Category Archives: United Airline News

Adam Schiff and Devin Nunes: From ‘bromance’ to bitter adversaries

Leave a reply

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) right, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) at a news conference in Washington on March 2, 2017. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/AP)

There was a time not too long ago when the Republican chairman and the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee were pals. Even as they set to work last year on the panel’s probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, they enjoyed a “collegial working relationship” and “something of a bromance,” as the San Jose Mercury News put it.

Since then, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) have transformed into bitter rivals, each accusing the other of letting partisan loyalties cloud his judgment on the most consequential political scandal in a generation.

Months of tension reached new heights late Wednesday night, when Schiff blasted Nunes for changing language in a secret memo alleging law enforcement abuses in the Russia investigation before sending it to the White House for approval of its release to the public.

Colleagues criticize each other on Capitol Hill all the time. But rarely does a member blow the whistle on another lawmaker in such dramatic fashion in full public view. It underscored the high stakes of the struggle over the Russia investigation now consuming Congress, the White House — and two once-cooperative colleagues.

In a letter to Nunes, Schiff said the controversial memo had been “secretly altered” without Democrats’ consent and called on Nunes to withdraw it, as The Washington Post reported. A spokesman for the committee’s Republican majority called the memo’s release “procedurally sound” and said the edits were “minor.” To “suggest otherwise is a bizarre distraction from the abuses detailed in the memo,” the spokesman said.

It was the latest and one of the most heated clashes between Schiff and Nunes in the months since Congress and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III opened their probes into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with the Kremlin to influence the 2016 election.

The two lawmakers — one a Harvard-educated lawyer, the other a third-generation cattle farmer — have come to personify opposing sides in the matter, representing two vastly different strains in American politics. Schiff, playing the part of both investigator and spokesman, has forcefully defended the probe, saying American democracy itself is at stake. Nunes, an ardent defender of the White House, has set out to protect a duly elected president and his administration from what he views as a politically motivated witch hunt.

Everything in Schiff’s résumé suggests he is well-equipped for this moment, although both he and Nunes have developed reputations as quiet operators in each of their 15-plus years in Congress.

The son of a Democratic father and a Republican mother, Schiff, 57, was born outside Boston but spent most of his youth in California. He attended high school in one of California’s wealthiest cities, Danville, studied political science at Stanford University and got his law degree from Harvard.

Schiff seemed destined for public office early on. “I remember, like every kid growing up in Boston, being awed by John Kennedy,” he told the Glendale News-Press in 2000.

After law school, he took a job with the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles. The case that put him on the map was his successful prosecution of Richard W. Miller, said to be the first FBI agent ever to be indicted on a charge of espionage. With Schiff arguing the case, Miller was convicted in 1990 of trading classified documents to the Soviet Union for gold and cash.

Soon after, Schiff turned his sights toward the state legislature. In 1996, after two failed bids for the state assembly, he was elected to the California State Senate, where he chaired the chamber’s judiciary committee. He served a single term, then won an election to the U.S. House of Representatives, unseating a Republican in a district north of Los Angeles in what was then the most expensive House race on record.

In Congress, Schiff was generally known as a mild-mannered centrist who preferred to keep a low profile.

“Schiff is not a bomb-thrower. And he’s not a partisan street brawler,” the Hill wrote of him in 2006. “A fair-faced congressman from southern California, Schiff is a moderate, a compromiser, a man who chose law school over med school because he thought it would give him greater opportunities to serve the public.”

Nearly a dozen years later, little about his demeanor seemed to have changed. A New York Times story from last March opened: “As attack dogs go, Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California, is more labradoodle than Doberman, his partisanship disguised by a thick fur of intense preparation, modulated locution and gentle accusations.”

National security has been a primary focus for Schiff for most of his tenure. More hawkish than his counterparts on the issue, he formed a Democratic study group on national security concerns in his second term, as the Los Angeles Times reported in 2005. It was an unorthodox move for a Democrat to make at the time, Will Marshall, then-head of the moderate Democratic Leadership Forum, told the newspaper.

“For a long time, particularly in the House, it has been a little lonely to be a Democrat who specializes in security,” Marshall said. “Members too often regarded it as the other party’s issue. Adam sincerely believes the Democratic Party has to reassert its leadership on national security.”

Little in Nunes’s backstory — a rise from farm boy to head of a powerful congressional committee — points to why he has become a pivotal ally of President Trump on Capitol Hill. Born and raised as a third generation Portuguese-American in California’s rural Central Valley, Nunes’s aspirations originally didn’t stretch beyond the cattle yard. “All I wanted to be was a dairy farmer,” he told a group of high school students in 2002.

Nunes grew up working a family farm. “I broke so many tractors, they made me work with the cows,” he told the Hill in 2005. He studied agriculture and agricultural business at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, before returning to the family soil.

His first stab at elective office came in 1996 when he successfully ran for an open seat on the board of the College of the Sequoias, where he had studied in an associates program. He was only 23.

In 1998, Nunes lost a primary campaign for California’s 20th congressional District seat. The campaign, however, brought him national attention, in part because of his youth, and in 2001 he was appointed by President George W. Bush as the California Director of Rural Development for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. A year later, he tried again for a House seat, this time winning. He was 29.

“Once I got into politics in 1996 I never thought I couldn’t do it,” Nunes told the Hill. “I don’t worry about what other people think. I do what I think is right. I’m not very shy.”

Politically, Nunes’s beliefs run along the standard tracks of GOP conservatism. “Restoring the Republic,” his 2010 book, was a mix of boilerplate free-market advocacy and big government criticism, with Nunes arguing the biggest threats to America lie in the “the convergence of big government, big business, and the radical left in Washington.” The government, Nunes warned, aims to “take power away from individuals and give it to politicians and bureaucrats — people who have no idea what it’s like to live in the real world or what the problems of everyday people are like.”

Nunes laid out in the book a strenuous opposition to the “environmental lobby,” which he defined as the “well-funded interest groups that pursue an anti-capitalist, anti-economic growth, and anti-democratic agenda that aims to bring about a green utopia.”

On Capitol Hill, Nunes jumped to high-profile positions on the House Ways and Means Committee and the House Intelligence Committee. In 2010, Time magazine named him one of Washington’s “40 Under 40.” But he also stayed below the radar. “You never did hear too much about Devin over the last seven, eight years,” a constituent told Politico in March, adding the congressman “did a really good job.”

Yet Nunes’s reputation among his congressional colleagues, even fellow Republicans, is not unblemished. During the 2013 brawl within the Republican caucus, Nunes blasted GOP colleagues who were pushing for a government shutdown, memorably calling them “lemmings with suicide vests,” according to the New Yorker.

In March, the New York Times’s Frank Bruni reported he had spoken to a Republican insider who described Nunes as an “overeager goofball” who can’t see “the line between ingratiating and stupid.”

Bruni continued: “The insider said that Nunes crossed that line with John Boehner, the former House speaker, who gave him the committee chairmanship but grew weary of Nunes’s indiscriminate pep and constant bumming of his cigarettes.”

The House’s Russia investigation shot both Nunes and Schiff to a new level of national prominence. Despite their different party affiliations, the two men seemed to share a mutual respect. “I have always been impressed by him,” Schiff said of Nunes in 2014, the Fresno Bee reported. “He works in a very bipartisan way.”

The apparent respect remained as the hearings started. In March, when the intelligence committee held a rare public hearing with then-FBI director James B. Comey, Nunes gave Schiff a generous 15 minutes to make an opening statement — time the Democrat used to argue that a full-throttle probe of links between the Trump campaign and Russia was justified.

Schiff says he didn’t seek out the spotlight, but that he was leading the charge because he felt like American democracy is at stake. “This is the political equivalent of [9/11] in magnitude,” he told The Post in an interview at the time.

“I think my role is to try to help the Democratic Party to make this investigation thorough and to make it nonpartisan,” Schiff said. “Sometimes that’s playing the role of diplomat, and other times that’s using the public spotlight to push the investigation forward. … If we issue a report where Democrats find one thing and Republicans find another, both sides retreat to their respective corners and nothing gets revealed.”

The relationship began to fray at an accelerating pace in March. Both congressmen held a joint news conference on March 15 announcing the committee had found no evidence Trump Tower was wiretapped by the Obama administration — a claim made by Trump in a tweet. “We don’t have any evidence that took place,” Nunes said.

But on March 21, Nunes made a strange late-night visit to the White House, where an anonymous source provided what was later characterized as evidence of surveillance on the transition team. The next day, Nunes was back before reporters — this time without Schiff.

“What I’ve read seems to me to be some level of surveillance activity — perhaps legal, but I don’t know that it’s right,” Nunes said. “I don’t know that the American people would be comfortable with what I’ve read.”

Schiff blasted back from his own news conference hours later. “The chairman will either need to decide if he’s leading an investigation into conduct which includes allegations of potential coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians, or he is going to act as a surrogate of the White House,” he told reporters. “Because he cannot do both.”

Facing ethics complaints and claims that he was now compromised, Nunes eventually stepped away from the investigation.

But the conflict between the two congressmen continued to boil — culminating in this week’s battle over the memo.

The four-page document, which the committee voted on party lines to make public, was produced by Nunes’s office and is said to raise questions about whether the FBI abused surveillance laws when it obtained a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to spy on Carter Page, a former adviser to Trump’s campaign. Schiff and other Democrats say the memo contains inaccuracies and is a thinly veiled attempt to distract from the Russia probe.

“This is a grave cost for short-term political gain,” Schiff said Wednesday in a Washington Post commentary.

The aggressive attack by Schiff, which challenged the motives of a committee colleague, was a serious escalation, a breach of congressional comity even by the standards of a bitterly polarized Congress.

Nunes and Schiff, once an example of collaboration amid an otherwise fractured House, are now locked in a high-stakes struggle. The relationship will be hard if not impossible to repair.

More from Morning Mix:

Parroting Trump: Ill. GOP official resigns after calling East St. Louis a certain vulgar name

University of Iowa wants to drop Steve Wynn’s name from institute amid sexual misconduct allegations

‘Cheaters edition’ of Monopoly cheerfully caters to sordid reality

Withdrawal of US envoy candidate and tough talk from Trump worries South Korea

Leave a reply

TOKYO — South Korea’s progressive government was already nervous about President Trump’s intentions when it came to North Korea, fearing that he might press ahead with military action without Seoul’s consent.  

The sudden withdrawal of the candidate for ambassador to Seoul — apparently because he argued against striking North Korea — coupled with the president’s tough language in the State of the Union has now only exacerbated those fears.

Trump described North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear missiles as “reckless” and said there is a campaign of “maximum pressure” to prevent that from happening. The administration has also put forward the idea of a targeted strike to respond to missile launches to give the regime a “bloody nose” that would — hopefully — not escalate into a wider conflict.

“This puts Moon Jae-in between a rock and a hard place,” said Lee Chung-min, professor of international relations at Yonsei University in Seoul, referring to the South Korean president. 

Now, the Moon administration will be trying to talk down a Trump administration that is apparently more serious about giving North Korea a “bloody nose” than analysts realized — at the same time as North Korea is preparing for a huge military parade.

The Pyongyang regime suddenly moved its army foundation day, celebrated for the last 30 years on April 25, back to the original date of Feb. 8. This just happens to be the day before the opening ceremony for the Winter Olympics being held just over the border in South Korea.

Satellite photos show preparations for a large parade in Pyongyang and South Korean officials have said it is shaping up to be “intimidating” in both size and weaponry — a display that will likely further heighten fears about the regime’s intentions.

Then, once the Olympic Games are over and joint military exercises begin in South Korea, many analysts think North Korea will protest with a provocative action like launching another missile.

All this is taking place without a U.S. ambassador in Seoul. 

[ Disagreement on North Korea derails White House choice for ambassador to South Korea ]

“The role of an ambassador is not nearly as important as it once was, but we will have been more than a year without an ambassador in one of the United States’ most important alliances and at a very sensitive time in the region,” Lee said.

The Trump administration has abruptly ditched Victor Cha, an academic who served in the George W. Bush administration and is known for his hawkish approach to North Korea, as its candidate for U.S. ambassador to South Korea.

Although his views are sharply divergent from the South Korean government’s engagement-centered approach, Cha, a Korean American who teaches at Georgetown and runs the Korea department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is well known and well connected in Seoul. 

Moon’s government had signed off on Cha’s nomination after Washington last month sent formal notice of intent to nominate him as ambassador, a process known as agrément.

Cha was suddenly withdrawn, however, partly because he raised concerns about the “bloody nose” idea of a limited strike to send a message without sparking a wider war.

Political analysts across the spectrum generally think this is an ill-advised strategy that could put at risk the 25 million South Koreans — and tens of thousands of Americans — living within North Korean artillery range.

The South Korean president has repeatedly said that Trump cannot launch a strike on North Korea without his approval — a statement of hope more than of fact, since the United States calls the shots in their military alliance. 

South Korean news sites were on Wednesday full of headlines about the “mystery” of Cha’s sudden withdrawal from the position — literally “falling off a horse” in Korean. Media commentary noted how unusual it was for an ambassadorial candidate to be withdrawn after the host government had signed off.

[ Victor Cha: Giving North Korea a ‘bloody nose’ carries a huge risk to Americans ]

The South Korean government has not been informed of the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw Cha as its candidate for ambassador, according to two senior officials.  

Having completed the agrément process, Seoul is expecting an explanation from Washington, said one of the officials, asking for anonymity to discuss diplomatic issues. 

“It’s not desirable to not have a fully-fledged ambassador at this very sensitive time,” said the other senior official. He questioned whether the administration would be able to find a candidate who was even more hawkish that Cha. “Victor is seen as rather conservative,” he said. “Some people here were wondering if he, as a Korean American, was trying to prove that he was loyal to President Trump.”

Trump doubled down Tuesday with his tough language against North Korea, saying that only heavy-handed measures would work against the regime in Pyongyang. 

“Past experience has taught us that complacency and concessions only invite aggression and provocation. I will not repeat the mistakes of past administrations that got us into this dangerous position,” he said. 

Trump’s omission of diplomacy as an option for dealing with North Korea stood out to Duyeon Kim, a fellow at the Korean Peninsula Future Forum in Seoul.

“It almost sounds like he is selling a future war with North Korea much the same way Bush did in his State of the Union on Iraq,” she said. “If he is indeed marching the U.S. and the region into a war, this time it would be with a country that actually has nuclear weapons. So that could quickly get out of hand.”

[ Trump’s ambassadors fan out across the globe. But some powerful countries are still waiting.]

For its part, North Korea released its own damning condemnation of Trump Wednesday. This is a standard regime tactic to try to divert from its own treatment of its citizens.

In a report on its “White Paper on Human Rights Violations in U.S. in 2017,” North Korea’s state media laid out a litany of complaints against the American president, starting with his choice of billionaires for Cabinet posts and his policies to help the rich.

“In the U.S. the absolute majority of the working masses, deprived of elementary rights to survival, are hovering in the abyss of nightmare,” the report said, citing youth unemployment and homeless numbers, and the “hell” of student loans.

It continued through the lack of paid maternity leave and sexual assault to gun crimes and marijuana use.

“The U.S., ‘guardian of democracy’ and ‘human rights champion,’ is kicking up the human rights racket but it can never camouflage its true identity as the gross violator of human rights,” the report said.

Read more

The incredible story of the North Korean escapee at the State of the Union
 South Korea went gaga over a North Korean singer. Just wait until the rest arrive.

Trump asked Moon to give him public credit for pressuring North Korea into talks

Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

Super blue blood moon delights skywatchers

Leave a reply


Video

A Super Blue Blood Moon is coming

A rare celestial occurrence called a ‘Super Blue Blood Moon’ will be visible on January 31, 2018. What exactly is this rare phenomenon and where can you see it?

Skywatchers are being treated to the extremely rare phenomenon of a super blue blood moon early Wednesday.

The unusual lunar trifecta is occurring for the first time in North America since 1866, according to Space.com.

SUPER BLUE BLOOD MOON 2018: WHAT, WHEN AND WHERE

“The Jan. 31 full moon is special for three reasons: it’s the third in a series of ‘supermoons,’ when the Moon is closer to Earth in its orbit — known as perigee — and about 14 percent brighter than usual,” explains NASA. “It’s also the second full moon of the month, commonly known as a ‘blue moon.’ The super blue moon will pass through Earth’s shadow to give viewers in the right location a total lunar eclipse. While the Moon is in the Earth’s shadow it will take on a reddish tint, known as a ‘blood moon.’

“For the (continental) U.S., the viewing will be best in the West,” explained Gordon Johnston, program executive and lunar blogger at NASA Headquarters in Washington, in a statement.

Across the globe, skywatchers have been closely monitoring the moon to see the rare event.

People set up telescopes on the waterfront for the super blue moon and eclipse in Hong Kong, China Jan. 31, 2018. (REUTERS/Bobby Yip)

Photographers have also been capturing the phenomenon on camera.

The Statue of Liberty is backdropped by a supermoon, Wednesday, Jan. 31, 2018, seen from the Brooklyn borough of New York. The supermoon, which is the final of three consecutive supermoons, also experience lunar eclipse as it set over the horizon, but only a partial eclipse was visible in the East Coast. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)

Only a partial eclipse, however, was visible in the East Coast of the U.S. 

The Statue of Liberty is backdropped by a supermoon, Wednesday, Jan. 31, 2018, seen from the Brooklyn borough of New York. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)

While the super blue blood moon is visible in the pre-dawn hours in much of the U.S., other parts of the world viewed the lunar event in the middle of the night.

A full moon is seen during a lunar eclipse in Jakarta, Indonesia Jan. 31, 2018. (REUTERS/Darren Whiteside)

The lunar spectactle is generating plenty of buzz on social media, with #SuperBlueBloodMoon a topic trending global topic on Twitter.

Some Twitter users, however, were underwhelmed by the spectacle.

A NASA live feed of the event can be viewed here.

The unusual lunar showstopper won’t happen again until 2037.

The Associated Press contributed to this article.

Follow James Rogers on Twitter @jamesjrogers

The Daily 202: State of the Union underscores why Trump is his own worst enemy

Leave a reply

With Breanne Deppisch and Joanie Greve.

THE BIG IDEA: A little humility goes a long way.

President Trump really enjoys talking about himself, his grievances and how he’s never treated fairly. In his first State of the Union address, he showcased other people. As a result, his approval rating is likely to inch up in the coming days.

The businessman who likes to put his name on buildings and declared “I alone can fix it” during his acceptance speech at the 2016 Republican convention spoke less in the first-person Tuesday than in any major address since he came down the escalator at Trump Tower three years ago to launch his campaign.

He used the word “we” 130 times, “our” 103 times and “us” 15 times. He mentioned “the people” nine times. He used the word “I” just 35 times and “my” 14 times. He went with the second person “you” 25 times, though that includes “thank you.”

Trump is a consummate showman, and his stagecraft was top notch. He played the pomp and circumstance to his advantage. The first reality television president seemed to be channeling Mike Deaver, Ronald Reagan’s image guru, by pointing to a bevy of ordinary people who have done extraordinary things.

Reagan began this tradition by highlighting the heroism of Lenny Skutnik in his 1982 State of the Union. The federal employee had jumped into the icy Potomac to save a woman from drowning after a plane crash.

The official White House transcript shows that Trump was interrupted by applause 117 times in 80 minutes. The bulk of those came when the president was praising others: the cop from New Mexico and his wife who adopted the baby of a heroin addict, the victim of torture in North Korea who escaped to freedom and defiantly held up crutches he no longer needs, the Army staff sergeant who performed CPR for 20 minutes and artificial respiration for two-and-a-half hours to save a comrade after an explosion in Iraq. He offered a touching tribute to House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who recovered after being shot at congressional baseball practice.

He didn’t whine about “witch hunts,” or even elliptically refer to special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, and he made just one passing mention of Russia (it was critical).

— The speech offered a window into what might have been, if he had stuck to script and shown more self-discipline during his first year. Trump’s approval rating could easily be 10 points higher right now if he just behaved the way he did last night, even while pursuing an identical agenda. The speech worried politically savvy Democrats because it suggested that he has upside potential.

— But, but, but: No serious person in either party believes that last night represents a real pivot to becoming more “presidential.”

The White House went to great lengths to say that the State of the Union would be “unifying.” Sure enough, Trump nodded to bipartisanship. He even wore a blue tie. “I call upon all of us to set aside our differences, to seek out common ground, and to summon the unity we need to deliver for … the people we were elected to serve,” he declared.

But we’ve seen this movie before. “The time for trivial fights is behind us,” Trump declared in his address to Congress last year.

Reacting to that speech, specifically his praise for a Navy SEAL who died in a raid that went wrong, liberal pundit Van Jones declared on CNN: “He became president of the United States in that moment, period.”

Just a few days later, Trump falsely accused Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower on Twitter. Jones has been mocked mercilessly since then. After watching the president spend the past year starting trivial fights, the commentator ripped into Trump last night on CNN for leaving the impression that many “dreamers” are gang members in his speech.

No one wants to be Lucy with the football in “Charlie Brown,” and the chattering class seems to have finally concluded that there will always be a Teleprompter Trump and a Twitter Trump. He will oscillate unpredictably and erratically between the two personas.

Preston Sharp looks at first lady Melania Trump after being acknowledged by President Trump. (Toni L. Sandys/The Washington Post)

— The president will perennially struggle to be a unifying figure because he is so personally divisive. It’s a feature, not a bug. Frankly, it’s part of his enduring appeal to the GOP base.

One of the people Trump gave a shout-out to last night was a 12-year-old from California who organized a campaign to put 40,000 flags on the graves of veterans. The little boy was adorable and proud. But Trump couldn’t help using his inspiring example to take a dig at black NFL players who have protested police brutality by taking a knee during the national anthem. “Preston’s reverence for those who have served our nation reminds us … why we proudly stand for the national anthem,” Trump said.

Likewise, on immigration, Trump talked as if he was proposing a true compromise even as he outlined a hardline position that would require curbs in the number of legal immigrants and restrictions on what he calls “chain migration” in exchange for a pathway to citizenship for the “dreamers.”

“Americans are dreamers, too,” Trump said.

Conservatives loved it, and liberals groaned. It highlighted the extent to which Trump’s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which protects the “dreamers,” has split the country.

Consider this response from the former grand wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan:

— In a speech covered with the nationalistic fingerprints of domestic policy adviser Stephen Miller, Trump went on to talk about, “All of us, together, as one team, one people and one American family.”

The Washington Post’s Editorial Board poses this rhetorical question in response, “Have a president’s words ever rung more hollow?”

“It was a campaign event — literally,” adds columnist Dana Milbank. “His campaign offered to display supporters’ names on the Official Donald J. Trump for President livestream of the address — if they contributed $35 or more. … Trump was still in the first minute of his speech — 72 words from the start — when he belted out his campaign slogan, ‘Make America Great Again.’ … It was the first of several cultural wedges Trump would drive through the chamber over the next hour — pitting immigrants against ‘Americans,’ trumpeting his support for the Second Amendment but no other, and reviving racially charged disputes he ignited over the past year.”

— Trump has so poisoned the well that Democrats, except for red state senators who are in cycle, don’t even really want to work with him on the areas where he did extend olive branches, such as spending $1.5 trillion on infrastructure, creating paid family leave, cutting prescription drug prices and easing prisoner reentry into society.

As a Boston Globe reporter put it:

Bill Clinton’s secretary of labor piled on:

— A central theme of the speech was Trump’s ongoing bid to eviscerate the Obama legacy.

The president announced that, just before taking the stage, he had signed an order to rescind a directive from Obama to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He said he will keep the facility open indefinitely and may send new terrorism suspects there for the first time in a decade.

He also said he repealed the centerpiece of “disastrous Obamacare” and declared that “the era of economic surrender” is over.

On his way out of the chamber, Trump said “100 percent” when asked if the classified “memo” written by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) should be released. “Oh yeah, don’t worry,” the president told Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.).

Many professionals in the national security firmament worry that this partisan document, drafted by GOP staffers to challenge the integrity of the investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election, could compromise sources and methods and further politicize the nation’s intelligence-gathering apparatus.

Every president since Reagan has worked to reduce the size of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and dreamed of a world free from nuclear weapons. Not Trump. “Perhaps someday in the future there will be a magical moment when the countries of the world will get together to eliminate their nuclear weapons,” he said. “Unfortunately, we are not there yet.” He proposed more spending to “modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal.”

THE DEMOCRATIC RESPONSES:

— “Led by Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.), at least eight current and former Democratic legislators took on one of the stiffest challenges in politics: responding to a State of the Union address in a time of strong economic growth,” Dave Weigel reports. “Kennedy spoke from a technical school in his coastal Massachusetts district, facing a small crowd, framed by an antique car. His colleagues, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), spread out across TV studios and press clubs to deliver a message that, perhaps, some of the president’s critics would hear.

“For Kennedy, that message was that President Trump and Republicans had offered ‘one false choice after another’ to Americans, ‘turning American life into a zero-sum game’ in which the wealthiest score the most wins. Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), speaking on behalf of the moderate New Democrats, was largely in sync with Kennedy … Sanders, who also delivered a rebuttal to Trump last year, went further by saying that the president was papering over the real problems in the economy.

“The debate about ‘identity politics’ that briefly distracted Democrats after 2016 was long forgotten, as Democrats in the Capitol brought immigrants as their special guests, and Virginia state Del. Elizabeth Guzman [in the Spanish-language response] warned that Trump threatened ‘to drag our nation back to a shameful past.’

“The litany grew at the ‘State of Our Union,’ an event at the National Press Club that was a gathering of progressive organizations including Planned Parenthood, Moms Rising and the Women’s March. Three House Democrats, who boycotted the presidential address, shared a stage with activists as they promised to keep standing up to Trump. … On Facebook, former Maryland congresswoman Donna F. Edwards delivered a speech on behalf of the left-wing Working Families Party.”

HOW THE SPEECH IS PLAYING:

WAPO COVERAGE:

— The Post’s Fact Checker team looks at 18 dubious claims that Trump made during the speech. Many have been fact-checked repeatedly, yet the president persists in using them. Three relate to immigration. 

— Karen Tumulty and Philip Rucker: “Trump calls for unity, pushes GOP agenda in State of the Union speech.”

— Robert Costa: “Trump’s plans for immigration, infrastructure meet swift resistance in Congress.”

— Dan Balz: “A call for unity against a backdrop of controversy and division.”

— Marc Fisher: “Best behavior: How Trump alters his tone to suit the occasion.”

— Aaron Blake says “the winners” last night were strength metaphors, Trump’s illusion of unity, Steve Scalise and tax cuts. “The losers” were the truth, brevity, the deep state, bipartisanship and immigration reform.

— Read a transcript of the speech, annotated by Callum Borchers.

— Anna Fifield: “The incredible story of the North Korean escapee at the State of the Union.”

— Robin Givhan: “At the State of the Union, fashion puts women on mute.”

— Krissah Thompson: “After a month out of view, Melania Trump reemerges for State of the Union.”

— Vanessa Williams: “NAACP event delivers different view of State of the Union.”

— E.J. Dionne Jr.: “Instead of seeking ‘common ground,’ Trump gives a flabby, divisive speech.”

— Jennifer Rubin: “Trump’s State of the Union: A diatribe against immigrants.”

— Ed Rogers: “Trump’s State of the Union address was an 8.5.”

ACROSS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA:

— New York Times: “Trump Issues Appeal for Unity…”

— Wall Street Journal: “Trump Vows Optimism as More Fights Loom.”

— NPR: “Trump Makes Bipartisan Pitch … But Also Plays To Base.”

— ABC News: “Trump … avoids controversies but divides chamber on immigration reform.”

— Politico: “Trump offers same policies in new bipartisan packaging.”

— CNN: “Trump pledges to ‘make America great again for all Americans.’”

— CNBC: “Trump’s State of the Union speech is the third longest in modern history.”

— NBC News: “Democrats scoff, boo, groan, glower at Trump’s State of the Union.”

— Boston Globe: “Kennedy says Americans feel ‘fault lines of a fractured country.’”

ON THE RIGHT:

— Fox News: “Trump extends ‘open hand’ to Dems on immigration, touts tax cuts, warns N. Korea.”

— Daily Caller: “Trump Channels Reagan In Call To Make America Great Again.”

— Breitbart.com: “Dems Shocking Disrespect: Sit, Check Phones as President Praises Vets.”

— Drudge Report: “Trump Shows Heart.”

— National Review: “The (Tea) Party Is Over.”

— Weekly Standard: “Trump Mixes Calls for Unity With Divisive Comments on Immigration.”

ON THE LEFT:

— HuffPost: “The Hidden Extremism Of Trump’s State Of The Union.”

— Slate: “President Trump used people of color as cover for his anti-immigrant policies.”

— Vox: “Trump has no solutions for America’s big problems.”

— Mic: “Trump’s first State of the Union is unlikely to change the state of play.”

— The Nation: “Trump’s Long, Low-Energy SOTU Changed Nothing.”

— Mother Jones: “Fact Check: Trump Has Done Virtually Nothing to Combat the Opioid Epidemic.”

— Daily Kos: “One of Trump’s biggest SOTU applause lines will be the GOP’s biggest stumbling block come November.”

IN THE BORDER STATES:

— Arizona Republic: “Trump puts border wall at the center of State of the Union, but without a length or a cost.”

— Dallas Morning News: “As Dreamers gather for Trump’s State of the Union, GOP hardliner demands arrest of ‘illegal aliens.’”

— San Diego Union-Tribune: “San Diego ‘dreamers’ feel insulted by State of the Union speech.”

— Las Vegas Review-Journal: “Las Vegas immigration advocates gather to watch State of the Union.”

FROM STATES WITH MARQUEE SENATE RACES:

— Columbus Dispatch: “Trump’s address seeks bipartisan cooperation on infrastructure, immigration, security, but continues jabs.”

— Philadelphia Inquirer: “State of the Union 2018: Recap, reaction and fact checks from Donald Trump’s speech.”

— Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: “Trump gives backing to Ron Johnson’s ‘right-to-try’ legislation for terminally ill patients.”

— Las Vegas Review-Journal: “Trump talks economy, immigration in first State of the Union.”

— Indianapolis Star: “Indiana workers will receive dueling messages during Trump’s State of the Union speech.”

— Kansas City Star: “Sunayana Dumala of Olathe becomes symbol of hope for immigrants at State of the Union.”

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING:

— Adult film star Stormy Daniels issued a statement denying any past affair with Trump. “The fact of the matter is that each party to this alleged affair denied its existence in 2006, 2011, 2016, 2017 and now again in 2018,” Daniels’s signed statement reads. “I am not denying this affair because I was paid ‘hush money’ as has been reported in overseas owned tabloids. I am denying it because it never happened.” The statement ends, “I will have no further comment on this matter. … Please feel free to check me out on Instagram at @thestormydaniels.” (Frances Stead Sellers)

— But a few hours later, during an interview with Jimmy Kimmel, Daniels seemed to cast doubt on the statement, despite confirmation from her representative of its authenticity. Emily Heil reports: “[Kimmel] read the statement aloud and asked her if she had, in fact, signed it. Daniels was cagey from the get-go. ‘I don’t know, did I?’ she parried, ‘It doesn’t look like my signature, does it?’ she added, suggesting she didn’t know where it came from and that it was just another scrap from the Internet, which was rampant with crazy rumors about her. … Daniels managed to give a non-answer answer to Kimmel’s next line of questioning, when he asked her if she had a non-disclosure agreement. … Kimmel then deduced that if she didn’t have a NDA, she could probably say so. ‘You’re so smart, Jimmy,’ Daniels said. So that was a yes, right?”

GET SMART FAST:​​

  1. Hawaii’s false missile alert was sent by a worker with a troubled history who said he misunderstood that an exercise was a drill and believed a ballistic-missile attack was “imminent,” according to state and federal investigators. The state said the staffer had been a “source of concern” to his co-workers for over 10 years and had confused real-life events and drills “on at least two other occasions.” (Mark Berman and Brian Fung)
  2. Police identified a second person of interest in the Las Vegas massacre within “days” of the mass shooting, according to newly unsealed court documents. Earlier this month, authorities reiterated that Stephen Paddock was the lone shooter in the attack but said the FBI maintains an open investigation into an “unnamed person of interest.” The Clark County sheriff also said that he does not anticipate Paddock’s girlfriend, Marilou Danley, will face any criminal charges. (New York Times)
  3. The Pentagon submitted a report to Congress outlining the problems climate change could pose for the U.S. military. The survey, conducted during the Obama administration, documents how flooding, drought and extreme temperatures have affected military facilities. (Missy Ryan) 
  4. Apple confirmed it has received questions from “some government agencies” about a software update that slowed down older iPhone batteries. The tech giant’s statement comes amid reports that the Justice Department and SEC are looking into the update from last January. (Hayley Tsukayama)
  5. A small West Virginia town with 2,900 people has been deluged with 20.8 million opioid painkillers from out-of-state drug firms. (Charleston Gazette-Mail)
  6. Saudi Arabia has now released most of the detainees who were being held in a luxury hotel as part of what authorities dubiously described as an anti-corruption crackdown. But the move has increasingly seemed more like a shakedown: The detainees were let go after reaching financial settlements totaling nearly $107 billion. Of the 381 people arrested, 56 still remain in custody. (Kareem Fahim and William Branigin)
  7. An “emotional support peacock” was denied boarding at Newark Airport. United Airlines said the animal was not allowed onto the plane because it “did not meet guidelines for a number of reasons, including its weight and size.” (Lindsey Bever and Eli Rosenberg)

South Korean President Moon Jae-in and President Trump speak at a joint news conference. (Kim Min-Hee/European Pressphoto Agency/Shutterstock) 

THE NEW WORLD ORDER:

— The White House’s original pick for U.S. ambassador to South Korea is no longer expected to be nominated after he privately expressed disagreement with Trump’s North Korea policy. David Nakamura and Anne Gearan report: “Victor D. Cha, an academic who served in the George W. Bush administration, raised his concerns with [NSC officials] over their consideration of a limited strike on the North aimed at sending a message without sparking a wider war — a risky concept known as a ‘bloody nose’ strategy. Cha also objected to the administration’s threats to tear up a bilateral trade deal with Seoul that Trump has called unfair to American companies[.] U.S. officials [formally notified Seoul in December of Trump’s intended nominee], and South Korean officials quickly signed off on Cha … But the nomination never came. A senior administration official confirmed this week that the White House had moved on to other potential candidates.”

— Timing is everything: Cha pens a Post op-ed today outlining his opposition to a “bloody nose” strike: “I empathize with the hope, espoused by some Trump officials, that a military strike would shock Pyongyang into appreciating U.S. strength, after years of inaction, and force the regime to the denuclearization negotiating table. … Yet, there is a point at which hope must give in to logic. If we believe that Kim is undeterrable without such a strike, how can we also believe that a strike will deter him from responding in kind? … An alternative coercive strategy involves enhanced and sustained U.S., regional and global pressure on Pyongyang to denuclearize. This strategy is likely to deliver the same potential benefits as a limited strike, along with other advantages, without the self-destructive costs.”

— Meanwhile, a senior American general said he is confident the U.S. military could destroy “most” of North Korea’s nuclear missile infrastructure “if necessary in a favorable scenario.” Paul Sonne reports: “Air Force Gen. Paul J. Selva, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the U.S. military could ‘get at most of [Pyongyang’s nuclear missile] infrastructure’ … but he declined to specify the percentage of North Korean missiles U.S. forces could dismantle in the event of any military action . . . ‘Remember, missile infrastructure is not just the missiles,’ Selva told reporters. ‘If you’re the poor sergeant that has to go out and launch the missile, and I blow up your barracks, you’re not available to go do your job.’”

— The leaders of South Korea and Japan will meet next week and will likely discuss North Korea. Anna Fifield reports: “Progressive South Korean President Moon Jae-in will meet with his conservative Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, for talks at the Winter Olympics site on Feb. 9, the day of the opening ceremony. Until last week, it wasn’t even clear that Abe would attend. But the Trump administration intervened to ask him to go — not least because Vice President Pence will be traveling from Tokyo to PyeongChang for the opening ceremony. The White House ‘strongly urged’ Abe to attend the ceremony[.]”

THERE’S A BEAR IN THE WOODS:

— Top Justice Department officials made a last-ditch appeal to the White House on Monday night to halt the release of a GOP memo alleging abuses by the FBI. Josh Dawsey and Devlin Barrett report: “Shortly before the House Intelligence Committee voted to make the document public, [Rod Rosenstein] warned [White House Chief of Staff John] Kelly that the four-page memo prepared by House Republicans could jeopardize classified information and implored the president to reconsider his support for making it public[.] Rosenstein was joined in the meeting at the White House by FBI Director Christopher A. Wray. Rosenstein, who is supervising [Robert Mueller’s investigation], said the Department of Justice was not convinced the memo accurately describes its investigative practices. He said making the document public could set a dangerous precedent … While Wray also expressed opposition to the memo’s release, Rosenstein did much of the talking[.] [Jeff Sessions] was not present at the meeting.”

“In response, Kelly told Rosenstein and Wray that the president was still inclined to release the memo but the White House would go through a review led by the National Security Council and the White House Counsel’s Office … Rosenstein’s urgent push to head off the disclosure of the classified memo came after Kelly privately relayed to Sessions last week that Trump wants to see the document come out[.]”

— As he was leaving the Capitol last night, Trump told a Republican congressman he will “100 percent” allow the memo’s release. Karoun Demirjian reports: “Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) approached Trump as he exited the House chamber following the State the Union address, and asked him to ‘release the memo.’ ‘Don’t worry, 100 percent,’ Trump responded, with a wave of his hand. The exchange was caught by television cameras filming the president after he delivered the address.”

— DOJ’s inspector general has been focused for “months” on deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s role in the final stretch of the 2016 election, and why he appeared not to act for several weeks on a request to examine a batch of Clinton-related emails found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Devlin Barrett and Karoun Demirjian report: “The inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, has been asking witnesses why FBI leadership seemed unwilling to move forward on the examination of emails [until] late October — about three weeks after first being alerted to the issue … A key question of the internal investigation is whether McCabe or anyone else at the FBI wanted to avoid taking action on the laptop findings until after the Nov. 8 election, these people said. It is unclear whether the inspector general has reached any conclusions on that point.

In late September, FBI agents in New York were investigating Weiner’s laptop when they discovered the emails, and McCabe was aware of the matter “by late September or early October at the latest,” our colleagues report. “The agents on the Weiner case wanted to talk to the Clinton email investigators and see whether the messages were potentially important. … McCabe’s defenders in law enforcement say that there was nothing nefarious going on — officials were pursuing a careful process of determining whether the emails might be relevant, and that took time. Other law enforcement officials, however, have said they are concerned that the issue seemed to die for a period of time at McCabe’s desk, without explanation.”

— Trump may not have considered that McCabe could be a bigger headache for him outside the FBI than he was inside of it (see James Comey). The Fix’s Callum Borchers writes: “When Trump cut Comey loose in May, Comey promptly orchestrated the leak of his personal notes from a February meeting with the president. According to the notes … Trump expressed to Comey his desire for the FBI to drop an investigation into [Michael Flynn]. Comey later testified … that he ‘thought [the leak] might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.’ Now, of course, there is a special counsel[.] We don’t know whether McCabe possesses anything as explosive as the Comey notes — or whether he would provide any information to the press — but his departure from the FBI is not without risk to Trump.”

—  Memo fallout: Paul Ryan defended House Intel Chair Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), whose staffers penned the memo and whose committee voted to release it on party lines. But the speaker warned GOP lawmakers against using it to discredit Robert Mueller’s investigation. Karoun Demirjian reports: “Ryan [said Nunes] was following a well-established process when the committee voted Monday to release a GOP-drafted memo … Ryan suggested to reporters Tuesday that ‘there may have been malfeasance at the FBI by certain individuals,’ citing that as one of several reasons Republicans want ‘all of this information’ contained in the memo ‘to come out.’”

— The Fix’s Philip Bump created a timeline of the events leading up to Monday’s partisan vote to #Releasethememo — showing how congressional Republicans seem to have coopted the arguments of Trump and his allies.

— Nunes refused to say whether he coordinated with the White House as Republicans on his staff wrote the memo. Betsy Woodruff and Spencer Ackerman report: “During Monday’s contentious closed-door committee meeting, Rep. Mike Quigley, a Democrat, asked Nunes point-blank if his staffers had been talking with the White House as they compiled [the memo] … According to sources familiar with the exchange, Nunes made a few comments that didn’t answer the question before finally responding, ‘I’m not answering.’ Quigley’s question harked back to Nunes’ history of surreptitiously working with the White House to deflect from the myriad inquiries into possible coordination between Trump’s associates and the Kremlin.”

— The Trump administration admitted it cribbed from Forbes Magazine to create its report on Russian oligarchs who could be subject to U.S. sanctions for their alleged proximity to the Kremlin. BuzzFeed News’s John Hudson reports: “The revelation is likely to invite criticisms of the thoroughness of the Treasury Department’s report and reinforce the notion that the list is primarily a who’s who of the Russian elite rather than an official accounting of Kremlin-linked political corruption … Almost all of the 96 oligarchs listed in the government-issued report, who each have a net worth of $1 billion or more, appear in the Forbes ranking. When asked if there is ‘any truth to the criticisms that the Treasury list was inspired or derived in some way from the Forbes list,’ a Treasury spokesperson said ‘yes.’” Former Treasury officials said that while the list includes friends of [Vladimir] Putin, it also includes foes — such as brothers Aleksey and Dimitriy Ananyev, who’ve had their businesses seized in recent years.

— The Justice Department has reportedly given Mueller internal documents that cover Jeff Sessions’s proposed resignation and Michael Flynn’s firing. (ABC News’s Mike Levine)

— Mueller wants to talk to Mark Corallo, the former spokesman for Trump’s legal team. The Wall Street Journal’s Rebecca Ballhaus reports: “Mr. Corallo’s resignation [in July] followed the revelation that Donald Trump Jr. … had arranged a Trump Tower meeting in June 2016 between a Russian lawyer linked to the Kremlin and top campaign aides[.] … Mr. Corallo had privately expressed frustration over the administration’s handling of reports about that meeting[.]”

Hillary Clinton speaks during the Women in the World Summit at Lincoln Center in New York. (Mary Altaffer/AP)

THE #METOO MOVEMENT:

— Hillary Clinton expressed regret about retaining a 2008 campaign adviser who was accused of repeated sexual harassment. John Wagner reports: “In a lengthy Facebook post, the Democrat sought to explain her decision to deliver a less severe punishment to Burns Strider, who was her faith adviser, despite a recommendation from her campaign manager that Strider be fired. ‘I very much understand the question I’m being asked as to why I let an employee on my 2008 campaign keep his job despite his inappropriate workplace behavior,’ Clinton wrote. ‘The short answer is this: If I had it to do again, I wouldn’t.’ … Clinton said on Facebook that the woman’s complaint was taken seriously and that she decided on a more lenient punishment, which included demoting Strider, docking his pay and separating him from the woman[.]”

Clinton also took a shot at the New York Times, who broke the story on Strider: “‘At the time, I believed the punishment I imposed was severe and fit the offense,’ she said [in her Facebook post]. ‘Indeed, while we are revisiting whether my decision from a decade ago was harsh enough, many employers would be well served to take actions at least as severe when confronted with problems now — including the very media outlet that broke this story.’ She was referring to the case of Glenn Thrush, a former White House reporter at the New York Times who served a suspension after an investigation into allegations that he had behaved inappropriately toward female colleagues. … ‘A decade from now, that decision may not look as tough as it feels today,’ Clinton wrote.”

— Chicago businessman Todd Ricketts is expected to become Republican National Committee finance chair after casino mogul Steve Wynn was forced to resign amid accusations of sexual misconduct. Robert Costa and Josh Dawsey report: “A formal vote was expected to happen Tuesday. Ricketts is working closely with the White House and RNC leaders on the appointment[.] … Ricketts, who last year was Trump’s pick to be deputy secretary of the Commerce Department, withdrew over a dispute with the Office of Government Ethics, citing his financial portfolio as too difficult to disentangle.”

During the early stages of 2016, Ricketts was a key financial backer of Scott Walker’s presidential bid. That February, Trump blasted some of his family members who were funding super PACs aimed at stopping him from securing the GOP nomination. “I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me,” he tweeted. “They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!”

— The Nevada Gaming Control Board has opened an investigation into Wynn. (CNBC)

— Wynn has already lost hundreds of millions of dollars due to falling stock prices since the accusations arose. CNN’s Chris Isidore and Nathaniel Meyersohn report: “According to the most recent filings, Wynn owns 12.1 million shares of the company’s stock through a family trust he controls. That’s 11.8% of the shares outstanding. So when the stock fell 10% on Friday on this report, his estimated net worth dropped by $246 million, or roughly a quarter-billion dollars. Monday’s drop in share price added $204 million to his paper losses, bringing the total decline in his net worth to $450 million. He’s made back $23.5 million as the stock inched up 1.2% Tuesday.”

— Former Michigan governor John Engler (R) is this morning expected to be named interim president of Michigan State University. The school’s former president was forced to step aside amid fallout from the Larry Nassar sexual-abuse scandal. (Susan Svrluga)

CDC Director Brenda Fitzgerald at the agency’s headquarters in Atlanta last month. (Melissa Golden for The Washington Post)

PERSONNEL IS POLICY:

— Trump’s top health official, Brenda Fitzgerald, bought shares in a tobacco company one month after being appointed as director of the CDC, the agency tasked with preventing tobacco use and antismoking efforts. Politico’s Sarah Karlin-Smith and Brianna Ehley report: “The stock was one of about a dozen new investments that [Fitzgerald] made after she took over the agency’s top job … Fitzgerald has since come under Congressional scrutiny for slow walking divestment from older holdings that government officials said posed potential conflicts of interest. Buying shares of tobacco companies raises even more flags than Fitzgerald’s trading in drug and food companies because it stands in such stark contrast to CDC’s mission . . . Critics say her trading behavior broke with ethical norms for public health officials and was, at best, sloppy. At worst, they say, it was legally problematic if she didn’t recuse herself from government activities that could have affected her investments.”

— In a 2016 radio interview, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said having Trump in the White House “would be more abusive to the constitution than Barack Obama — and that’s saying a lot.” Brady Dennis and Juliet Eilperin report: “The radio interview [took place when] Pruitt — then Oklahoma’s attorney general — was serving as a policy adviser to [Jeb Bush]. Asked whether he supported Trump as a presidential candidate, Pruitt replied, ‘No.’ Pruitt added that he feared Trump, if elected would ‘use executive power to confront Congress in a way that is truly unconstitutional.’ He also agreed with [the host’s] description of Trump as ‘dangerous’ and ‘a bully.’” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) pressed Pruitt on the comments Tuesday. Asked if he recalled the statements, Pruitt said, “I don’t, senator. And I don’t echo that today at all.” “I bet not,” Whitehouse responded.

Minutes later, Pruitt sent out a statement lavishing praise on his boss: “After meeting him, and now having the honor of working for him, it is abundantly clear that President Trump is the most consequential leader of our time,” Pruitt said in the statement. “No one has done more to advance the rule of law than President Trump. The President has liberated our country from the political class and given America back to the people.”

— Noncitizens will not be hired as workers for the 2020 Census. Tara Bahrampour reports: “In recent decennial counts, door-to-door census takers could be legal permanent residents or non-citizens with a work visa and a bilingual skill that no available citizen possessed. Such employees made up a tiny percentage of hires in the last count, but have been seen as crucial to reaching hard-to-count immigrant communities whose members might not understand or trust the process, and where response rates are typically lower than the general population. … However, in a meeting Tuesday, Census staff were told that non-citizens would not be hired[.] … Among bureau staff the announcement was seen as a political move, the source said, adding, ‘The feeling was this is going to happen, and yes, it’s because of the administration.’”

THE REST OF THE AGENDA:

— House Republicans voiced skepticism and opposition to Trump’s immigration proposal — a warning sign of the tough path ahead for any deal. Erica Werner and Ed O’Keefe report: “The concerns came from a range of lawmakers, not just immigration hard-liners, just hours before Trump’s State of the Union address … In a sign the issue is roiling both parties, members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus — comprised entirely of Democrats — complained directly to [Sen. Chuck Schumer] (D-N.Y.) Tuesday about his one-on-one talks with Trump over the price of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. … Democrats were outraged about the White House proposal because it would severely limit legal immigration by family members of citizens and others — but opposition from the right threatens to leave the plan with scant support from any quarter.”

— No immigration on the menu, however: Congressional Republicans are slated to focus on the tough midterm environment at their retreat in West Virginia this weekend. Politico’s Burgess Everett and Heather Caygle report: “The headlining events will be a two-hour dinner with [Vice President] Pence on Wednesday and two-hour lunch with Trump on Thursday. GOP lawmakers will also hear about Republicans’ ‘Big Vision’ for 2018 from [Mitch McConnell] and [Ryan] on Wednesday afternoon, as well as receive a briefing from pollster David Winston and [Kevin McCarthy] on how to sell the new tax law during the mid-term campaigns. On Thursday, Republicans will hold a working breakfast with [Rex Tillerson and Jim Mattis], then pivot to a joint session on infrastructure with committee leaders … Other sessions will focus on workforce development and government reform before a reception and dinner with [Nikki Haley]. And while the topic of immigration is sure to come up, there is no specific item on the schedule devoted to the approaching deadline on the expiring [DACA] program.”

— Jeff Sessions vowed a “surge” of DEA agents look into opioid over-prescribers. Sari Horwitz and Scott Higham report: “To intensify the fight against what is called ‘prescription drug diversion,’ the DEA will examine data from approximately 80 million reports it collects every year from prescription drug manufacturers and distributors, Sessions said.” 

SOCIAL MEDIA SPEED READ:

Trump’s State of the Union, fittingly, set a Twitter record:

Republican messaging guru Frank Luntz thought Trump hit a home run:

Trump’s former chief of staff and press secretary offered extensive praise:

So did his former press secretary:

The chairman of the House Freedom Caucus highlighted one of Trump’s invited guests:

Two Democratic senators reacted to Trump’s remarks with drastically different tones:

 Al Gore criticized Trump’s energy comments:

A liberal commentator took this jab at the president:

From an MSNBC anchor:

Former congressman John Dingell (D-Mich.) said the speech was loooong:

First lady Melania Trump enters the House chamber for last night’s speech. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)

Many noted that the first lady wore white, the color of the anti-Trump “resistance” movement. From a former Justice Department spokesman:

From Obama’s former deputy chief of staff:

From a Bloomberg News reporter:

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus held a quiet protest of Trump’s “shithole” comments:

This still of the CBC also made the rounds:

Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) continues to boost his populist street cred ahead of a potential run for governor:

The fact-checking website Politifact had a busy night:

Some other reaction from around the Twitterverse:

From a New York Times reporter:

From a Hot Air editor:

A Guardian reporter saw this from Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Tex.):

A refugee activist expressed dismay at Trump’s applause:

The response by Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.) was blasted by the RNC. From the communications director of Organizing for Action:

But Breitbart zeroed in on another detail:

And Samantha Bee summed up all five of Democrats’ State of the Union responses:

GOOD READS FROM ELSEWHERE:

— Politico, “The demise of one of the best gigs in Congress,” by John Bresnahan: “Relinquishing the chairmanship of the House Appropriations Committee once would have been an unthinkable surrender of congressional power. Rodney Frelinghuysen, with his decision this week to do exactly that, showed just how much cachet the role of committee chair has lost. Hemmed in by term limits, a domineering party leadership, bitter partisan feuds and a GOP base that automatically loathes anyone in power, seven Republican committee chairs have decided to leave office at the end of this Congress, a remarkable level of turnover by any measure. Another committee chair, Rep. Diane Black of Tennessee, is running for governor and will give up her gavel at the Budget Committee (the panel has had three chairs this Congress alone.) And Rep. Jason Chaffetz … quit Congress last year to become a regular on Fox News. While term limits are behind most of the departures …. it’s also true that being a committee chair has lost a lot of its allure.” “Times aren’t like they used to be,” Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said. “Yeah, leadership needs to give direction, but the committee chairmen aren’t what they used to be.”

— The Atlantic, “How the Swamp Drained Trump,” by McKay Coppins: “Indeed, while Trump’s ‘populism’ has manifested itself primarily in performative spasms of culture war, the most substantive policy victories of his first year in office have gone to the donor-class conservatism of Paul Ryan and his fellow swamp creatures in the congressional leadership. As it turns out, all they had to do was ask nicely. It is perhaps the central irony of the Donald Trump story: The Queens-born billionaire who could never win the respect of the taunting insiders on the other side of the river led a bitter revenge march to the White House, ranting and raving and railing against the ‘haters’ — and then giving them what they wanted the moment they said please.”

HOT ON THE LEFT:

“Greg Gianforte, politician who assaulted reporter, to lead communications workshop,” from the Guardian: “The National Republican Congressional Committee has picked as the speaker for its next monthly communications workshop Greg Gianforte, the US congressman who violently attacked Guardian journalist Ben Jacobs and then tried to mislead the public and the police about it. Gianforte’s hour-long communications session in February is titled ‘Hire for culture, train for skill’ and invitations show a picture of the grinning politician above a brief biography that waxes lyrical about his entrepreneurial wealth but makes no reference to his conviction for assault.”

 

HOT ON THE RIGHT:

“A teacher called members of the military ‘the lowest of our low.’ The video made people furious,” from Eli Rosenberg and J. Freedom du Lac: “A high school teacher in a small city on the outskirts of Los Angeles became the subject of harsh criticism — and, he said, violent threats — after a video of him slamming the U.S. military went viral. Gregory Salcido, who works at a high school in Pico Rivera and also serves on the city council, said in the video that members of the military fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan were ‘the lowest of the low.’ The video was reportedly taken in the middle of a history class Salcido was teaching … as he launched into a rant about how long the wars overseas have dragged on. ‘Because we have a bunch of dumbs‑‑‑s over there,’ Salcido said in the video[.]”

DAYBOOK:

Trump has a meeting with Pence, Rex Tillerson and Jim Mattis followed by a “tax reform meeting with American workers.” He will also meet with Steve Mnuchin in the afternoon.

 

NEWS YOU CAN USE IF YOU LIVE IN D.C.:

— District residents will see some sun and slightly warmer temperatures today. The Capital Weather Gang forecasts: “High pressure keeps us dry and partly sunny today. Temperatures rise into and through the 20s this morning with light winds. Afternoon highs should manage the upper 30s to low 40s[.]”

— Kirk Cousins appears to be leaving Washington. Mark Maske reports: “The Redskins’ stunning trade with the Kansas City Chiefs for quarterback Alex Smith, the NFL’s top-rated passer this season, brought an unofficial end Tuesday to Cousins’s tenure in Washington. He presumably will be permitted to leave the Redskins via unrestricted free agency in March, unencumbered by a franchise- or transition-player tag, and shop his services to a group of quarterback-needy teams[.]”

— The Wizards beat the Thunder 102-96. (Candace Buckner)

— Trump signed a bill recognizing six Native American tribes in Virginia, making them eligible for federal funding. (Jenna Portnoy)

— Paul Schwartzman profiles venture capitalist Mark Ein, who recently bought Washington City Paper: “A pillar of Washington’s gilded set, Ein resides in a palatial estate in suburban McLean, Va., twice contributed to the campaigns of President George W. Bush, and has been known to praise President Trump and his family — at least before they took over the White House. Asked if he supports marijuana legalization, an issue dear to many City Paper readers, Ein, 53, volunteers nothing more than that he has never smoked pot. He also acknowledges that he is not steeped in City Paper lore, and he struggles to recall an article that left a lasting impression.”

VIDEOS OF THE DAY:

Trevor Noah and Stephen Colbert both taped their shows live to respond to Trump’s State of the Union:

Rep. John Delaney (D-Md.) released an ad for the 2020 Democratic primaries:

Tokyo held its first ever North Korean missile drill:

And an Air Force sergeant was suspended for posting a rant about black women in her unit:

The Latest: Putin says US list of Russians is ‘hostile step’

Leave a reply

WASHINGTON — The Latest on the Trump administration and Russia sanctions (all times local):

7:15 a.m.

Russian President Vladimir Putin says the Trump administration’s list of top officials and businesspeople is a “hostile step” that harms relations between Russia and the United States.

Just 12 minutes before the deadline, the administration late on Monday released a long-awaited list of 114 Russian politicians and 96 “oligarchs” who have flourished under Putin, fulfilling a demand by Congress that the U.S. punish Moscow for interfering in the 2016 U.S. election.

The section on political leaders includes the entire Kremlin administration and the Cabinet as well as other top officials.

Speaking at a campaign event in Moscow, Putin, who is running for president at the March election, joked on Tuesday that he felt “slighted” that he himself was not on the list.

Putin described the list as a “hostile step” but said Moscow does not want to make the situation worse and is eager to “develop the relations as much as our American counterparts are willing to.”

___

6:10 a.m.

The chairwoman of the upper chamber of the Russian parliament says Monday’s publication of the list of Russian officials and businessmen as part of a U.S. law on sanctions against Russia is an attempt to influence Russia’s upcoming presidential vote.

The Trump administration late on Monday published a long-anticipated list of top Russian officials and “oligarchs” who have flourished under President Vladimir Putin. The 114-strong political list is the entire presidential administration and the Russian Cabinet, while the list of 96 “oligarchs” is an exact copy of the Forbes magazine’s Russian billionaires’ rankings.

Valentina Matvienko, who chairs the Federation Council and whose name is also on the list, told Russian news agencies on Tuesday that the publication is “nothing but meddling into the electoral process” which seeks to “lower the support for the president.”

Russians are going to the polls on March 18, and Putin is expected to win by a landslide.

___

4:30 a.m.

The Kremlin says Monday’s publication of the U.S. list of Russian officials and businessmen as part of a sanctions law shows that the United States views the entire Russian government as enemies.

The Trump administration late Monday released a long-awaited list of 114 Russian politicians and 96 “oligarchs” who have flourished under President Vladimir Putin, fulfilling a demand by Congress that the U.S. punish Moscow for interfering in the 2016 U.S. election.

Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s spokesman, told reporters on Tuesday that Moscow would like to take time to analyze the list which he described as “unprecedented” in its scope. Peskov said Russia has yet to understand how individuals on the list, their activities and reputation abroad might be affected.

Although he said Russia should not “give in to emotions” before studying the list and its implications carefully, Peskov pointed out to the name of the law: “On countering America’s adversaries through sanctions.”

“De-facto everyone has been called an adversary of the United States,” he said.

Peskov, as a member of the Kremlin administration, is on the list.

The Kremlin also indicated that it didn’t view the U.S. administration’s announcement that it would not impose any new sanctions on Russia for now as any sort of reassurance. Peskov said the Kremlin noted that new sanctions might still be imposed later.

___

2:55 a.m.

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has lauded the Trump administration’s list of Russian oligarchs and politicians as a “good list.”

The list released late on Monday was required by a sanctions law, adopted last year against Russia for meddling in the 2016 U.S. election. Although it does not trigger any U.S. sanctions against the individuals, the very preparations for listing the Russian oligarchs has sent chills across the Russian business community and political elite in the past months.

Navalny, who came to prominence thanks to his investigations into official corruption, tweeted on Tuesday that he was “glad that these (people) have been officially recognized on the international level as crooks and thieves.” Navalny in his investigations has exposed what he described as close ties between government officials and some of the billionaires on the list.

He questioned, however, why some Russian businessmen with no apparent ties to the government were put on the list, including Sergei Galitsky, founder of retail chain Magnit, and Arkady Volozh, founder and CEO of the search engine Yandex. Both have been lauded as self-made men who built their successful businesses without any government support.

___

2:40 a.m.

A Russian businessman who is on the Trump administration’s list of Russian politicians and businessmen, released as part of a U.S. law aimed at punishing Russia for meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, says he will nevertheless advocate for better ties with the West.

Boris Titov, presidential ombudsman for business, is on the list along with two other Russian presidential envoys for human rights.

Titov, who is also running for Russian president in the March election, said he was surprised to find his name on the list: “We are working to protect people from authorities.”

Titov said he would keep doing his job, “part of which is to improve relations with the West.”

___

2:30 a.m.

A senior Russian lawmaker has described the Trump administration’s list of politicians and business figures released late on Monday as “political paranoia which, it turns out, is very hard to cure.”

In a Facebook post Tuesday, Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the Federation Council’s foreign affairs committee, said U.S. intelligence failed to find compromising material on Russian politicians and “ended up copying the Kremlin phone book.”

Kosachev criticized the U.S. government for harming Russia-U.S. relations, saying that “the consequences will be toxic and undermine prospects for cooperation for years ahead.”

___

2:20 a.m.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich has dismissed the Trump administration’s list of Russian politicians and businessmen as simply a “who’s who” of Russian politics.

The list released by the Trump administration late on Monday includes 114 political figures and 96 people the U.S. Treasury deems to be “oligarchs.” The list, required by a law passed by Congress last year to punish Russia for meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, does not trigger any U.S. sanctions targeting the individuals.

Dvorkovich told Russian news agencies on Tuesday that he was not surprised to find his name on the list, too, saying that it “looks like a ‘who’s who’ book.” Dvorkovich stopped short of saying how Russia would react to it, saying that the government would “monitor the situation.”

___

12:15 a.m.

The Trump administration has released its highly anticipated list of Russian politicians and business figures in an attempt to increase pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The list includes 114 individuals deemed by the Treasury Department to be senior Russian political figures. It also includes 96 people deemed to be “oligarchs.” The Treasury says each has an estimated net worth of $1 billion or more.

The list was required by a law passed by Congress last year to punish Russia for meddling in the 2016 U.S. election. The Trump administration had until Monday to release the list, aimed at exposing those who have gained wealth or power through association with Putin. It’s been informally referred to as the “Putin list.”

The list does not trigger any U.S. sanctions targeting the individuals.

___

8:18 p.m.

The Trump administration has notified Congress that it will not impose new sanctions on Russia at this time.

The State Department says it’s confident that new legislation enacted last year is significantly deterring Russian defense sales.

Spokeswoman Heather Nauert estimates foreign governments have abandoned several billion dollars in planned or announced Russian purchases.

The decision comes amid ongoing concerns from critics of the president that his administration has been too soft on Russia. Investigations continue into Moscow’s efforts to influence the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win.

The Treasury Department was expected to release another list of businessmen who have grown rich under Russian President Vladimir Putin, but the day came and went with no word. The Treasury Department did not respond to multiple inquiries Monday about the list.

Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

State of the Union gives Trump the chance to ‘act presidential,’ at least for a night

Leave a reply

Every now and again, President Trump chooses to embrace the office of the presidency, with all its pomp and power, if only to prove that he can.

The moments rarely last long, but they are notable when they arrive — at an international gathering in Switzerland, during a Medal of Honor ceremony or in an address to a joint session of Congress. 

Trump’s first State of the Union address Tuesday night will be one such moment, according to White House aides who have been touting his preparations and message. They say he will deliver a unifying speech of American values and patriotism, one that touches on everything from the just-passed Republican tax plan and the new immigration proposal to trade, infrastructure and national security. 

The question is whether the swirl of conflict and diversion that has monopolized so much of his first year in office will distract from the message he is trying to deliver. 

President Trump speaks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last week. (Evan Vucci/AP)

After a year as president, Trump has proven himself capable of reading words from a teleprompter. The former reality TV star can summon a performance to rival that of Martin Sheen as the aspirational President Jed Bartlet on “The West Wing” when he chooses. 

What is less clear, however, is if he has the ability — or even the interest — to turn his well-delivered words into actual, tangible results, without self-sabotaging or undermining his and his team’s best intentions. 

“There’s no question that President Trump can deliver a speech,” said Michael Steel, a Republican strategist. “The question is whether he has the discipline to turn his words into policies that help the American people — and when he’ll set off another counterproductive Twitter firestorm about something like Russia, the NFL, or Bruno Mars at the Grammys.”

[Trump’s first State of the Union: Can a divisive president flip the script?]

Like the campaign that elected him, Trump’s time in office has been built around the idea that what the nation needs now is a citizen-leader, not another politician, and that his primary role is one of disruption. 

 “It’s so easy to act presidential, but that’s not going to get it done,” Trump said at a rally in Youngstown, Ohio, in July.

Yet one of the reasons Trump is able to credibly elevate both his rhetoric and the stature of his office on certain, pre-scripted occasions is because he has a willing audience desperate to believe.

President Trump arrives for his first address before a joint session of Congress on Feb. 28, 2017. (Jabin Botsford /The Washington Post)

Congressional Republicans, for instance, are so worried privately about the impetuous leader of their party that they cling to any grain of normalcy — repeating it like a mantra to reassure themselves that Trump is, in fact, able to rise to the occasion of commander in chief. 

Many Trump supporters, too, say they wish he wouldn’t tweet quite as much or would act more “presidential.” And even many Democrats yearn for a return to normalcy of sorts, where a reported $130,000 payoff to a porn star who allegedly had an affair with Trump — a surefire scandal in any other administration — does not get dismissed as a C-list sideshow. 

Much of the public seems to anticipate these fleeting moments where Trump seems to understand and channel the gravity and import of the presidency, and plays the role of a traditional leader. 

The problem, however, is that Trump so far has proven himself less a method actor than one able to briefly inhabit a role, before slipping back into his more comfortable self. 

His policy positions are often only temporary notions, his calls for unity and bipartisan cooperation can be contradicted in the same day, and his ideological vision is often undermined by the laws that he ultimately signs. The facts he uses to defend his positions also regularly prove to be false.

[Names of campaign donors to be flashed live during live stream of Trump’s State of the Union speech]

And none of this lends itself to the traditional role of the State of the Union, which voters, legislators and foreign governments look to as a guide to the nation’s political agenda. 

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, the director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, said that because the State of the Union is a constitutionally mandated address to Congress, the level of expectation is greater. Most presidents use the occasion to not just outline their goals and promises, but also follow through on them in the coming months with detailed policies, plans and initiatives. 

“Has the White House done the level of work that is required to do that?” Jamieson asked. “If it hasn’t, then we’ve seen a revolution in the way the president treats this address and his relationship with the Congress. If the president says, ‘I want these four things,’ and then he doesn’t follow up with specifics, it then throws the ball to Congress.”

Trump has demonstrated that he can play the role when necessary. 

He delivered a well-received address before a joint session of Congress last February that hit upon many of the traditional tropes of the office. He began by praising Black History month and denouncing threats at Jewish community centers. He painted a soaring vision of American renewal and economic optimism. And he laid out a series of carefully fact-checked arguments for his big policy pushes — for a tax overhaul, trade policy and infrastructure spending. 

“If we are guided by the well-being of American citizens, then I believe Republicans and Democrats can work together to achieve an outcome that has eluded our country for decades,” he said at one point about his plans for immigration. 

[As Trump prepares to unveil the State of the Union, Congress struggles to do its job]

Immediately after the address, in which Trump also honored the widow of a slain Navy SEAL — a moving moment that led to a sustained standing ovation — Van Jones, a liberal commentator on CNN, declared, “He became president of the United States in that moment, period.”

But within days, Trump’s unifying message was a distant memory. He accused former president Barack Obama of having Trump’s “wires tapped” in Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign without evidence. The FBI director later said there was “no information” to support Trump’s accusation. 

“The real problem is that people just do not listen to his words and treat them with the seriousness that they afford other presidents,” said Michael Beschloss, a presidential historian. “He has been on so many sides of so many issues that even if it is a good speech, people will figure that it is not going to last long.”

Republican leaders in Congress have nonetheless encouraged and embraced the idea that Trump will stick to a broadly palatable script Tuesday night. Republican polls in many key swing districts show the president continues to poll below GOP incumbent members of Congress. 

That is not the only concern in a midterm election year that typically hinges on the popularity of the president. In 2017 elections in Alabama, Virginia and the suburbs of New York and Philadelphia, concern about the president’s behavior proved to be a drag for Republican candidates by turning off suburban voters and driving Democratic turnout. 

[Ahead of State of the Union, Democrats are united against Trump — but not on impeachment]

Republicans are hopeful Trump can be convinced to focus his messaging on selling GOP tax cuts as a boon to the middle class over the coming months. “Success in the midterm hinges on selling the tax bill to the American people,” said one senior Republican strategist. “To do that successfully, we need the president and the White House making the case every day instead of every sixth day.” 

On Tuesday night before Congress would be a good place for Trump to start. In the pecking order of public presidential events, the State of the Union remains perhaps the most powerful platforms, usually attracting between 30 million and 50 million television viewers, including a broad cross-section of Americans who do not follow day-to-day politics. 

“All the pundits Tuesday are going to say he looked presidential,” said Cody Keenan, a former chief speechwriter for Obama. “Well, spoiler alert, it’s the most presidential thing a president does.”

Fitness app Strava lights up staff at military bases

Leave a reply

Red heat lines are arrayed neatly in the pattern of roads and streets on a dark black mapImage copyright
Strava

Image caption

The movements of soldiers within Bagram air base – the largest US military facility in Afghanistan

Security concerns have been raised after a fitness tracking firm showed the exercise routes of military personnel in bases around the world.

Online fitness tracker Strava has published a “heatmap” showing the paths its users log as they run or cycle.

It appears to show the structure of foreign military bases in countries including Syria and Afghanistan as soldiers move around them.

The US military was examining the heatmap, a spokesman said.

How does Strava work?

San Francisco-based Strava provides an app that uses a mobile phone’s GPS to track a subscriber’s exercise activity.

It uses the collected data, as well as that from fitness devices such as Fitbit and Jawbone, to enable people to check their own performances and compare them with others.

It says it has 27 million users around the world.

What is the heatmap?

The latest version of the heatmap was released by Strava in November last year.

It is a data visualisation showing all of the activity of all of its users around the world.

Strava says the newest version has been built from one billion activities – some three trillion points of data, covering 27 billion km (17bn miles) of distance run, jogged or swum.

But it is not a live map. The data aggregates the activities recorded between 2015 and September 2017.

So why is it in the news now?

That is thanks to Nathan Ruser, a 20-year-old Australian university student who is studying international security at the Australian National University and also works with the Institute for United Conflict Analysts.

Skip Twitter post by @Nrg8000

End of Twitter post by @Nrg8000

He said he came across the map while browsing a cartography blog last week.

It occurred to him that a large number of military personnel on active service had been publicly sharing their location data and realised that the highlighting of such exercises as regular jogging routes could be dangerous.

“I just looked at it and thought, ‘oh hell, this should not be here – this is not good,'” he told the BBC.

“I thought the best way to deal with it is to make the vulnerabilities known so they can be fixed. Someone would have noticed it at some point. I just happened to be the person who made the connection.”

What does the heatmap show?

Although the location of military bases is generally well-known and satellite imagery can show the outline of buildings, the heatmap can reveal which of them are most used, or the routes taken by soldiers.

You might also be interested in:

It displays the level of activity – shown as more intense light – and the movement of personnel inside the walls.

It also appears that location data has been tracked outside bases – which may show commonly used exercise routes or patrolled roads.

Skip Twitter post by @N_Waters89

End of Twitter post by @N_Waters89

Mr Ruser said he was shocked by how much detail he could see. “You can establish a pattern of life,” he said.

A significant risk

By Jonathan Marcus, defence and diplomatic correspondent

Many years ago, operational security was a relatively simple matter of not being physically overheard by the enemy.

Think of the British WWII poster with the slogan “Careless Talk Costs Lives”.

Well, no more. Our modern electronic age means that we all move around with a number of “signatures”; we send and receive a variety of signals, all of which can be tracked. And as the episode with the exercise tracker shows, you do not need to be an American or Russian spy to be able to see and analyse these signals.

Russian troops have been tracked in Ukraine or in Syria by studying their social media interactions or geo-location data from their mobile phone images.

Each piece of evidence is a fragment, but when added together it could pose a significant risk to security – in this case highlighting the location of formerly secret bases or undisclosed patterns of military activity.

Which bases are affected and why?

The app is far more popular in the West than elsewhere and major cities are aglow with jogging routines.

But in remote areas foreign military bases stand out as isolated “hotspots” and the activities of a single jogger can be illuminated on dark backgrounds.

Exercise activities stand out in such countries as Syria, Yemen, Niger, Afghanistan and Djibouti, among others.

Skip Twitter post by @tobiaschneider

End of Twitter post by @tobiaschneider

A US base at Tanf in Syria, near the Iraqi border, is an illuminated oblong, while forward bases in Helmand, Afghanistan, are also lit up.

Although US bases have been frequently mentioned it is by no means just an American problem.

One image shows the perimeter of the main Russian base in Syria, Hmeimim, and possible patrol routes.

Skip Twitter post 2 by @Nrg8000

End of Twitter post 2 by @Nrg8000

The UK’s RAF base at Mount Pleasant in the Falkland Islands is also lit up with activity, as are popular swimming spots nearby.

And it is not exclusively the more remote areas either. Jeffrey Lewis in the Daily Beast highlights one potential security flaw at a Taiwan missile command centre.

Neither is it just military personnel who could be affected, but also aid workers and NGO staffers in remoter areas too.

Both state and non-state actors could use the data to their advantage.

Can’t you apply a privacy setting?

Yes. The settings available in Strava’s app allow users to explicitly opt out of data collection for the heatmap – even for activities not marked as private – or to set up “privacy zones” in certain locations.

Strava has not said much since the concerns were raised but it released a brief statement highlighting that the data used had been anonymised, and “excludes activities that have been marked as private and user-defined privacy zones”.

Skip Twitter post by @arawnsley

End of Twitter post by @arawnsley

But journalist Rosie Spinks is one of those who has expressed concern at the privacy system.

In an article for Quartz last year she said there was too much onus on the consumer to navigate an opting-out system that required different levels.

Then there is the fear that hackers could access Strava’s database and find the details of individual users.

What have authorities said?

A US Department of Defense spokeswoman, Maj Audricia Harris, said it took “matters like these very seriously and is reviewing the situation to determine if any additional training or guidance is required”.

The US has been aware of such problems, publishing a tract called Enhanced Assessments and Guidance Are Needed to Address Security Risks in DOD.

In 2016, the US military banned Pokemon GO from government-issued mobile phones,

An image of the Pentagon on the Strava heatmap showed no activity.

Image copyright
Strava

Image caption

The heatmap showed no data from inside the Pentagon

The UK’s Ministry of Defence said it also took “the security of its personnel and establishments very seriously and keeps them under constant review” but would not comment on specific security arrangements.

Hillary Clinton’s ‘Fire and Fury’ reading on Grammys slammed by Nikki Haley, Donald Trump, Jr.

Leave a reply

Hillary Clinton reads from “Fire and Fury” in a skit for the 60th Annual Grammy Awards.

 (CBS)

Hillary Clinton’s surprise Trump-bashing cameo during the 60th Annual Grammy Awards on Sunday night caused at least a couple of viewers to switch channels, namely the president’s U.N. ambassador, and his oldest son.

Grammys host James Corden set up a pre-taped bit about who might take home next year’s spoken word gong.

“We know that our current president does love winning awards and the good news is he may just be the subject of next year’s winner [for Best Spoken Word Album],” Corden announced. “The question I’ve got is, who’ll be the narrator?”

Outspoken anti-Trump stars John Legend and Cher then auditioned to be the narrator for Michael Wolff’s book “Fire and Fury” about Trump’s White House.



Snoop Dogg, DJ Khaled and Cardi B also read excerpts from the book during the fake auditions.

Finally, Clinton read from the book and Corden declared, “That’s it! We’ve got it!”

Clinton said, “You think so? The Grammy’s in the bag?”

Corden replied, “In the bag!”

The segment resulted in wild applause from the star-studded crowd. But not all were pleased. United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley slammed the bit. However, the harshest words came from Donald Trump Jr.

After the show, Grammys Executive Producer Ken Ehrlich said getting Clinton to appear in the skit wasn’t tough. However, he credited Corden with sealing the deal. 

“She kind of took a couple of days to say ‘yes,’ but ultimately she saw the script, she knew what we were doing and she liked it.” 

Clinton recorded the segment near her home on Friday, the Grammys producer added.

He also admitted that he was aware the cameo was receiving some backlash, but said they stand by what they did.

You can find Sasha Savitsky on Twitter @SashaFB.

Bruno Mars, Kendrick Lamar Dominate 2018 Grammy Awards

Leave a reply

Bruno Mars and Kendrick Lamar dominated the 60th Annual Grammy Awards Sunday night, with both artists picking up a slew of trophies and delivering some of the night’s most memorable performances. Mars pulled off an incredible Grammys sweep, winning all six awards for which he was nominated and snatching the night’s three biggest prizes: Record of the Year for “24K Magic,” Song of the Year for “That’s What I Like” and Album of the Year for 24K Magic.

After winning Album of the Year, Mars first thanked his fellow nominees, saying, “Lorde, Kung Fu Kenny [Kendrick Lamar], Jay-Z, [Childish] Gambino, you guys are the reason why I’m in the studio pulling my hair out, because I know you guys are only gonna come with the top shelf artistry and music.”

He went on to talk about the earliest days of his music career, performing for tourists in Hawaii as a teenager and quipping, “I would put together a setlist of like 10 to 12 songs and I’ll be honest, I was incredible at 15.” Noting that he later learned that those songs were written by Babyface, Jimmy Jam, Terry Lewis or Teddy Riley, Mars said, “I remember seeing it firsthand, people dancing that had never met each other from two sides of the globe, dancing with each other, toasting with each other, celebrating together. All I wanted to do with this album was that. Those songs are written with nothing but joy and for one reason and for one reason only, and that’s love – and that’s all I wanted to bring with this album.” 

Mars also won Best RB Performance and Song for “That’s What I Like,” and Best RB Album and Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical for 24K Magic. 

As for Lamar, the rapper opened the proceedings with a politically charged medley of Damn tracks that featured U2, an army of dancers and in-performance commentary from Dave Chappelle (“I just wanted to remind the audience that the only thing more frightening than watching a black man be honest in America is being an honest black man in America,” the comedian said). 

Lamar went on to win four Grammys: Best Rap Performance for “Humble,” Best Rap/Sung Performance for “Loyalty” with Rihanna, Best Music Video for “Humble” and Best Rap Album for Damn. 

“This is a special award because of rap music – this is the thing that got me on the stage, got me to tour all around the world, support my family and all that,” Lamar said while accepting Best Rap Album. “Most importantly, it showed me a true definition of what being an artist was. From the jump, I thought it was about the accolades and the cars and the clothes, but it’s really about expressing yourself and putting that paint on the canvas for the world to evolve for the next listener, the next generation after that. Hip-hop has done that for me.”

Late Late Show host James Corden returned to host the Grammys, though instead of delivering an opening monologue or performance, he primarily popped up for the occasional cheeky bit or quip. The “Carpool Karaoke” mastermind tapped Sting and Shaggy for a reconfigured version of his signature sketch for the New York City subway, while he later skewered President Trump by hosting auditions for the audiobook of Michael Wolff’s explosive, Fire and Fury. The readers included John Legend, Snoop Dogg, Cher, an incredulous Cardi B (“Is this how he lives?”) and Hillary Clinton.

Other politically potent moments included Lamar’s opening salvo and U2’s performance of “Get Out of Your Own Way” in front of the Statue of Liberty. Camila Cabello also shared an impassioned plea on behalf of the embattled Dreamers, a sentiment the rapper Logic echoed after his performance of “1-800-273-8255” with Alessia Cara and Khalid.

But the night’s most potent moment belonged to Kesha, who partnered with Cabello, Cyndi Lauper, Julia Michaels, Andra Day and Bebe Rexha for a rendition of “Praying,” off her Grammy-nominated album, Rainbow. The performance served as a powerful statement of solidarity with the Time’s Up movement, which other artists supported by wearing white roses to the ceremony. Janelle Monáe introduced Kesha’s performance with a moving speech, in which she declared, “We come in peace, but we mean business. And to those who would dare try to silence us, we offer two words: ‘Time’s up.”

With only nine awards handed out on stage, performances comprised the bulk of the 60th Annual Grammy Awards, ranging from extravagant and spectacular to stripped-down and stirring. Bruno Mars and Cardi B drenched the stage in Nineties nostalgia for a rendition of their “Finesse” remix, while Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee unleashed a scintillating performance of their hit “Despacito.” DJ Khaled delivered one of his trademark inspirational speeches – “They said I’d never perform at the Grammys, they played themselves!” – before a sultry rendition of “Wild Thoughts” with Rihanna and Bryson Tiller.

Other performers took a more straightforward approach. Lady Gaga partnered with Mark Ronson for a minimalist rendition of “Joanne” and “Million Reasons,” while Pink ditched the gravity-defying theatrics of her 2010 Grammy performance to belt “Wild Hearts Can’t Be Broken” alongside a sign-language interpreter. RB star SZA delivered a dazzling rendition of “Broken Clocks,” while Childish Gambino showed off his impressive range with a chilling performance of the gauzy funk cut, “Terrified.”

The Grammys served up several high-profile collaborations as well, with Miley Cyrus joining this year’s lifetime achievement award recipient, Elton John, for a performance of “Tiny Dancer.” However, the most stirring collaborations came during the ceremony’s most somber moments. Eric Church and Maren Morris led a cover of Eric Clapton’s “Tears in Heaven” to honor the victims of the Las Vegas Harvest Festival shooting and the Manchester Arena bombing, while Chris Stapleton and Emmylou Harris paid tribute to Tom Petty with a performance of “Wildflowers.”

As always, the bulk of the Grammys were handed out during a pre-show ceremony. Most notably, Leonard Cohen posthumously won his first solo Grammy for Best Rock Rock Performance for his song, “You Want It Darker,” the title track off his final album (Cohen previously received the Grammy’s lifetime achievement award in 2010, and earned an Album of the Year trophy for his contribution to Herbie Hancock’s River: The Joni Letters). Other artists that picked up their first-ever trophies included Childish Gambino (Best Traditional RB Performance, “Redbone”), the National (Best Alternative Album, Sleep Well Beast), Mastodon (Best Metal Performance, “Sultan’s Curse”) and the War on Drugs, who bested the likes of Metallica and Queens of the Stone Age to win Best Rock Album for A Deeper Understanding. 

Other big winners included country darling Chris Stapleton, who won a trio of awards for Best Country Song (“Broken Halos”), Best Country Album (From A Room: Volume 1) and Best Country Solo Performance (“Either Way”). An absent Ed Sheeran – who was not nominated in any of the major categories – picked up two awards, including Best Pop Vocal Album for ÷ (Divide) and Best Pop Solo Performance for “Shape of You.”

Portugal. the Man also pulled off an upset in the Best Pop Duo/Group Performance category for their surprise hit, “Feel It Still,” while Aimee Mann won Best Folk Album for her LP Mental Illness and the Rolling Stones picked up Best Traditional Blues Album for Blue and Lonesome. Other pre-show winners included the Weeknd, who won Best Urban Contemporary Album for Starboy, the Foo Fighters, who took home Best Rock Song for “Run,” and Jason Isbell, who picked up two awards: Best Americana Album and Best American Roots Song for The Nashville Sound and “If We Were Vampires,” respectively.

Among the other notable winners were Dave Chappelle, who won Best Comedy Album and Carrie Fisher, who earned a posthumous Grammy in the Best Spoken Word Album category for her reading of her memoir, The Princess Diarist. Greg Kurstin won Producer of the Year, non-Classical, for his work with an array of artists, from the Foo Fighters, Beck and Liam Gallagher to Zayn, Halsey and Kendrick Lamar. And Tony Bennett also added another Grammy to his collection, winning Best Traditional Pop Vocal Album for his album, Tony Bennett Celebrates 90.

While past Grammy Awards have leaned on unexpected all-star collaborations, this year’s show functioned more as a 2017 pop music jukebox and offered perhaps just one certified “Grammy moment”: Kesha’s performance of “Praying” and Monáe’s introductory speech. Kesha’s ongoing legal battle with her alleged abuser, Dr. Luke, is one of the most prominent sexual assault cases in the entertainment world, and the vocal power the singer and her cohorts amassed on “Praying” served as a powerful reminder that the fight for justice and equality has just begun.

But this moment for Time’s Up and #MeToo was just that – a singular spot in a nearly three-and-a-half hour broadcast. While Monáe made clear in her speech that sexual harassment was “right here in our industry, as well,” the issue did not crop up again during the ceremony, perhaps a testament to the fact that the music industry has not yet reckoned with  sexual assault and harassment to the same degree as Hollywood. 

While the Grammys were happy to tout the fact that this year’s nominees featured its most diverse group of artists, they inadvertently reemphasized their own shortcomings and long-standing gender gap (a recent report detailed that just 9.3 percent of nominees over the past six years have been women). On Sunday, only two female artists received awards during the Grammys’ televised broadcast: Rihanna, who shared Best Rap/Sung Performance for “Loyalty” with Kendrick Lamar, and Alessia Cara, who picked up Best New Artist.