Supreme Court to Issue Expedited Ruling on 2020 Census Citizenship Question

The Supreme Court will soon review and rule on the Trump administration’s plan to include a question pertaining to citizenship on the 2020 census.

The high court recently announced plans to conduct an expedited analysis, argument, and review of the case before producing a timely ruling—likely in an effort to prevent issues with the census itself, which is typically conducted each decade. The upcoming census is expected to be offered both through the mail and the internet in 2020.

On 15 January, U.S. District Judge Jesse Ferman, who operates out of Manhattan, issued a ruling that prohibited the inclusion of the question on the 2020 census. The judge stated that the question would disproportionately affect minorities as well as the Democratic Party, as the latter relies heavily on the former’s support at the polls.

It is also argued by opponents that the question will hinder the Democrats’ House of Representatives distribution and federal funding allocation, both of which are determined based upon the results of the census. Besides impacting the census, the Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling will impact the 18 U.S. states, multiple cities, and several private organizations that contested the potential question in court.

Although the Supreme Court doesn’t usually review decisions made by lower courts before at least one appeals court considers and rules upon the matter, the justices made clear that exceptions can and will be made in instances of public pertinence—such as, apparently, the make-up of the 2020 census.

The Supreme Court’s oral arguments are set to take place in April, and a decision on the question is expected to be issued sometime in mid-June. Present nonpartisan opinions of the matter—of which way the Court will rule—appear to be divided. Some individuals believe that the federal government does in fact possess the authority to question the citizenship status of census participants, while others yet believe that the move is an overstep of executive authority.

The matter will once again be settled soon, and it’s expected that the legal implications of the decision will factor into future efforts on the part of the government to make inquiries relating to personal matters—including in terms of preexisting census questions.

Biden May Take A Swing At Trump In 2020 But The Liberals Think Joe Should Call It Quits

There is an underlying disease in both of our political parties. Democrats don’t like other Democrats who like to jive with the beat of the people. And Republicans don’t like other Republicans who think building a wall is probably the dumbest political strategy in history.

Some of the old school Democrats and Republicans did their best to throw their desires in front of the desires of the voters. The people were a distraction, and those sneaky old lawmakers conquered that challenge by establishing the Electoral College. There’s been a lot of talk about throwing that vote-cheating scheme out with the Trump gang.

The gang of elected misfits devised an aggressive “all for them scheme” through the years. Lawmakers liked to feather their own nest on the down-low. The Trump gang has a bad case of personal feather grooming. But Congress thinks they have the cure.

Voters don’t want the old capitalistic captains of Congress to plan and implement the techno advancements of a new generation. The old faithful government officials like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton are dinosaurs in the political age of Trump, according to a couple of Trump tweets. This new group of super-civil workers will introduce an age where’s there’s more than a two-party system. They say Washington is a four-party system right now. There are liberal Democrats who lean toward a democratic socialist approach to the future, and they are middle of the road Democrats who want to shake things up a little, but they don’t have the genes to make that happen.

The Republicans have two groups The first group would love to spend two more years listening to Trump embarrass himself. And there’s another Republican Party that wants to send Trump to the nearest psychiatric ward.

There’s constant fighting within each party. They can’t agree so they come up with lists of frivolous ideas, and they throw them into a bill so all four parties can claim a victory of some kind.

According to Trump-loving Republicans, Trump will win in 2020. The Democrats have to pick a side, according to a recent NBC News article. Do they choose a Democrat who wants to implement a socialistic approach? Or, do they choose a Democrat who maintains the status quo and calls it change?

Amazon vs Enquirer: Jeff Bezos Claims National Enquirer Guilty of “Extortion And Blackmail”

Jeff Bezos, head of Amazon and the worlds’ wealthiest man has put forward a theory combining Saudi Arabia, Donald Trump, the National Enquirer, and his affair with one Lauren Sanchez. Expounding his observations in a Medium.com post, he made his charges against the National Enquirer public.

While somewhat crude, he went on to claim that David J. Pecker demanded that he publically state American Media, the company behind National Enquirer, had no political motivation in their coverage on his affair. The rub was that if he didn’t, David J. Pecker would allegedly publish various graphic pictures of Jeff Bezos.

The day after Jeff Bezos and his wife of twenty-five years announced their divorce, the National Enquirer article on his affair went public. The tabloid article boasted of doggedly investigating Bezos and Lauren Sanchez, following them to five-star hotels and documenting their activities. Additionally, text messages of a sexual nature were published therein.

Given the zeal with which National Enquirer covered Bezos, questions were raised about their motivations. Mr. Pecker and President Trump have been known to be friends, and the National Enquirer was implicated in hush money dealt during the 2016 election.

In response, Bezos has ordered friends and associates to launch an investigation of Mr. Pecker. While Jeff Bezos generally evades media attention, he’s given his staff the promise of supplying ‘whatever budget they need’ in their investigation as to how the Enquirer obtained his texts to Ms. Sanchez.

While Mr. Pecker and American Media allegedly threatened to release graphic pictures in retaliation, Bezos claims to have met the threat head-on instead. Additionally, he used his long blog post on medium to connect various dots in the political drama of recent years. The inquiry into the Stormy Daniels affair resulted in a guilty plea from Michael D. Cohen, who implicated American Media in the backchannel deals to protect Donald Trump.

It was found by Federal prosecutors that American Media effectively made an illegal, corporate contribution to the Trump campaign by its actions. While the authorities declined to press charges, American Media was to admit guilt and that it had intended to influence the election. Additionally, American Media would be required to commit ‘no crimes whatsoever’ for three years. If found guilty of blackmail in the Bezos case, the non-prosecution agreement would have been violated on their part. If Jeff Bezos’ allegations prove true, the tabloid giant could find itself facing multiple legal battles.

State of the Union Address

The State of the Union is an annual speech given by the President of the United States. During the government shutdown, political leaders decided to delay the speech. The State of the Union is a controversial event for opposing political leaders. In this year’s address, President Trump talked about his success from the previous two years.

Immigration

Immigration is one of the most controversial topics in the United States. There are millions of people on both sides of the argument who are passionate about this issue. President Trump promised his supporters that he would build a wall along the border with Mexico. However, he has not been able to accomplish his goal so far in his term. Many political leaders do not think a wall is a viable solution. Instead, these people want to spend the money on other priorities. During his speech last night, President Trump called for a new dialogue concerning the border wall.

Economic Growth

President Trump repeatedly talked about positive economic growth in the United States. He discussed how the unemployment rate is at the lowest point in over five decades. He also credited the recent tax cuts for boosting economic growth.

Although economic growth is strong, some people feel like only wealthy individuals are benefiting from the growth. Many opposing political leaders have called for higher tax rates on business owners.

Unity

President Trump called for unity from both political parties during his speech. Over the past few months, many individuals have become dismayed about the lack of cooperation between political parties. Although the vast majority of people are skeptical about the political parties working together, President Trump sounded confident about working with opposing political leaders.

Defense

Another issue that President Trump discussed was national defense. He is a staunch proponent of a robust military. After taking office, he drastically increased the money spent on defense. He also pulled troops of Syria recently. He feels like the United States should not be responsible for problems around the world.

Yahoo Data Breach Settlement Rejected

In the largest data breach in U.S. History, with millions of people’s accounts compromised, Yahoo’s proposed settlement has been rejected by a District Judge. Yahoo has proposed to pay $50 million dollars, plus two years of free credit monitoring for the affected 200 million users, reported by Reuters on Tuesday “source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-verizon-yahoo/u-s-judge-rejects-yahoo-data-breach-settlement-idUSKCN1PN20F “.

U.S. District Judge, Lucy Koh has cited multiple issues with the proposed settlement. The plaintiffs’ attorneys have requested a maximum of $35 million dollars in fees, which Judge Koh has determined is far too high. Koh asserted that the legal theories in this case were ‘not particularly novel’, which do not warrant fees at this level.

Secondly, Judge Koh has taken issue with Yahoo’s reluctance to report multiple breaches between 2013 and 2016 in a timely manner. Judge Koh presided over the Anthem Inc. settlement last year, $115 million paid to 79 million victims, which she compared to the actions of Yahoo in this case. Anthem responded quickly with credit monitoring for the victims of their data breach along with timely disclosure of the incident. Furthermore, in the Anthem case, the company committed itself to upgrading its internal security. Yahoo has demonstrated a lack of transparency with multiple incidents and is responding to the need for credit monitoring for its users too late.

Technically, Judge Koh took issue with the unclear terms of the settlement. The proposed settlement did not outline the costs of credit monitoring, or the actual size of the fund to be paid to the victims. There is also a discrepancy between large proposed class and the number of ‘active’ users privately relayed to the Judge.

This data breach has been attributed to two Russian intelligence officers and two hackers, who U.S. prosecutors charged in 2017. The data breaches covered in this proposed settlement have negatively impacted the price of Yahoo when Verizon acquired the internet business portion of the company in July 2016. The final price from the sell was $4.48 billion, dropping from the initial price of $4.83 billion, after the disclosure of the extent of the breaches.

Yahoo remains confident that an adequate settlement can be decided upon in the near future.

 

Fans Take NFL to Court After Saints Loss

Many fans looked on in disbelief as the referees missed a major call that may have changed the outcome of the New Orleans Saints vs. Los Angeles Ram game. During the game played on January 20, 2019, the Saints had the ball on the 13-yard line. They had a third-and-10. A first down would have left them the option of going for a touchdown or kicking a field goal.

New Orleans’ quarterback Brees threw the ball to Tommylee Lewis. Seconds before the ball arrived Ram’s player Nickell Robey-Coleman knocked Tommylee Lewis down. Almost everyone in the stadium could not believe that the officials were not quick to throw a flag. According to disgusted fans, referees should have called pass interference or helmet-to-helmet contact.

The Rams took advantage of the lack of a call to regain control of the ball and score sending the game into overtime. The Rams went on to win the game 26 to 23 in overtime.

Some Saints’ fans, however, are not quick to accept that their team lost the game. Instead, they have taken the National Football League to court claiming that the league is not abiding by their own rules.

One of the suits was filed by attorney Frank D’Amico Jr. with the Civil District Court of Orleans Parish. The lawyer asked the court to rule that Commissioner Roger Goodell follow NFL Rule 17 Section 2 Article 1 that states “The commissioner has the sole authority to investigate and take appropriate disciplinary and/or corrective measures if any club actions, non-participant interference, or calamity occurs in an NFL game which the commissioner deems so extraordinary unfair or outside the accepted tactics encountered in professional football that such action has a major effect on the result of the game.”

The lawyer says that the game should be replayed starting at the point that fans claim that the referee missed the call. At least two other layers have sent letters to the NFL commissioner asking him to invoke NFL Rule 17 Section 2 Article 1.

Another lawsuit has also been filed by Darrell Guillory against the individual referees and the league. In it, Darrell Guillory says that the league broke promises to ticket holders that an ethical game would be played. He claims that officials favored the team that was likely to give the league the biggest payout at the Super Bowl.

Read More: https://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/sports/saints/article_022b16fc-2316-11e9-8871-bb5e22d7dfc6.html

Rudy Giuliani Bounces Back Into The Political Spotlight With Legal Foolery On His Mind

Some people say Rudy Giuliani seems to be morphing into his role as Trump’s legal penguin with a legal flare that reminds them of his days as a New York Prosecutor. Rudy had a way of confusing the Mafia Dons he sent to the slammer. He developed a keen sense of legal foolery that mimicked the confusing statements the Dons gave him when he prosecuted them. The old saying “it takes a crook to catch a crook” seemed to be the legal look Rudy put in play in those days.

There are press reports that say trying to defend Donald Trump is a challenge only a former New Yorker prosecutor like Giuliani could do. He knows Don Sr. from the old New York days. Rudy Giuliani knew what Trump had up his sleeve back then, but he befriended Trump anyway. Trump must have seen a flash of his mentor Roy Cohn in Rudy Giuliani. Just like Cohn, compliments Trump’s “Teflon Don” image perfectly.

Mr. Trump knew once he unleased Giuliani on the press, the Fake News title would stick on the news publications that want to report honest news. It was almost impossible to get honest news out of Roy Cohn and John Gotti when Robert Mueller put the legal hammer down on Gotti’s head. Rudy learned from the best mobsters in New York.

Sometimes Rudy takes his legal foolery too far when he talks to the press. He said Trump and his lawyer Michael Cohen worked on the Moscow Trump Tower project throughout the campaign on a Sunday news show.

Obviously, Mr. Trump thought Rudy said too much. So on Monday Rudy put on his best Roy Cohn-type impersonation and said his answer to the Moscow Tower question was a hypothetical answer on Sunday. In other words, he said he didn’t talk to Trump about the Trump Tower debacle. It could be Trump didn’t want to talk to his criminal lawyer about a possible criminal act, but even the Republicans know that’s a freshly squeeze sack of excrement. But some of Trump’s allies say Trump knew Rudy would turn the situation around some much that reporters would feel like they just got off a Coney Island roller coaster.

Rudy Giuliani knows how to handle criminal cases. Rudy likes to confuse, bewilder, and bother the press. He knows those three tools give him the upper hand in TV interviews. Rudy’s job is to protect Trump from criminal prosecution. And the Republicans say Rudy’s the man for the job.

But Mr. Giuliani knows defending Trump will be his epitaph when all the Russian ghosts come out of the Trump Organization closets. When they do Rudy will go down in history as the greatest example of presidential legal foolery.

Judiciary Pushes Back Date Funds Will Run Out For Third And Final Time

The federal judiciary recently pushed back the date money used to operate the federal court system is set to run out. This is the third time the measure has become necessary.

Money to operate the court system was first estimated to run out on January 18. The federal judiciary was able to find money to fund the courts an additional week at that time and it was pushed back to January 25. The new date for the funds to dry up is January 31, reports ABA Journal.

Court fees and other monetary sources have so far been able to keep the court system afloat. Expenses have been cut for things like new hires, expenses for travel, and contracts. However, private lawyers appointed by the court are presently working without pay.

The Department of Justice has requested civil cases that involve the government is postponed until a later date.

If the 31st approaches without a resolution to the shutdown, non-essential court personnel will more than likely remain at home. The Antideficiency Act mandates that workers necessary to maintain judicial powers under Article three remain on the job. This provision will guarantee the salaries of Supreme Court justices as well as judges working in district and appeals courts.

The situation is causing courts to wrestle with a number of potential complications that can possibly occur when funding is exhausted. The situation can have dramatic effects on court reporters, interpreters, and clerks needed for efficient court proceedings. The situation will also negatively affect jurors who are required to receive payment for their service.

United States District Judge Ruben Castillo is especially troubled by the potential complications for jurors. He says that jurors who are not paid for their service may feel pressure to come to judgment quicker in a case.

Courts around the country are toying with their own unique ideas to deal with the problems of an extended shutdown. The Court of Appeals in San Francisco is proposing to close the court and furlough workers one day a week. A Brooklyn court is considering furloughs for certain employees and restricting the use of the courthouse for groups and classes that meet there.

Bob Carlson, president of the American Bar Association, expressed deep concern regarding the current state affairs for federal courts. Carlson made requests to both Congress and the White House a week ago to provide funding for agencies that play no direct role in their fight over the border wall.

Senate Leader Mitch McConnell May Finally Jumps Into The Border Wall Debacle

Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell is no fool. He’s up for reelection in 2020, and he wants to win. Mitch wants to keep his seat in the Senate even though Mr. McConnell has overstayed his welcome in that governing body, according to the Democrats. McConnell is one of those old school politicians who knows how the system in Washington works. But Mitch knows the Washington system isn’t what it used to be now that Donald Trump is president. Trump’s not a typical president and he’s not a typical political negotiator.

Mr. Trump negotiates with threats and bullying tactics. Trump is not a statesman, according to the Democrats. He’s a dictator that will do anything to get what he wants. The government shut down is a good example of Trump’s negotiating skills. He is an emotional hot head that uses schoolboy bullying tactics to intimidate and conquer his opponents, according to several news articles. But Trump’s up against another seasoned group of negotiators who want to cut him down to size. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer know how to keep Trump upset and angry while he tries to solve a government mess of his own making.

Donald Trump’s latest attempt to make the Democrats do what he wants was a waste of time. Before Trump could act pompous on TV over the weekend, the Democrats had an answer for his feeble attempt to get his $5.7 billion border wall built. Before Trump had a chance to tell the public his ill-fated scheme, the Democrats shot his Dreamer plan down. It wasn’t a plan. It was Trump offering a crumb to solve the situation. The Democrats want the 700,000 Dreamers to live in the United States without the fear of being deported, and Trump’s plan didn’t guarantee that.

Now that Trump has no place to go, Mitch McConnell will finally rear his Kentucky head and try to solve this out-of-control situation. McConnell will wrap Trump’s border wall plan into another Republican-inspired package. His package will include billions in disaster relief and it will call for the immediate opening of the government. But Trump’s $5 billion border wall is still part of McConnell’s plan.

Vice President Mike Pence said Trump’s plan may change on the Senate floor, and McConnell is the man who will do that. But if the border wall is in that plan, the Democrats will reject it, according to Speaker Pelosi. She wants the Republicans to open the government and then the Democrats will negotiate with McConnell and the Republicans.

Spotlight on Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is also commonly known by the moniker RBG, has spent her life as an underdog. From an early age, the diminutive, Brooklyn-born future jurist was shaped by the example and influence of her hard-working mother, a highly intelligent woman who sacrificed her own education to help put her brother through college. This altruistic act left an indelible impression on RBG, and it also instilled in her the importance of self-reliance as well as the need to pursue an education.

These early influences not only helped to propel Ginsburg forward in life, but they also facilitated her maturation into a trailblazer. In a time when few women were offered the opportunity to pursue higher education, Ginsburg excelled in her studies and matriculated from Cornell University in 1954, where she was first in her class.

Ginsburg’s trailblazing nature has not only defined her professional pursuits, but it has also extended into her personal life, as well. The same year she graduated from Cornell, RBG married Martin Ginsburg, her life partner and equal. The two formed an extremely successful union on every level. It was a relationship built on love, mutual respect, and support of one another’s goals as well as ambitions.

While RBG worked a civil service job and attended to their young family, Martin was able to build a successful career as a tax attorney. In later years, Martin assumed the role of domestic gatekeeper and oversaw many of the family responsibilities while RBG climbed the ranks. The couple has been well-regarded for their ability to balance each other and foster one another’s pursuits–both personally and professionally. Their relationship is admired for its equality and progressive nature, especially given the societal climate in which it began.

RBG’s academic excellence continued in her law studies at Harvard, where she became the first female member of the prestigious Harvard Law Review. This was followed by a transfer to Columbia Law School, following her husband’s battle with testicular cancer and subsequent graduation from law school. While at Columbia, she was also appointed to their law review and, once again, graduated first in her class from Columbia Law School in 1959.

Despite Ginsburg’s lifelong academic excellence and varied accomplishments, she continued to encounter gender discrimination while seeking employment following her graduation from law school. These experiences helped to foster the future Supreme Court justice’s fight for gender equality, women’s rights, and civil rights, just to name a few. These pursuits are passionate ideologies that Ginsburg has fought to uphold and defend while on the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS), a post which she was appointed to in 1993 by President Bill Clinton.

More recently, Ginsburg has been in the news due to the release of a biopic based on her life story, On the Basis of Sex, starring Felicity Jones (The Theory of Everything) as RBG. She has also made headlines for her recent surgery to remove cancerous growths from her left lung. Ginsburg is currently recovering and has been deemed cancer-free by her doctors.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Misses Supreme Court Oral Arguments

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg missed oral arguments on Monday. It was Justice Ginsburg’s first absence since she began serving on the highest court in 1993. Ginsburg was unable to hear arguments before the court because she is still recovering from lung cancer surgery, which she underwent last month. Before hearing the opening case of the day, Chief Justice John Roberts addressed Ginsburg’s absence by simply saying she was “unable to be present.” Kathy Arberg, a spokesperson for the Supreme Court, said that Justice Ginsburg would be working from home while she recuperates, examining argument transcripts and reviewing case briefs. Despite her absence, Justice Ginsburg met with the other eight justices of the Supreme Court on January 4 to vote on what cases they would hear in their current session.

At 85 years old, Justice Ruth Ginsburg is the oldest member of the Supreme Court. Ginsburg has made news in recent months owing to various health scares. Earlier in November, Justice Ginsburg fractured three ribs in a fall. During treatment for her broken ribs, doctors found two cancerous nodules on her lungs. The nodules were removed in a surgery on December 21 and Ginsburg was released from the hospital on December 25. A spokesperson for Ginsburg said there was no evidence of any remaining nodules or cancer following the procedure. Monday’s oral arguments were the first Supreme Court hearing since Ginsburg’s surgery. It remains to be seen if Ginsburg will need to miss any more sessions. Ginsburg’s most recent cancer scare is her third battle with the disease. Prior to her most recent diagnosis, Ginsburg battled colon cancer in 1999 and pancreatic cancer in 2009. Justice Ginsburg also had to have a stent implanted in her right coronary artery in 2014 to improve blood flow. During all of these incidents, Ginsburg never had to miss an oral argument.

Ginsburg was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Bill Clinton and is considered the head liberal on the court. The court currently has a 5-4 conservative majority and Democrats worry that the court could shift further to the right in the event of Ginsburg’s retirement. Those close to Ginsburg say she will probably stay on the Supreme Court until 2020. Liberal voters view Justice Ginsburg as a cultural icon, sometimes referring to her as “Notorious RBG.” Ginsburg was the subject of a recent CNN documentary as well as a Hollywood film entitled On the Basis of Sex.

Georgia’s Electronic Voting Network Said To Be Vulnerable To Outside Interference, Challenged In Courts Of Law

Last year, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams was barely edged out by longtime Republican politician Brian Kemp, who worked for the state of Georgia as its secretary of state and its chief elections official.

Even though Abrams brought home the W, she and her political friends publicly claimed that Kemp’s party suppressed people belonging to minorities from voting, among other allegations.

Kemp and company have consistently shot down even the most remote possibility of that cluster of allegations being true.

Such controversy in Georgia’s gubernatorial race has prompted computer security experts, advocates of democratic governments that operate with integrity, and even a statewide commission of relevant experts to peer into the potential flaws that Georgia’s old, rusty election system possesses.

Criticisms of Georgia’s statewide voting infrastructure have been floating around since 2002

Georgia has done away with paper ballots for nearly 20 years. While electronic voting systems sound far more secure than their papyrus-based counterparts, they’re actually quite vulnerable to being tainted by mission-minded cybercriminals.

Currently, no vote checks, confirmations, or audits can be conducted on votes cast throughout the state of Georgia. Paper-ballot voting systems have the benefit of being able to be audited, not to mention being able to recount votes in case elections are too close or counted incorrectly.

Lawsuits have been filed against the state of Georgia regarding its insecure electronic voting system

Supported by Ms. Abrams, the nonprofit organization Fair Fight Action submitted a lawsuit contesting the outcome of the 2018 gubernatorial race in the state of Georgia. Filed shortly after the election ended in mid-November, the case is still going through the motions that all cases filed in courts of law go through.

Back in September, United States District Court Judge Amy Totenberg entered an opinion on the status of Georgia’s voting system, sharing that “a mounting tide of evidence” points to its statewide polling network being highly susceptible to outside attacks and other major issues that undermine that democratic process. Totenberg chose not to force Georgia to return to using paper ballots in the 2018 midterm elections because they were just a few months away at the time, though she is pushing for Georgia to revamp its system before the next election cycle.

The members of Secure, Accessible, and Fair Elections, a committee dedicated to overhauling the existing outdated system that was created by Kemp, believe the state can choose a reliable alternative before 2020 rolls around.

Did Trump Campaign In Front Of The Troops During His Three-Hour Visit To Iraq?

President Trump planned to spend the holidays in Mar-a-Lago before Fox News and two conservative talk show hosts gave him a tongue whipping for almost agreeing to sign a funding bill. The tongue-lashing force Trump to put on a show on national television that sent hundreds of thousands of government workers home without paychecks. After tweeting like a schoolboy who didn’t get his way on the playground, Trump decided to get out of town. Instead of going to Florida he went to Iraq.

Traveling to a war zone isn’t Trump’s style even though he says he’s a military man at heart. Past presidents made it a point to visit the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, so in order to show his base he appreciated the men and women in uniform, he and Melania went to Iraq Christmas night to spread a little Trumpism around.

Some Trump critics say Mr. Trump went to Iraq to campaign, and to show military leaders he’s the boss now that former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is home writing his memories. Trump stood in front of the troops, and he acted like the perpetual candidate he is. He told the troops how great he is, and how he gave them a pay raise even though that didn’t happen. He gave them his Make America Great Again speech while trying to act presidential. But that act needs a lot of work, according to the Washington Post.

Some news reports say Trump’s speech in Iraq broke military rules. American troops can’t get caught in the political trap Mr. Trump tried to set. According to the Pentagon, military personnel can’t show political favorites. Trump made it look like the military was his personal fan base, and that undermines the trust Americans have in the military, according to Trump critics.

Trump’s job in Iraq was to spread goodwill not to stage a political rally, according to former general counsel for the Air Force and Army, Charles Blanchard. American saw their military clapping when Trump threw out one of his distorted political messages. And they saw soldiers asking Trump to sign their red hats like true Trump voters.

Politicizing the troops by wearing a bomber jacket and spewing his version of the world according to Trump is another act from a president who does things his way. He didn’t meet with Iraqi officials, and that was a major blunder, according to his advisors. But Trump doesn’t care about blunders or Iraq. He cares about being reelected, and he’s willing to do whatever it takes to make that happen.

Respected DOJ Attorney Douglas Letter Is The New House General Counsel

There’s a legal eagle circling around the “President Trump Washington Reality Show.” His name is Douglas Letter. Letter is a respected and long-term Department of Justice attorney. He’s the new House General Counsel. Letter’s impressive DOJ record includes his service under Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama as well as Donald Trump. Letter retired from the DOJ in 2018, but he’s eager to assist Congress members and their staff as they start to unravel the political, as well as the financial world, of Donald Trump.

The new Congress is on a mission to get Trump’s tax returns. Massachusetts Congressman Richard Neal will be able to get those returns and review them according to an NPR report. Neal is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. California Congressman, Adam Schiff, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and a well-respected prosecutor, hired experts in forensic accounting and money laundering so the committee can examine and investigate Trump’s personal finances.

The new House Majority Leader Maryland Democrat Steny Hoyer told the press his party plans to hold hearings about ICE’s treatment of migrants. Plus, he plans to watch Mueller’s back and make sure his investigation doesn’t get derailed or shove under a political rug by the Republicans. Doug Letter will be part of that process.

Mr. Letter told the press he’s eager to use his legal expertise to address the challenges and the opportunities that come with the House Legal Counsel’s job. Letter knows how the Department of Justice operates behind the scenes. He understands that government department as well as anyone. He was in the thick of DOJ things for more than 40 years.

Several news reports say the new Congress won’t do any meaningful work in 2019. Those reports say Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer just want to get rid of Trump any way they can. The Democrats think Trump poses a dangerous threat to American Democracy, and they plan to drill down on Trump’s past and present business and financial interest to get a real picture of Trump’s world. Trump is the first president in decades who didn’t release his tax returns. And he hasn’t stopped managing the Trump Organization, according to several news stories.

Mr. Trump likes to fight in court. But what the Democrats have in mind for the president is unlike any legal battle in the past. Some reports say Trump will break under the legal pressure from Mueller’s investigation and what Congress has in store for him. But Trump’s voter base thinks he will be victorious when all the legal smoke clears.

Justice Ginsburg Works And Wards Off Critics During Recovery From Illness

United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg underwent surgery to remove cancerous growths from her lungs on Friday. The 85-year-old justice is expected to remain in the hospital for a few more days. Rest is the only further treatment planned at this time for Justice Ginsburg and doctors say no other illness is present in her body.

The cancerous nodules in Ginsburg’s left lung were found during tests at George Washington University. Ginsburg took the tests after breaking three ribs. The injuries were sustained as a result of a fall Ginsburg suffered in November.

The procedure performed on Ginsburg, a pulmonary lobectomy, took place in New York at the Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

The good health prognosis for Justice Ginsberg has not stopped many analysts and media personalities from suggesting her time on the bench is nearing its end. Most pundits believe she will be replaced with a conservative judge.

One of the most callous responses regarding the illness of Justice Ginsberg came from former Fox News personality Bill O’Reilly. O’Reilly first pointed out the obvious and relayed the message that Ginsberg was suffering from a serious illness. His next point was the illness of Ginsberg was bad news for liberals.

The conservatives judges on the Supreme Court already own a 5-4 advantage over liberals. The four liberal judges on the court operate under the leadership of Justice Ginsburg.

Meghan McCain is one person that takes particular exception to the words of O’Reilly. McCain was critical of the timing of O’Reilly’s remarks and chastised him for using her sickness as a time to speculate about the political future of Ms. Ginsburg. McCain also enourgaed everyone to pray for Justice Ginsburg to have a speedy recovery from her illness.

Ginsburg has not stopped working during her illness. She recently gave the deciding vote from her hospital bed that effectively blocked efforts by President Donald Trump to deny asylum for immigrants.