Ivanka Trump accompanied her father and the first lady on the diplomatic trip to Saudi Arabia. She was a trending topic in the country’s social media this weekend. (Photo: AP)
the news cycle continues to churn around President Trump’s first foreign tour — particularly the glaring contradictions between his current statements and the things he stated publicly before he became president — another Trump story is also developing. Namely, the fascination around Ivanka Trump on the part of their Saudi hosts. While most of the conversation around Ivanka, and Melania as well, focused heavily on the women’s wardrobe choices, Ivanka herself became a trending news topic in Arabic social media.
As detailed in the English-language website Arab News, as soon as the president’s daughter stepped off the airplane in Saudi Arabia, she stepped into the Arabic speaking spotlight. The Twitter hashtag “Ivanka bint Trump,” or “Trump’s daughter” was trending on the social media platform.
So far, Melania Trump has also impressed the Saudi press, with nearly a full page dedicated to her “classy and conservative” look.
Interestingly, the Saudi public on social media also seemed to be pretty impressed with the U.S. delegation’s choice in security personnel. Arab News pointed to many poetic compliments to the so-called Man in the Red Tie. “Just give me the man in the red tie and throw me in a sea,” one commenter declared. While visiting the U.S. ally, Ivanka Trump has met with Saudi women for a roundtable discussion concerning women’s rights. At the meeting she stated, “Saudi Arabia’s progress, especially in recent years, is very encouraging, but there’s still a lot of work to be done and freedoms and opportunities to continue to fight for.” She also brokered a $100 million donation from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to a billion-dollar global fund dedicated to women’s economic empowerment.
FBI Director James B. Comey has been dismissed by the president, according to White House spokesman Sean Spicer - a startling move that officials said stemmed from a conclusion by Justice Department officials that he had mishandled the probe of Hillary Clinton’s emails.
Comey was fired as he is leading a counterintelligence investigation to determine whether associates of President Trump may have coordinated with Russia to meddle with the presidential election last year. That probe began quietly last July but has now become the subject of intense debate in Washington. It is unclear how Comey’s dismissal will affect that investigation.
“The president has accepted the recommendation of the Attorney General and the deputy Attorney General regarding the dismissal of the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” Spicer told reporters in the briefing room.
Spicer also said that Comey was “notified a short time ago.” This is effective “immediately,” he said.
In a letter to Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that he agreed.
“I have concluded that a fresh start is needed at the leadership of the FBI,’’ Sessions wrote. “I must recommend that you remove Director James B. Comey, Jr. and identify an experienced and qualified individual to lead the great men and women of the FBI.’’
Shortly before the announcement, the FBI notified Congress by letter that Comey had misstated key findings involving the Hillary Clinton email investigation during testimony last week, but nothing about that issue seemed to suggest it might imperil Comey’s job.
The letter was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, more than a week after Comey testified for hours in defense of his handling of the Clinton probe.
The career of James B. Comey as FBI director
View Photos
James Comey, the head of the bureau since 2013, was dismissed by President Trump on May 9, 2017.
“This letter is intended to supplement that testimony to ensure that the committee has the full context of what was reviewed and found on the laptop,’’ wrote FBI Assistant Director Gregory A. Brower.
In defending the probe at last week’s hearing, Comey offered seemingly new details to underscore the seriousness of the situation FBI agents faced last fall when they discovered thousands of Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s emails on the computer of her husband, Anthony Weiner.
“Somehow, her emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information,” Comey said, adding later, “His then-spouse Huma Abedin appears to have had a regular practice of forwarding emails to him for him I think to print out for her so she could then deliver them to the secretary of state.”
At another point in the testimony, Comey said Abedin “forwarded hundreds and thousands of emails, some of which contain classified information.’’
Neither of those statements is accurate, said people close to the investigation.
Tuesday’s letter said “most of the emails found on Mr. Weiner’s laptop computer related to the Clinton investigation occurred as a result of a backup of personal electronic devices, with a small number a result of manual forwarding by Ms. Abedin to Mr. Weiner.’’
The letter also corrected the impression Mr. Comey’s testimony had left with some listeners that 12 classified emails were among those forwarded by Abedin to Weiner.
“Investigators identified approximately 49,000 emails which were potentially relevant to the investigation,” the letter said. “All were reviewed with a particular focus on those containing classified information. Investigators ultimately determined that two e-mail chains containing classified information were manually forwarded to Mr. Weiner’s account.’’
Ten other emails chains that contained classified information were found on the laptop as a result of backup activity.
The letter also clarified some of the figures Comey gave regarding ongoing terrorism probes.
The issue of Comey’s misstatements was first reported by ProPublica.
At the hearing, the statements about Abedin’s email practices were immediately seized on by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and others, who demanded to know why Abedin wasn’t charged with a crime. Comey said it was difficult finding evidence those involved in Clinton’s use of private email knowingly engaged in wrongdoing, and that traditionally the Justice Department has not prosecuted such cases without some indicator of intent.
Comey’s incorrect comments about Abedin surfaced again this week at a different Senate hearing, when Cruz pressed former director of national intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. to say how he would handle an employee who “forwarded hundreds or even thousands of e-mails to a non-government individual, their spouse, on a non-government computer.’’
Clapper said such conduct “raises all kinds of potential security concerns.’’
At the hearing last week, Comey spent hours defending his handling of the investigation of Clinton’s use of a private server for work while she was secretary of state, saying it made him “mildly nauseous” to think his decisions might have affected the outcome of the presidential election, but insisting that he had no regrets and would not have handled it differently.
Comey’s decision-making during the Clinton inquiry has come under sustained criticism from Democrats — including Clinton — who say it was a major factor that contributed to her presidential election defeat in November to Donald Trump. On Oct. 28, less than two weeks before Election Day, the director notified Congress that new Clinton-related emails had been found on a laptop belonging to Weiner.
Days later, investigators obtained a search warrant to examine about 3,000 messages on the device that were work-related. Of those, Comey said, agents found a dozen that contained classified information, but they were messages investigators had already seen.
Comey’s public comments about the Clinton case have been a source of public debate since he first announced last July that he would not recommend charges against anyone in connection with her use of a private server for government business.
At the time, he called the use of the server “extremely careless’’ but said it did not rise to the level of a crime.
Checkpoint newsletter
Military, defense and security at home and abroad.
The misstatements in testimony aren’t the first time Comey has overstated a key fact in a high-profile probe.
A year ago, while speaking at a security forum in London, the director miscalculated the price the FBI had paid for a technique to crack into a locked iPhone belonging to one of the dead suspects in a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, Calif.
At the event, he said the cost of the phone hacking tool was “more than I will make in the remainder of this job, which is seven years and four months, for sure.’’ Based on Comey’s salary, his comment strongly implied the bureau paid at least $1.3 million to get into the phone, which belonged to Syed Rizwan Farook. Farook and his wife killed 14 people during a December 2015 terrorist attack.
People close to that case said the FBI actually paid about $900,000.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill on Tuesday. (Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
WASHINGTON — House Republicans defied the odds and narrowly passed a controversial bill to repeal and replace Obamacare on Thursday afternoon, with House Speaker Paul Ryan urging his members to seize the moment and deliver on their long-held campaign promise even before members received an estimate of the bill’s effects from the Congressional Budget Office.
It took many late night meetings, last-minute amendments and old fashioned arm-twisting to push the bill through the House, but the American Health Care Act likely faces an even steeper and more treacherous climb in the staid and slow Senate.
Factions of both moderate and conservative GOP senators are deeply skeptical of the bill for entirely different reasons, making a path forward they can all agree upon difficult to imagine. The Republicans’ bare majority — just 52 votes — means they can only lose two senators and still push a repeal through. The chamber’s Democratic senators remain firmly unified against any repeal of Obamacare.
Even if Republican senators do find that path, they are unlikely to accede to House conservatives’ demands that they return the precariously negotiated legislation back to them virtually untouched. Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., a member of the Freedom Caucus, said Tuesday the Senate better not change the AHCA “one iota,” or risk losing support. But several Republican senators said Thursday they expected to write their own, improved bill after reviewing the House version.
“When the House passes a bill, I’ll review it and then we’ll go to work on the Senate bill,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.
“The Senate will have its own bill, I don’t think this is the final product,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said.
Several GOP senators also expressed concerns with the rushed process in the House, which voted on the revised bill less than 24 hours after posting it. Members also voted on the bill before receiving a new Congressional Budget Office estimate of its cost and effects. A previous score from the nonpartisan office estimated that 24 million people would lose insurance coverage under the original AHCA plan over 10 years. Several tweaks were made to win over support from the Freedom Caucus, the group of hardline conservative members who balked and refused to support that version of the bill.
House Speaker Paul Ryan leaves a meeting at the Capitol before the vote to repeal Obamacare. (Photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
The Senate will almost certainly consider the bill at a slower pace, with a vote on likely happening in July at the earliest — right before the body’s monthlong August recess.
“Any bill that’s been posted less than 24 hours, going to be debated three or four hours, and not scored needs to be viewed with suspicion,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Thursday morning.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she wanted to see a CBO score of the House version before starting work on a Senate bill.
“It’s very difficult for me to analyze the bill in the absence of a CBO score,” Collins said.
The Senate couldn’t skip the CBO score step even if it wanted to, since the Republican leadership is attempting to pass the sweeping health care changes through reconciliation — a process that takes just a bare majority instead of 60 votes to advance. Senate rules require a CBO score for any bill passed through reconciliation.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., also seems poised to put up a fight over the reconciliation process, saying Wednesday on the Senate floor that portions of the bill “very possibly” violate the Byrd Rule, which prohibits bills that would significantly increase the federal deficit beyond a 10-year term from passing through reconciliation. Schumer argued that portions of the House bill dealing with preexisting conditions would increase the deficit.
Meanwhile, spokespeople for two Republican senators who had earlier expressed concerns that the AHCA cuts coverage for Medicaid recipients in their states say they still remained opposed. Kevin Smith, spokesman for Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, said the senator “has concerns that this bill does not do enough to protect Ohio’s Medicaid expansion population, especially those who are receiving treatment for heroin and prescription drug abuse.” Ashley Berrang, spokeswoman for Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.V., said the AHCA “still does not address the concerns Sen. Capito has voiced throughout this debate.” Berrang said Capito would work to improve the bill in the Senate.
Medicaid remains a huge stumbling block for the bill going forward. The CBO estimated that the previous version of the AHCA would cut Medicaid by $880 billion over 10 years. Republican senators in states that have expanded Medicaid under Obamacare could face blowback from their constituents if they back these cuts. But keeping Medicaid expansion would likely alienate more conservative Republicans who say the government can’t afford the increased Medicaid and should repeal Obamacare altogether. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, opposed the previous version of the AHCA and called for a “clean repeal” of Obamacare in March with a replacement to come at a later date. Paul and other Senate conservatives like Ted Cruz, R-Texas, remain wildcards going forward.
On Thursday, Paul told reporters he had “fundamental problems” with the AHCA because it directs taxpayer money to insurance companies. But the senator said he remained open to voting yes if the bill can be changed to be more conservative. “If we can bring the bill in our direction I’m still open-minded,” Paul said.
The "Keeping Up With the Kardashians" stars prove skin is always in and big sister Kim Kardashian West keeps it surprisingly covered up in a white design.
Talk about solid assets.
Mouths dropped as Kendall Jennerascended the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Costume Institute stairs. The model arrived to the 2017 Met Gala in a black, slinky La Perla Haute Couture dress, designed by the brand's creative designer Julia Haart. And calling the one-of-kind gown simply sexy may be the understatement of the century.
The dress isn't made of fabric at all, but rather just thread and crystals—85,000 to be exact. Because less is definitely more in this case, you can see plenty of the supermodel's skin. The large, asymmetrical cutout gives Kendall's cleavage plenty of room to breathe, while the high slit shows off the beauty's legs for days.
That's not to say the Keeping Up With the Kardashians star was fully exposed—the body of the dress, which looks like a lace thong and breast pasties to an untrained eye, is actually one full piece that's painted on, so nothing moved.
Kendall paired her chain-mail-esque dress with a pair of see-through Christian Louboutin heels, fire-engine-red lips and large, charcoal-colored earrings.
A federal judge on Tuesday blocked any attempt by the Trump administration to withhold funding from "sanctuary cities" that do not cooperate with U.S. immigration authorities, saying the president has no authority to attach new conditions to federal spending.
U.S. District Judge William Orrick issued the preliminary injunction in two lawsuits — one brought by the city of San Francisco, the other by Santa Clara County — against an executive order targeting communities that protect immigrants from deportation.
The injunction will stay in place while the lawsuits work their way through court.
The judge said that President Donald Trump cannot set new conditions for the federal grants at stake. And even if he could, the conditions would have to be clearly related to the funds at issue and not coercive, Orrick said.
"Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the president disapproves," the judge said.
A Justice Department attorney, Chad Readler, had defended the president's executive order as an attempt to use his "bully pulpit' to "encourage communities and states to comply with the law."
The Trump administration had further argued the lawsuits were premature because the government hasn't cut off any money yet or declared any communities to be sanctuary cities.
Meanwhile, mayors from several U.S. cities threatened with the loss of federal grants emerged from a meeting Tuesday with Attorney General Jeff Sessions saying they remain confused about how to prove their police are in compliance with immigration policies — a necessary step for them to receive grant money.
During a recent court hearing, the Trump administration and the two California governments disagreed over the order's scope.
San Francisco and Santa Clara County argued that the order threatened billions of dollars in federal funding for each of them, making it difficult to plan their budgets.
But Readler, acting assistant attorney general, said the threatened cutoff applies to three Justice Department and Homeland Security grants and would affect less than $1 million for Santa Clara County and possibly no money for San Francisco.
In his ruling, Orrick sided with San Francisco and Santa Clara, saying the order "by its plain language, attempts to reach all federal grants, not merely the three mentioned at the hearing."
"And if there was doubt about the scope of the order, the president and attorney general have erased it with their public comments," the judge said.
The Trump administration says that sanctuary cities allow dangerous criminals back on the street and that the order is needed to keep the country safe. San Francisco and other sanctuary cities say turning local police into immigration officers erodes trust that is needed to get people to report crime.
The order also has led to lawsuits by Seattle; two Massachusetts cities, Lawrence and Chelsea; and a third San Francisco Bay Area government, the city of Richmond. The San Francisco and Santa Clara County lawsuits were the first to get a hearing before a judge.
San Francisco and the county argued that the president did not have the authority to set conditions on the allocation of federal funds and could not compel local officials to enforce federal immigration law.
The sanctuary city order was among a flurry of immigration measures Trump has signed since taking office in January, including a ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries and a directive calling for a wall on the Mexican border.
A federal appeals court blocked the travel ban. The administration then revised it, but the new version also is stalled in court.
Kitty Hawk is the “flying car” company that’s financially backed by Google founder Larry Page, and today it has published the first video of its prototype aircraft. The company describes the Kitty Hawk Flyer as an “all-electric aircraft” that is designed to operate over water and doesn’t require a pilot’s license to fly. Kitty Hawk promises people will be able to learn to fly the Flyer “in minutes.” A consumer version will be available by the end of this year, the company says.
The video is part commercial and part test footage, starting with a lakeside conversation between friends about using the Flyer to meet up before switching to what The New York Times says are shots of an aerospace engineer operating the craft in Northern California.
Kitty Hawk hasn’t said exactly what the Flyer is for, nor has it set a price for the retail version. But the company is enticing eager pilots with a $100 three-year membership that offers priority placement on a waiting list, company-branded gear, and exclusive access to a flight simulator and company events. Members will also get a $2,000 discount off the eventual retail price.
The Flyer is considered to be an Ultralight aircraft per FAA regulations, which is why there’s no pilot’s license required. Kitty Hawk says that there are no plans to ship the vehicle outside the US.
