Jun 09

Owen Wilson's Kids Might Be Funnier Than He Is

Posted in: Today's Chili

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);

Owen Wilson has played many funny roles, but his kids may be giving him a run for his money in the comedy department. 

The actor has two sons  ― 6-year-old, Ford, with his ex-girlfriend, Jade Duell, and 3-year-old, Finn, with his former personal trainer, Caroline Lindqvist. Appearing on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show,” he spoke about the boys and their everyday antics.

“Ford seems like he might even be a little stunt man in training,” the actor explained before presenting a video of his “fearless” son doing an epic belly flop off a diving board. “He’s a big Jackie Chan fan,” he added. 

As for Finn, they call him “me too” because he copies everything Ford does. 

“Anything Ford says is just the funniest thing ever,” Wilson said. “And I can make a joke, and it’s, like, crickets. It’s like nothing from those guys.”

“Unless Ford laughs,” DeGeneres noted. 

“Sometimes it feels more like I’m already seeing how they’re gonna be as teenagers, where they’re gonna sort of be ganging up on me,” the actor said.

On a recent trip to Sequoia National Park, Wilson showed his sons the famous General Sherman tree. 

“I’m like, ‘Guys, this is the biggest tree in the world,’ and Ford’s like, ‘I’ve seen bigger,’” he recalled. “And I’m like, ‘Well no, Ford, actually, you haven’t seen bigger. This is the General Sherman tree. This is the biggest tree.’ And he’s like, ‘If you say so.’”

He continued, “And I’m like, ‘No, it’s not if I say so, there’s the plaque right here,’ and he’s like, ‘I can’t read.’”

Watch the full interview for more of the actor’s parenting musings, including his memories of his own childhood in the 1970s.

Said Wilson, “It was just a different time, with no sunscreens and bike helmets.” 

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

GOP's New Defense of Trump: The Guy's A Toddler, He Doesn't Know Any Better

Posted in: Today's Chili

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 – Republicans trying to explain President Donald Trump’s behavior appear to be trying out a novel approach: He ought not be blamed for his mistakes because he doesn’t know any better.

“He’s new at government and so, therefore, I think that he’s learning as he goes,” House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told reporters Thursday, explaining how Trump could have thought it was okay to lean on the FBI director to drop a criminal investigation.

Call it the toddler defense. Trump cannot be expected to understand appropriate behavior for a president because he is a businessman, not a politician, and is still only learning.

Trump’s Republican critics, though, have little patience with this argument – particularly because of the dangers it poses in foreign affairs. They point to an MSNBC report Thursday suggesting that Trump may have been unaware that Qatar hosts a crucial United States air base when he issued a statement via Twitter accusing that nation of supporting terrorists.

“Our base in Qatar is a major hub for operations in the region. If he is getting halfway decent briefings on ongoing operations he would know what ― and if he is not being decently briefed it is on him, no one else,” said Eliot Cohen, a top lawyer at the State Department under President George W. Bush who now teaches at Johns Hopkins University. “Ditto, leaning on the FBI director to drop a politically inconvenient investigation.”

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said the MSNBC report on Qatar was not accurate. “100 percent false,” he said.

 

As it happens, Trump’s ignorance actually seemed a feature on the campaign trail, as many of his core supporters justified their allegiance in spite of his clear ― and sometimes admitted ― lack of knowledge on a range of issues, from health care to foreign policy. After Trump won the GOP nomination, more established Republican operatives adopted a similar defense of their standard-bearer.

But both grassroots followers and Republican Party regulars nevertheless expressed confidence that Trump, in their view a wildly successful businessman, would quickly learn on the job all he needed to know.

Some supporters, though, concede that five months in, Trump has not been learning as quickly as might have been hoped.

“The voters wanted an outsider, and these are things you get with someone from outside,” said one top Republican National Committee member privately.

Matt Mackowiak, a Texas GOP consultant and frequent Trump defender, acknowledged that Trump’s attempts to end the investigation into his first national security adviser’s contacts with Russian officials was improper.

“Lawyers know that ignorance of the law is no defense,” Mackowiak said. “But what may have clearly been inappropriate, may indeed not rise to the level of being illegal.”

For Trump critics, the attempts to defend the president’s ignorance and unwillingness to adhere to basic standards of conduct have already gone too far ― particularly as they now involve the Republican National Committee’s systematic attacks on Comey’s integrity.

“Trump is like a parasite that invaded the body politic, and the part that is most rotten right now is the RNC,” said John Weaver, who ran Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s presidential campaign last year. “They should be ashamed of themselves.”

Weaver added that in addition to being wrong, reflexively defending Trump was bad politics. “Handcuffing yourself to a president who’s at 34 percent and sinking is not a good strategy,” he said.

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

Despite Progress, Too Many Children Are Still Dying From Diarrhea

Posted in: Today's Chili

In the decade between 2005 and 2015, the world changed dramatically. The smart phone was introduced. New planets were discovered. Yet children were still dying from a preventable and treatable illness that has plagued the world since the beginning of time.

A recently-published study in the medical journal “The Lancet”showed that deaths from diarrhea among children under 5 dropped by 34 percent from 2005-2015 — a major step toward ensuring that no child dies of a preventable or treatable disease. But half a million children still die from diarrheal diseases every year and millions more are sickened by unsafe drinking water, which turns a simple sip of water into a potentially life-threatening act for a vulnerable child.

As the fourth-largest killer of the world’s children, diarrhea is a particularly infuriating enemy. Clean water, proper sanitation and good hygiene practices can keep children safe from the water-borne illnesses that make them sick and deaths can be prevented with low-cost interventions like oral rehydration salts and, more recently, vaccines. These seem like simple solutions — but for a child living in poverty, without access to basic health care, and with a body that may already be compromised by malnutrition or other preventable illnesses, a simple fix is anything but.

Over the past 15 years or so, Save the Children has been working to strengthen the communities where children at risk of childhood death live — to reach children in the hardest-to-reach places in the world. By training and equipping community health workers to correctly diagnose and treat pneumonia, diarrhea and malaria, we have been able to contribute to a massive reduction in child deaths worldwide. 

In Bangladesh, which the study notes saw a 60 percent reduction in under-5 deaths from diarrhea from 2005-2015, Save the Children has helped decentralize pneumonia and diarrhea treatment from formal health facilities (mostly in large population centers) to community-level facilities. More than 1.2 million sick children received services from trained village doctors working in local clinics and communities, and 2,000 children were referred to formal health facilities for further treatment as needed. 

The progress in Bangladesh and around the world is encouraging, but it’s not good enough and it’s not happening fast enough. Approximately 1,400 children still die every day in the world’s poorest communities and diarrhea-related illness, which can leave a child weakened and susceptible to other illnesses, has only fallen by about 10 percent in the past decade. So if we want to give every last child the opportunity to have a healthy childhood, we’re simply going to have to do better. 

Using what we know works and leveraging local communities to deliver life-saving medication, we can further reduce diarrheal death and illness—and make huge progress toward Sustainable Development Goals #3 (“Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages”) while we see the benefit of fulfilling #6 (“Ensure access to water and sanitation for all”). This study is a great start, and it reminds us that we need more data to build the evidence for what we know works and to spark innovation around new solutions that will help save more lives.

The data shows us what’s possible. Our experience shows us what’s doable. Now we must show children that we refuse to measure progress in decades or centuries or even millennia, but in the healthy childhoods that all children deserve.

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

Deputy's Husband Could Face Murder Charge In Texas Chokehold Death

Posted in: Today's Chili

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);

A grand jury is hearing evidence relating to possible criminal charges in the case of a Texas man who died last week after the husband of a sheriff’s deputy placed him in a chokehold.

The Harris County District Attorney’s Office said the grand jury began hearing evidence on Thursday in the death of John Hernandez. Since grand jury proceedings are secret, the district attorney’s office said it’s unable to discuss what specific evidence is being presented or how many witnesses will be called to offer testimony.

“We don’t know if they will be done in a few hours or a few days,” Dane Schiller, director of communications for the district attorney’s office, told HuffPost.

The grand jury proceedings come two days after the medical examiner found that Hernandez, 24, died of lack of oxygen to the brain caused by strangulation and chest compression. His death was ruled a homicide, according to the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.

Randall Kallinen, the attorney representing the Hernandez family, has said he believes felony charges – ranging from manslaughter to murder ― would be appropriate.

Hernandez died three days after the husband of a Harris County sheriff’s deputy put him in a chokehold.

According to Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez, the incident occurred on May 28, after the deputy’s husband arrived at a Denny’s restaurant and saw a drunken Hernandez urinating outside. The man “verbally confronted … Hernandez about his behavior” and the physical altercation ensued, the sheriff said.

Melissa Trammell, an individual who claims to have witnessed part of the altercation, was seen leaving the grand jury room at the Harris County Criminal Courthouse on Thursday afternoon. Trammell reportedly declined to discuss her testimony, but did recount what she saw that night, according to The Houston Chronicle.

“The man was turning purple,” she said. “We begged him to get off the man and he wouldn’t … He looked me in the face and said, ‘I’m not getting off him.’”

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_2’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Houston attorney Jack B. Carroll on Monday released video that was shot by a bystander.

“You’re watching a man basically being killed,” Carroll said. “He was kicking his legs in a helpless fashion and you can hear him gurgling, just begging to stop.”

Carroll represents a man who turned the video over to him. He said the man, who wishes to remain anonymous, was threatened with arrest when he made the recording. It was unclear who threatened to arrest him.

The deputy can be seen on the video helping her husband restrain Hernandez. The couple relents once it becomes obvious he’s stopped breathing.

Gonzalez said the deputy administered CPR to Hernandez until paramedics arrived on the scene and transported him to an area hospital. Hernandez died three days later, after he was removed from life support.

Authorities have not identified the deputy or her husband, beyond confirming the deputy’s last name is Thompson. Houston’s KPRC-TV identified the deputy as Shauna Thompson and her husband as Terry Thompson.

The deputy has since been pulled from patrol duties, according to the sheriff’s office.

The death of Hernandez, who was a married father of a 3-year-old daughter, sparked outrage throughout the community.

Approximately 100 protesters marched through downtown Houston on Wednesday, demanding justice. They chanted:

“What do we want? Justice! When do we want it? Now!”

Hernandez’s family reportedly helped organize the event.

“We don’t want anyone else to have to go through this,” his cousin, Yvette Escalante, told KTRK News.

David Lohr covers crime and missing persons. Tips? Feedback? Send an email or follow him on Twitter.

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=593705e0e4b01fc18d3e48eb

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

5 Things The Anti-Sharia Movement Gets Dangerously Wrong

Posted in: Today's Chili

Sharia is a complex, wide-ranging, and ever-evolving set of principles that are meant to help Muslims get closer to God, according to the example set out by Islam’s founder, the Prophet Muhammad. It’s a guide to life that encompasses a whole range of behaviors and faith practices ― from praying five times daily to abstaining from pork and alcohol — and it’s interpreted in vastly different ways by Islam’s many sects.  

In the United States, politicians and anti-Muslim organizations like ACT for America have tapped into fears and misunderstandings about Muslims and immigrants to give the word “Sharia” an entirely different, more sinister meaning.

To promote this misinterpretation, ACT for America, which was designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an extremist group, plans to hold a nationwide “March Against Sharia” in cities around the country on June 10. 

The basic premise of the anti-Sharia movement is this: Sharia is a concrete set of inherently cruel and barbaric Islamic laws that is slowly infiltrating American courts. It unequivocally demands harsh punishments for the slightest offenses and it fundamentally violates human rights, especially the rights of women and children. Furthermore, anyone who calls the anti-Sharia movement what it really is (a new and insidious form of American nativism) is either willfully ignorant or pitifully daft.

Over the past few years, efforts to ban Sharia law in America (often under the guise of banning “foreign” laws) have gained steam. Ten states have already adopted legislation that prohibits the use of foreign law in their state courts, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In 2017, sixteen states have proposed legislation on the subject. 

But the group’s stated intent of “protecting” America from Sharia law betrays a basic level of misunderstanding about what Sharia actually is and how it is interpreted by Muslims today. On the flip side, spreading false information about Sharia actually has negative consequences for American Muslims ― including the “Muslim women and children” that ACT for America claims it is trying to protect.

Below, HuffPost has put together a brief explainer for those who think discriminating against an entire religious tradition will make America great again.

Sharia is primarily about a personal relationship with God. 

Sharia is an Arabic word that means a path to be followed, commonly a path that leads to water. This image of a road leading to the sustenance needed for life is a powerful one. Faraz Rabbani, an Islamic scholar, explained to the BBC: “The linguistic meaning of Sharia reverberates in its technical usage: just as water is vital to human life, so the clarity and uprightness of Sharia is the means of life for souls and minds.”

Sharia is drawn from two main sources ― the Quran, Islam’s holy book, and the Sunnah, or the example set by the Prophet Muhammad. It encompasses both a personal moral code and a general religious law that can influence the legal systems of Muslim-majority countries. It’s also a living body of law ― it developed over the centuries and is still being examined with fresh eyes by Muslim scholars and believers today.

Many religions have legal codes that offer ethical and moral guidelines for practitioners of the faith ― from the canon law of the Catholic Church to Jewish religious rules and practices, called Halakhah (which, like Sharia, also means “the path that one walks.”) And just as opinions about these laws vary greatly within each of these traditions, Muslims around the world fall on a vast spectrum when it comes to how to interpret Sharia. 

Asking a Muslim to stop believing in Sharia is like asking her to stop practicing her religion. It is a blatant attack on religious liberty.

Much like Jewish Halakhah, which can influence everything from a person’s diet to the clothes they wear, Sharia is a set of laws that covers all aspects of a Muslim’s life, imbuing even mundane acts with a touch of divine significance. 

According to the American Muslim scholar Imam Suhaib Webb, there are five main things that Sharia law aims to preserve: Life, learning, family, property, and honor.  From these main goals come laws about things like marriage, eating, worship, financial transactions, and many other essential aspects of living in a community.  

Sharia is not all about punishment. 

Critics like to focus on violent verses from the Quran in order to paint Sharia as a cruel, draconic legal system that is antithetical to American values. It’s true that Sharia does prescribe harsh punishments for acts like adultery, but according to journalist Omar Sacirbey, many of these punishments have been taken out of context, repealed, or require an incredibly high level of evidence.

According to the scholar Qasim Rashid, taking any religious text out of its historical and spiritual context will not result in an “honest legal interpretation.” The Bible also contains verses that could be seen as violent ― such as the verse in the Christian gospels when Jesus says, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” Or the time Jesus told his followers, “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you” and, “If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off.” 

Rashid writes, “The most ‘Muslim country’ in the world is likely America, because America guarantees freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of thought—all hallmarks of Shariah Law. Those nations that oppress in the name of Shariah are as justified in their claims, as the slave owners who claimed their right to slavery was based on the Bible.”

No one needs to worry about Sharia dominating American life and courts. 

Because nothing trumps the U.S. Constitution. No national Muslim organization has ever called for Sharia to supercede American courts. It’s completely beside the point of Sharia and it’s not something American Muslims want. 

And yet, during the run-up to the 2012 election, efforts to ban Sharia law popped up in at least two dozen states across the country. Many claim the initiative was a response to an imagined threat that was more about promoting anti-Muslim sentiment than about preserving American law.  

Not only are these anti-Sharia campaigns unconstitutional, they also often end up hurting Muslims. According to Abed Awad, a specialist in Islamic law, banning Sharia law makes it difficult for Muslims to provide cultural context in cases that have to do with divorce and marriage. 

One example is Soleimani v. Soleimani, a case that was decided in Kansas, where a ban against foreign law being used in state courts was adopted by state lawmakers in 2012.  A Muslim woman had signed an Islamic agreement with her husband that guaranteed that she would receive $677,000 in case of death or divorce. But the jury chose not to factor that contract into its decision about the case, and the woman ended up getting a substantially lower sum. 

The anti-Sharia movement that’s emerging today is the latest iteration of America’s old fear of the “other.

Catholics were once the victim of the kind of religious discrimination now fomented against Muslims. Many of the Founding Fathers were wary of Catholicism. The American statesman John Jay actually wanted Catholics to “renounce the pope and foreign authorities” before they could serve in the government. 

During the 19th century, the number of Catholics in the United States tripled because of immigration. This influx led to the rise of anti-Catholic, nativist sentiment, which manifested itself in violent ways, with the burning of convents and churches.

In the 1920s, when the first Roman Catholic tried to run for president, it was rumored that he’d invite the pope to live in the White House and would strip Protestants of their citizenship.  

Catholics weren’t the only group that has been targeted on American soil for their religious beliefs. Looking back at the experiences of Mormons, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, and atheists in this country, it becomes sadly obvious that hatred of the “other” is as American as apple pie.  

A previous version of this article was posted in 2016.

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

Comey Offered Republicans Only The Coldest Of Comfort

Posted in: Today's Chili

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 ― Republicans went hunting for a silver lining Thursday after FBI Director James Comey testified under oath that his firing was allegedly an attempt to alter the Russia investigation ― Comey’s testimony only showed President Donald Trump had hoped to obstruct the probe, not that he did it.

Comey explained repeatedly in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee that he believed Trump gave him the heave ho to try and influence the FBI’s investigation into the Russian campaign to sway the U.S. election, and especially any probe into former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

“It’s my judgment that I was fired because of the Russia investigation,” Comey told the panel. “I was fired in some way to change, or the endeavor was to change, the way the Russia investigation was being conducted. That is a very big deal.”

According to Comey, Trump had pressed him specifically to drop the probe into Flynn, who was forced to resign after he apparently misled Vice President Mike Pence and other officials about his business dealings with Russians.

While some Democrats started wondering if the overall circumstances amounted to a potential obstruction of justice case ― Comey said that was a matter for Special Counsel Bob Mueller to decide ― Republicans decided to parse Trump’s specific words.

They seemed especially relieved that the president, in a one-on-one Oval Office discussion with Comey, only said “I hope” Comey drops the Flynn investigation.

“He did not direct you to let it go; He did not order you to let it go,” said Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), who expressed pleasure that Comey’s written testimony was careful to put quote marks around the request.

“Do you know of any case where a person has been charged for obstruction of justice or, for that matter, any other criminal offense, where they said, or thought, they hoped for an outcome?” Risch continued.

Comey agreed Trump didn’t come out and say “obstruct justice,” but he did take pains to draw the big picture, stressing repeatedly that as an investigator every detail of their conversation was important ― including Trump asking Attorney General Jeff Sessions and other advisers to leave the room.

“I mean, this is the president of the United States, with me alone, saying, ‘I hope’ this. I took it as, this is what he wants me to do,” Comey said.

Like Risch, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said if Trump truly wanted to interfere in the investigation, his comments to Comey appeared to be “a pretty light touch.”

What’s the difference, Lankford asked, between Trump indicating he’d like Comey to let go of his investigation into Flynn and the president tweeting his displeasure with the Russian probe as a whole.

“Is there any question that the president is not real fond of this investigation?” Lankford quipped. “I’ve heard you share before in this conversation that you’re trying to keep the agents that are working on it away from any comment the president might have made. Quite frankly the president has informed around six billion people that he’s not real fond of this investigation. Do you think there’s a difference in that?”

Again, Comey directed Republicans to recognize everything Trump did that one day during their February meeting.

“There’s a big difference in kicking superior officers out of the Oval Office, looking the FBI director in the eye, and saying ‘hope you let this go,’” Comey said. “I think if agents ― as good as they are ― heard the president of the United States did that, there’s a real risk of a chilling effect on their work.”

Although Comey often called the entire situation a “very big deal,” some Republicans tried to suggest that the ex-FBI director’s reaction showed it was not.

After Comey testified that he told Sessions he never wanted to be alone in a room with Trump again, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) suggested Comey’s subsequent actions showed something different, including Comey being willing to take Trump’s calls.

“What is the difference in being in the room alone with him and talking to him on the phone alone?” Blunt asked.

Comey answered that it was similar, so he made sure to inform his own FBI team about them and the deputy attorney general.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) wanted to know why Comey didn’t just speak up.

“At the time, did you say anything to the president about ― that is not an appropriate request, or did you tell the White House counsel, that is not an appropriate request, someone needs to go tell the president that he can’t do these things?” Rubio said.

Comey admitted that when it happened he was “stunned” and the first thing he thought was to be careful what he said next. He ultimately told Sessions, but the attorney general never said anything.

Another tack Republicans tried was suggesting Trump was being treated unfairly. Both Rubio and Blunt argued that it was significant that of all the leaks that kept coming out about Trump, none of them included the information that Comey told Trump three times that the president was not personally under investigation.

Comey didn’t comment on the fairness, but did tell Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) that while it was technically true that Trump wasn’t under investigation, at least one of Comey’s colleagues was concerned about telling Trump that because the colleague believe Trump’s actions as head of his campaign would fall under the probe.

In perhaps the oddest case of the fairness argument, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said that it was a double standard for Comey to clear HIllary Clinton in the completed investigation of her private email system, but not to clear Trump in the ongoing Russia probe. McCain seemed to suggest that Clinton’s emails had something to do with the Russian campaign to influence the election.

“She’s one of the candidates, but in her case you say there will be no charges, and in the case of President Trump, the investigation continues,” McCain said.

“I’m a little confused,” Comey professed of McCain’s complaint, noting that the Clinton investigation was long finished.

McCain was asked by reporters later why he thought Clinton should be part of the Russia probe when Russia’s alleged meddling was directed against her.

“That’s what some people say, but whatever,” McCain said. “She was declared completely innocent of any involvement whatsoever, and there’s a whole lot of other questions out there.”

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

As Law That First Saved Grand Canyon Turns 111, Trump Takes Aim At Its Legacy

Posted in: Today's Chili

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 — Today marks the 111th anniversary of the Antiquities Act, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt and used by him and 15 other presidents, both Republicans and Democrats, to designate more than 150 national monuments.

The magnificent treasures that have been protected by the act include Wyoming’s Devils Tower, Arizona’s Grand Canyon, Idaho’s Craters of the Moon and Alaska’s Glacier Bay. 

Rather than celebrating that legacy, President Donald Trump has taken aim at the 1906 law, claiming that recent administrations have abused it to “lock up millions of acres of land and water.” 

Twenty-seven national monuments designated or expanded since 1996, spanning more than 11 million acres of land and about 760 million acres of ocean, are threatened by a pair of executive orders signed by Trump in April. By Saturday, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is due to make a recommendation on what he thinks should happen to the 1.35-million-acre Bears Ears National Monument in Utah, which is at the center of the current fight.

In announcing his monuments review, Trump spoke as if a Bears Ears reversal was a done deal, saying the Obama-era designation had been done “over the profound objections of the citizens of Utah” and “should never have happened.” No previous president has tried to revoke a monument designation and legal scholars argue that Trump lacks the authority to do so.

Conservationists and lawmakers took to social media on Thursday to celebrate the Antiquities Act, with many using the hashtag  and expressing outrage over the Trump administration’s actions. 

“On a day when we should be celebrating the anniversary of the law used to protect places like the Grand Canyon, Zion, and the Statue of Liberty, it’s outrageous that we’re facing down an unprecedented attack on our national parks and monuments by President Trump and Interior Secretary Zinke,” Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, said in a statement.

“People understand that this review is nothing more than an attempt to give away our public lands to the fossil fuel industry,” he added.

See below for some celebratory posts: 

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

Words Of Wisdom Gained From Watching The Comey Hearing

Posted in: Today's Chili

Everyone watched the James Comey hearing like it was the season finale of Trump. Unfortunately, we have more seasons to go. And with any highly-publicized, highly-viewed event like this, we’re gonna walk away with some catchphrases and memes. 

We all knew this was coming.

 

I’m not out of work, I’m …

Where are the tapes?

We’re all alone, so …

All the humans.

In an open setting??

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

Stephen King Confirms It’s Trump, Not Comey, Who’s A 'Nut Job'

Posted in: Today's Chili

Since last year’s presidential election, a handful of popular writers — J.K. Rowling, Margaret Atwood and Stephen King among them — have used their position to criticize the new administration. 

King once again shared his thoughts on President Donald Trump, during former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony Thursday.

“After listening to Comey today and Trump for last 4 and a half months, I have a clear opinion on which one is the actual ‘nut job,’” he declared.

Aside from occasional posts propping up TV shows and books that he recommends, or cataloging the doings of his pet dog Molly, King has devoted most of his recent social media activity to political comments.

“No wonder Trump’s always babbling about fake news,” King tweeted last week. “He is a fake president.”

King’s outspokenness hasn’t been restricted to social media; last summer, he was among over 400 authors who signed a petition against Donald Trump, writing, “as writers, we are particularly aware of the many ways that language can be abused in the name of power.” 

— 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.

No Comments
Jun 09

Abandoned Baby Found In Jonas Brothers Backpack Outside Arizona Grocery

Posted in: Today's Chili

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);

Police in Tempe, Arizona, are looking for any information about a baby girl found alive inside a Jonas Brothers backpack Sunday night.

A passer-by found the backpack holding the newborn child in a shopping cart in a grocery store parking lot, according to AZFamily.com.

The temperature at the time was 103 degrees, and the baby was wrapped in a blanket.

The witness brought the child to the store manager, who called 911.

When the dispatcher asked if the girl appeared injured, he replied, “She’s beautiful,” while the child cried and gurgled, according to a 911 call obtained by Inside Edition.

The caller told police part of the baby’s umbilical cord was still attached.

“Oh my goodness,” the caller said. “The baby was just barely born right now.”

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_2’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Police picked up the child and took her to a hospital, where she was reported in good health. She is now in foster care, according to Phoenix station KSAZ.

Anyone with information about the child or her parents is asked to call 480-350-8311.

Whoever abandoned the child might be facing criminal charges, which is ironic since the baby girl was left only 50 feet from a fire station, which is considered a “safe haven,” according to Paul Nies, the assistant chief for the Tempe Fire Medical Rescue Department.

“There’s a certain amount of frustration that all they had to do was walk 50 feet away to the fire station, give us the child, no questions asked. We’d have taken care of that baby,” Nies told AZFamily.com.

Arizona state law says that parents who surrender an unharmed newborn within 72 hours of birth to a Safe Haven provider will not face criminal charges. 

— 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.

No Comments