justice Department had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.”

When Comey didn’t halt the investigation of Flynn, Trump fired him. The next day, Trump boasted to Russian officials in the Oval Office, “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” adding, “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

The day after talking to the Russian officials, Trump told NBC’s Lester Holt, “When I decided to just do it [fire Comey], I said to myself … this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.”

Comey testified that he was confused when he heard the president say on television “that he actually fired me because of the Russia investigation, and learned again from the media that he was privately telling other parties that my firing had relieved great pressure on the Russia investigation.” Comey added, “Something about the way I was conducting it, the president felt created pressure on him that he wanted to relieve.”

On May 12, Trump issued a veiled threat against Comey, tweeting, “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!” Comey testified yesterday, “Lordy, I hope there are tapes,” indicating that such evidence would corroborate his recollection of Trump’s incriminating statements.

Comey testified that he had a “gut feeling” that Trump might lie about what had transpired during their conversations. So, he memorialized them in written memoranda. This was a new practice for Comey; he had never thought it necessary to keep a record of his conversations with Presidents Bush and Obama. Comey said his gut told him he couldn’t trust Trump. “I was honestly concerned [Trump] might lie about the nature of our meeting so I thought it important to document,” Comey testified.

Trump’s acts constitute probable cause that he engaged in obstruction of justice. As Philip Allen Lacovara, former Justice Department deputy solicitor general and counsel to Watergate special prosecutors Archibald Cox and Leon Jaworski, wrote in the Washington Post:

Comey’s statement lays out a case against the president that consists of a tidy pattern, beginning with the demand for loyalty, the threat to terminate Comey’s job, the repeated requests to turn off the investigation into Flynn and the final infliction of career punishment for failing to succumb to the president’s requests, all followed by the president’s own concession about his motive. Any experienced prosecutor would see these facts as establishing a prima facie case of obstruction of justice.

Obstruction of justice is a felony, which is a “High Crime.” The articles of impeachment in the cases of both Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton included allegations of obstruction of justice.

Moreover, even if Trump’s conduct did not meet the elements of obstruction of justice, it nevertheless provides a basis for impeachment.

The Constitution provides for impeachment of the president when he commits “High Crimes and misdemeanors.” They include, but are not limited to, conduct punishable by the criminal law.

Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist No. 65 that offenses are impeachable if they “proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

The Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry staff during the Nixon case wrote in 1974 that impeachment “is to be predicated only upon conduct seriously incompatible with … the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office.” Under the Constitution, the president has a duty to “take Care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

By attempting to halt a criminal investigation and then firing the FBI director who refused to comply, Trump violated the “take care” clause of the Constitution. Instead of taking care to enforce the laws, Trump has endeavored to circumvent them.

Comey’s written testimony “is the most shocking single document compiled about the official conduct of the public duties of any President since the release of the Watergate tapes,” Benjamin Wittes, editor-in-chief of the Brookings Institution’s Lawfare blog, wrote.

To spur the appointment of a special counsel, Comey leaked his memos to a friend who is a professor at Columbia Law School and asked him to make them public. Professor Daniel Richman provided Comey’s memos to the New York Times.

On May 17, the Justice Department appointed former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” and “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.”

“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Comey testified. “I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning, but that’s a conclusion I’m sure the special counsel will work towards to find out the intention and whether that’s an offense.”

Comey’s testimony painted a clear pattern of obstruction of justice and of Trump’s failure to take care to enforce the laws. After independent counsel Kenneth Starr concluded there was evidence of wrongdoing by President Clinton, he turned over his findings to the House of Representatives for impeachment proceedings. Mueller could do the same.

Copyright Truthout. Reprinted with permission.

Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Judge Rejects $2.4 Million Fine For Oil Company Over Blast That Killed 7

A state appeals judge has rejected a $2.4 million dollar fine for an oil company after a refinery explosion killed seven workers.

State officials imposed the fine on Texas company Tesoro in October 2010, over a blast in Anacortes, Washington, that occurred April that year. It was the largest workplace-safety fine in Washington state history, local NPR member station KUOW reports.

But late last week, Judge Mark Jaffe of the Washington State Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals overturned the fine, saying the state had not shown that the deadly explosion was Tesoro’s fault. The company had been appealing the fine for years — though it did pay millions of dollars to the families of the victims.

The local news website, GoSkagit.com, reports that Jaffe’s ruling must still be approved by the board.

The explosion occurred at the Tesoro’s Anacortes refinery when a heat exchanger ruptured. The rupture released extremely hot hydrogen and naphtha, which ignited. The ensuing explosion was so intense that many people felt a shock wave across the nearby Fidalgo Bay, and a huge fireball shot into the sky over the refinery, the Seattle Times reported at the time. (The outlet’s report was published before the final death toll.)

Seven workers — Daniel Aldridge, Matt Bowen, Matt Gumbel, Darrin Hoines, Lew Janz, Kathryn Powell and Donna Van Dreumel — died from injuries sustained in the blast, according to KUOW.

The state’s Department of Labor and Industries accused Tesoro of dozens of violations that contributed to the explosion, and these alleged violations led to officials handing down the $2.4 million fine.

“Our position has been that had Tesoro conducted the appropriate and required testing, they would have found the cracking that led to the rupture,” department spokesman Hector Castro told Reuters in 2011.

But Judge Jaffe wrote in his ruling on Thursday that the state was “unable to really articulate what Tesoro did or did not do to cause the explosion.”

The Washington Department of Labor and Industries, however, is not the only group that has blamed the company for the disaster.

The U.S. Chemical Safety Board said in 2011 that Tesoro inadequately maintained the heat exchanger that exploded, Reuters reported at the time.
The CSB released its final report on the catastrophe in 2014, citing a “substandard safety culture at Tesoro, which led to a complacent attitude toward flammable leaks and occasional fires over the year.”

The company has repeatedly asserted it was not at fault for the explosion and that its heat exchanger maintenance was in line with industry standards and regulations.

Tesoro spokesman Matt Gill told GoSkagit.com that the company supported Judge Jaffe’s decision.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Montana Democrat Rob Quist May Make Another House Run

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

CHICAGO ― Democrat Rob Quist, the folk musician who lost a competitive U.S. House election last month in Montana, is already thinking about trying again.

Quist spoke to HuffPost at Saturday’s People’s Summit, a conference of Bernie Sanders-supporting activists organized by the labor union National Nurses United and other major progressive organizations.

“The people I connected with, I got them in my corner, but there just wasn’t enough time” to reach enough people across the sprawling state, Quist said. “So if I did this again, of course, I’d have a whole year to do it.”

Asked whether that was a hint he would run for his state’s sole House seat in 2018’s general election, Quist responded, “It could be. I haven’t decided for sure yet.”

“People here, folks like Our Revolution … are really encouraging me,” he said, referring to a group formed to push Sanders’ agenda. “And they said we’ll support you if you step into it again,” he added.

In the meantime, Quist has plans to start a progressive foundation called the Solution Room, and make a documentary about his experience running for office.

Republican Greg Gianforte defeated Quist by about 6 percentage points in the May 25 special election to fill the seat Republican Ryan Zinke gave up to become President Donald Trump’s Interior Department secretary.  

Quist’s showing was respectable in a state Donald Trump won by 20 points over Hilary Clinton last November and where Zinke won re-election in that same vote by about 16 points. 

Still, Quist’s loss was a disappointment for Democrats in general ― and Sanders supporters in particular ― who saw an opportunity to not only land a blow against Trump, but elect an unabashed liberal. Quist, a supporter of single-payer health insurance and marijuana legalization, was an early backer of Sanders’ presidential run.

That Gianforte assaulted a reporter asking about his position on the House GOP health care bill the day before the election made the loss that much tougher for Quist backers. (Gianforte has since apologized and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge.) 

Although Quist raised more than $6 million ― mostly through small individual donations ― during the the campaign’s relatively short course, some progressives criticized the national Democratic Party for allowing him to be pilloried by outside conservative groups in March and most of April without institutional backing of his own. Spending by outside groups for Gianforte was about 9 times the amount of comparable funding for Quist, according to a Roll Call analysis of official data.

The national Republican Party focused on depicting Quist ― a newcomer to politics ― as a deadbeat, spotlighting taxes he had failed to pay on time. (Quist argued it was an error that reflects his status as an ordinary middle-class American with financial struggles.)

With a chuckle, Quist said, “That’s probably true,” when asked about criticism of the national Democratic Party for not committing to his race earlier and more aggressively.

“I really feel that I’ve tried to live a pretty good life,” he said. While saying he had performed “years of community service,” was his high school’s student body president and an Eagle Scout, he added that “none of that really made it to the papers.”

“Every time in the local papers, it was always repeating the negative narratives,” he said. “But I understand that the first time you run for office you kind of have to go through a lot of the vetting process.”

The Free Beacon, a conservative news site based in Washington that concentrated its stories on Quist’s financial problems, is a particular whipping horse for him.

“I call it the ‘freakin’ beacon’!” he joked.

At the People’s Summit, Quist participated in a panel about “transforming the Democratic Party,” and he lingered to engage with some of those who helped fund his campaign. Quist fans repeatedly interrupted the HuffPost interview to shake his hand and offer words of support.

For Quist, it was just what he needed after his bruising first brush with electoral politics.

“I come from a family of basketball players and we don’t take losing lightly,” he said. “This has been such a great healing thing to come to this and to meet with a lot of people that really supported me from all over the country.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

'FIFA 18' isn't out yet and I'm already in love

There was a brief period of time last year when I was playing Pro Evolution Soccer more than FIFA. It was hard to wrap my head around that, considering EA’s franchise had been my number one choice since it was known as FIFA International Soccer back…

American military backs an entirely new kind of processor

Virtually every processor you see is based on the same basic (Von Neumann) computing model: they’re designed to access large chunks of sequential data and fill their caches as often as possible. This isn’t the quickest way to accomplish every task,…