Category Archives: United Airline News

Missile alert blunder leaves Hawaiians fearful, skeptical

A blunder that caused more than a million people in Hawaii to fear that they were about to be struck by a nuclear missile fed skepticism Sunday about the government’s ability to keep them informed in a real emergency.

Residents and tourists alike remained rattled a day after the mistaken alert was blasted out to cellphones across the islands with a warning to seek immediate shelter and the ominous statement “This is not a drill.”

“My confidence in our so-called leaders’ ability to disseminate this vital information has certainly been tarnished,” said Patrick Day, who sprang from bed when the alert was issued Saturday morning. “I would have to think twice before acting on any future advisory.”

The erroneous warning was sent during a shift change at the state’s Emergency Management Agency when someone doing a routine test hit the live alert button, state officials said.

Hopes Dim for DACA Deal as Lawmakers Battle Over Trump’s Immigration Remarks

“I’m not a racist. I am the least racist person you have ever interviewed, that I can tell you,” Mr. Trump said as he arrived at Trump International Golf Club for dinner with Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the majority leader.

The rift over Mr. Trump’s comments, and how they have since been recounted, risked further eroding trust between Democrats and Republicans at the beginning of a critical week for Congress. Government funding is set to expire on Friday, and lawmakers will need to pass a stopgap spending measure to avoid a government shutdown on Saturday.

And lawmakers are already facing a difficult fight over the politically volatile subject of immigration, with the fates of hundreds of thousands of young immigrants hanging in the balance. Adding to the uncertain picture for those immigrants, the Trump administration resumed accepting renewals for the program over the weekend, under orders from a federal judge who is hearing a legal challenge to Mr. Trump’s dismantling of the program.

But in Congress, the battle took on an increasingly personal dimension as Mr. Perdue and Mr. Cotton essentially accused Mr. Durbin of lying about the president’s comments, even after the vulgar remarks were widely reported and the White House did not immediately dispute that the president had made them.

“I didn’t hear that word either,” Mr. Cotton said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “And I was sitting no further away from Donald Trump than Dick Durbin was.”

Mr. Cotton said Mr. Durbin “has a history of misrepresenting what happens in White House meetings,” an assertion that Mr. Perdue made in his own interview Sunday morning on ABC’s “This Week.”

Graphic

How Republican Lawmakers Responded to Trump’s Vulgar Immigration Remarks

Reports of the president’s comments prompted outcry from some lawmakers, but they were followed by notable silence from others.


Ben Marter, a spokesman for Mr. Durbin, responded by suggesting that Mr. Perdue and Mr. Cotton should not be believed.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“Credibility is something that’s built by being consistently honest over time,” Mr. Marter wrote on Twitter. “Senator Durbin has it. Senator Perdue does not. Ask anyone who’s dealt with both.”

Mr. Graham had previously told a fellow South Carolina Republican, Senator Tim Scott, that reports in the news media of Mr. Trump’s language were “basically accurate.” A spokesman for Mr. Graham did not respond to a request for comment on Sunday.

Senator Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican who is part of a bipartisan group of senators that has developed an immigration proposal, said on Sunday that people in the room with Mr. Trump during Thursday’s meeting told him that the president had used the inflammatory language.

“I was in a meeting directly afterwards where those who had presented to the president our proposal spoke about the meeting,” he said on “This Week.” “I heard that account before the account even went public.”

The other lawmakers at the meeting, all Republicans, have not offered any public recollection of what the president said.

The Homeland Security secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, who also attended the meeting, said on “Fox News Sunday” that she did not recall the president “saying that exact phrase.”

Mr. Durbin had told reporters on Friday that Mr. Trump called African nations “shitholes,” which Mr. Durbin said was “the exact word used by the president, not just once, but repeatedly.” He called the president’s comments “hate-filled, vile and racist.” At the meeting, Mr. Durbin said Mr. Trump also questioned whether the United States needed more Haitians.

Mr. Graham is said to have admonished the president during the meeting, telling him that “America is an idea, not a race.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Saying that President Barack Obama had exceeded his authority when he created the program that shields from deportation young immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children, known as Dreamers, Mr. Trump moved to end it in September.

He gave Congress six months to find a fix for the program, called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

Democrats have been pushing to secure a deal by Friday’s government funding deadline that would protect Dreamers, hoping to capitalize on the leverage they have as a result of that deadline. Democratic votes will be needed to pass the stopgap spending measure in the Senate, where government funding measures require 60 votes, and Democratic votes might be needed in the House as well.

Republican leaders say they want to address DACA as well, but separately from funding the government. Compared with their Democratic counterparts, Republican leaders are operating on a longer time frame for taking action, given the six-month window that Mr. Trump gave Congress. They also have to contend with internal divisions over immigration policy.

The bipartisan group of senators, including Mr. Durbin and Mr. Graham, reached an agreement last week that would provide a path to citizenship for DACA recipients while also providing money for border security and making other changes to immigration policy.

But Mr. Trump dismissed the proposal, calling it a “big step backwards.” And on Sunday, he offered a pessimistic take on Twitter: “DACA is probably dead because the Democrats don’t really want it, they just want to talk and take desperately needed money away from our military.”

Still, administration officials said they intended to abide by an order from Judge William Alsup of Federal District Court in San Francisco last week to restart the DACA program, with some modifications, while a legal challenge plays out. On Saturday, officials did just that by updating the program’s website to once again accept renewals.

But administration officials hope the judge’s decision will be temporary. Officials said the president’s lawyers are examining whether to appeal his order, which could lead to a ruling allowing the administration to shut the program down again. The administration could also choose to modify its legal reasoning to satisfy the judge’s criticisms.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Either way, immigrant rights activists are not counting on legal action to be the ultimate protection for the Dreamers. Several said they believe the only real solution for the hundreds of thousands of young immigrants is to convince Congress to act soon.

The court ruling could lessen the pressure for that kind of action — at least in the short term — since some young immigrants can once again renew their protected status for another two years.

Lawyers and directors of community legal services spent Sunday preparing fact sheets and answering calls that have been flooding their offices.

Most of the calls that Hasan Shafiqullah, the director of the immigration unit of the Legal Aid Society of New York, said he has been receiving started with the burning questions “Is this real? Can I file?”

The answer, for now, he said, is yes. But he is concerned for his clients about another turnabout in the courts.

“It’s just the emotional roller coaster that our clients are on,” he said.

Allan Wernick, the director of CUNY Citizenship Now, a legal services program at the City University of New York, said filing renewals could be very powerful, at least symbolically, to Mr. Trump.

“The more applications get in, the more it is clear that his ending the program has real-world impact,” he said.

Liz Robbins contributed reporting from New York, and Michael D. Shear from Palm Beach, Fla.


Continue reading the main story

Chelsea Manning files to run for US Senate in Maryland

Chelsea E. Manning, the transgender former Army private who was convicted of passing sensitive government documents to WikiLeaks, is seeking to run for the U.S. Senate in Maryland, according to federal election filings.

Manning would be challenging Democrat Benjamin L. Cardin, who is in his second term in the Senate and is up for reelection in November. Cardin is Maryland’s senior senator and is considered an overwhelming favorite to win a third term.

Manning declined to speak about her filing or to say why she might be running when reached at her home in Bethesda on Saturday.

She said she might release a statement in the coming days.

“Our only statement on the record is ‘No statement,’ ” Manning said.

Manning, 30, who was formerly known as Bradley Manning, was convicted in 2013 of the largest leak of classified documents in U.S. history and was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Last year, as President Barack Obama was nearing the end of his term in office, he commuted Manning’s sentence to time served, and she was released from a military prison in Kansas.

The news of Manning’s filing caught Maryland’s political class by surprise Saturday afternoon. It was first reported in a tweet by the conservative media outlet Red Maryland.

Cardin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has an extensive fundraising base in Maryland and is not considered particularly vulnerable to a challenge from any known figures within the state. However, a candidate with national name recognition, such as Manning, who comes in from the outside could tap a network of donors interested in elevating a progressive agenda.

Without mentioning Manning, Sue Walitsky, Cardin’s spokeswoman, said: “Senator Cardin is looking forward to a vigorous debate of the issues and a robust conversation with Maryland voters.”

Manning would also have to file with Maryland State Board of Elections to get her name on the ballot.

Manning moved to Maryland after her release from prison. Since then, she has written for the Guardian and Medium on issues of transparency, free speech and civil liberties, transgender rights and computer security, according to her website.

Manning’s statement of candidacy was filed with the Federal Election Commission on Thursday.

She is running as a Democrat and refers to Maryland as her “home state” on her website. The Democratic primary is scheduled for the end of June.

Manning’s first column for the Guardian said Obama’s election in 2008 was a political awakening for her.

Manning wrote that Obama left behind “hints of a progressive legacy” but very few permanent accomplishments.

“This vulnerable legacy should remind us that what we really need is a strong and unapologetic progressive to lead us,” Manning wrote. “What we need as well is a relentless grassroots movement to hold that leadership accountable.”

Evan Greer, campaign director of the nonprofit organization Fight for the Future and a close supporter of Manning’s while she was imprisoned, said the news is exciting.

“Chelsea Manning has fought for freedom and sacrificed for it in ways that few others have,” Greer wrote in an email. “The world is a better place with her as a free woman, and this latest news makes it clear she is only beginning to make her mark on it.”

Todd Eberly, a political-science professor at St. Mary’s College in Maryland, said Donald Trump’s unexpected rise to the presidency opened the door for political neophytes such as Manning.

“My initial thought quite literally was, ‘Donald Trump is president, Oprah Winfrey is the leading contender for Democrats in 2020, why the hell not Chelsea Manning in the U.S. Senate?’ ” he said

Judging from her past statements, Manning’s brand could be one of “unapologetic progressivism, no compromise, take no prisoners,” he said.

Manning enlisted in the military in 2007 and was deployed to Iraq two years later as an intelligence analyst, according to her website.

In 2010, Manning was arrested after she provided a trove of nearly 750,000 documents to WikiLeaks that included information about the U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, State Department cables and information about prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.

Manning’s high-profile leak drew media coverage around the world. U.S. officials said the material placed the lives of U.S. soldiers and Afghan informants at risk, but Manning said she had a duty to inform the public about how the United States was conducting its wars.

Three years later, Manning was convicted on multiple charges, including violating the Espionage Act, and received a lengthy sentence. While serving time at Fort Leavenworth, Manning attempted suicide and went on a hunger strike, before the Army approved her for gender reassignment surgery.

Her case remains politically divisive. She has been lauded as a hero by some on the left but also decried as a traitor by many, including President Trump.

Her felony convictions do not appear to bar her from running for the Senate. The Constitution simply requires that a senator be at least 30 years old, have been a citizen of the United States for nine years and be a resident of the state from which the person is seeking office.

Katherine Shaver contributed to this report.

Trump does more damage to himself than his opponents ever manage to do

As the new year heads into its third week, President Trump remains on a personal political losing streak. None of his opponents — not the Democrats, not the Never Trumpers, not any of the others — can damage him as badly as he hurts himself.

It was only a few days ago when he opened up an immigration negotiating session with bipartisan members of Congress to the cameras and was lauded in some quarters for doing so. He was described in some accounts as a president doing the real business of the country. That proved to be a one-off moment.

Before and after, the conversation around the presidency — the conversation at times forced by the president — involved topics that were alternately disquieting and shocking, from questions about his mental fitness and stability to serve as president (which he helped elevate with tweets) to the racist and vulgar comment he made about African and other nations in a private meeting.

Together they reinforce a portrait of a president who doesn’t appear to understand or appreciate the importance of the immigrant experience, often lacks clarity of his own views or the details of issues he is negotiating, and who projects an image that regularly flies in the face of standards long applied to those who occupy the Oval Office.

Trump has tried to wiggle away from asking why the United States must take immigrants from what he called “shithole countries.” Amid the firestorm set off by Post reporter Josh Dawsey’s account of the meeting, Trump acknowledged that he used some “tough” language during the meeting at the White House but said he never used the exact words attributed to him.

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who was present in the meeting, condemned President Trump’s remarks as “hate-filled, vile and racist.” (Kiichiro Sato/AP)

His claim was quickly undercut by others. Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), one of the attendees, directly contradicted the president’s statement, saying the president used words that were “hate-filled, vile and racist.” Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who has been courted by the president, issued a statement of his own that implicitly backed up Durbin. Graham said he had conveyed his feelings about what was said at the meeting directly to the president at the time. Graham notably did not side with Trump’s version of events.

Two other senators at the meeting, Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.), both of whom opposed the bipartisan deal Durbin and Graham had brought to the president for his consideration, claimed they could not recall the language “specifically,” which is hardly an affirmation of the president’s explanation.

Trump has been at this place before on the issue of race. In 2011, as he was toying with running for president, he trafficked in the false allegation that President Obama was not born in the United States, claiming at one point that he had sent private investigators to Hawaii to find the evidence.

Obama punctured that canard by producing his long-form birth certificate. But the overt attempt to profit from the birther issue paid dividends politically for Trump and set him on a path that eventually put him in the Oval Office.

Through the course of the 2016 campaign, he attacked Mexican immigrants as rapists and criminals. He attacked a federal judge born in the United States of Mexican heritage, a judge who happened to be overseeing a lawsuit against Trump University. He got into a fight with a Gold Star family, who happened to be Muslim and whose son was killed in the Iraq War, after they used the platform of the Democratic National Committee to criticize his campaign proposal for a ban on Muslim immigration.

As president, he twice offered kind words for the white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville, saying that among them were some “very fine people.” Later, he called National Football League players who knelt during the national anthem, in protest of policing practices in some African American communities, sons of bitches and said the owners should fire them.

Now he has used a horrible vulgarity to denigrate nations whose immigrants to the United States have made valuable contributions to the country. He compounded his dismissal of those countries by asking why the United States country cannot take more immigrants from places such as Norway, which happens to be predominantly white.

Condemnations came quickly from different parts of the political spectrum. A U.N. human rights spokesman said there was no other word than “racist” to describe Trump’s comment. The episode once again left the president politically isolated, save for those who either agree with him or are willing to set aside their discomfort, as many voters did when he was elected.

What the president said in the Oval Office on Thursday was only the most shocking of the comments that have marked the early days of 2018. He has continued his attacks on the First Amendment and freedom of the press. He has questioned the libel laws of the country, which protect the press in covering public figures, except in cases of recklessness and malice.

His response to events that go against him is to lash out by declaring that the processes of our democratic system are rigged or broken. His perspective on democratic governance is viewed almost entirely through the lens of whether he, personally, is winning or losing.

For some Trump advisers and for many Republican elected officials, there is an almost automatic reaction to turn away when things like this occur, either to pretend what happened did not happen or to dismiss them as a president blowing off steam, like somebody ranting in a bar.

The consequences are far greater. As these kinds of comments pile one on top of another, they define the Trump presidency — and, in the eyes of much of the world, the current state of United States and the Republican Party itself — as much as the policies he and party leaders are pursuing.

Hawaii Panics After Alert About Incoming Missile Is Sent in Error

At no time, officials said, was there any indication that a nuclear attack had been launched on the United States. The Federal Communications Commission announced that it had begun “a full investigation into the FALSE missile alert in Hawaii.”

The alert went out at about 8:10 a.m., lighting up phones of people still in bed, having coffee by the beach at a Waikiki resort, or up for an early surf. “BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII. SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL,” it read.

Hawaii has been on high emotional alert — it began staging monthly air-raid drills, complete with sirens, in December — since President Trump and Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, began exchanging nuclear threats. Estimates vary, but it would take a little more than half an hour for a missile launched from North Korea to reach Hawaii, traversing an arc of roughly 5,700 miles. State officials said that residents here would have as little as 12 minutes to find shelter once an alert was issued.

Within moments of the first announcement, people flocked to shelters, crowding highways in scenes of terror and helplessness. Emergency sirens wailed in parts of the state, adding to the panic.

“I was running through all the scenarios in my head, but there was nowhere to go, nowhere to pull over to,” said Mike Staskow, a retired military captain.

Allyson Niven, who lives in Kailua-Kona, said her first instinct was to gather her family as she contemplated what she thought would be her final minutes alive.

“We fully felt like we were about to die,” she said. “I drove to try to get to my kids even though I knew I probably wouldn’t make it, and I fully was visualizing what was happening while I was on the road. It was awful.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Ray Gerst was vacationing on Oahu with his wife to celebrate their 28th wedding anniversary. He received the alert as they pulled up for their tour of Kualoa Ranch.

“All the buses stopped, and people came running out of the ranch and said, ‘Just sit still for a minute, nobody get off the bus, nobody get off the bus,’” he said.

They were taken into the mountains, Mr. Gerst said, and dropped off at a concrete bunker. They sheltered in place for about 15 minutes, he said, during which time they had no cell signal.

“It was scary,” Mr. Gerst said. “I mean, there was no intel.”

At Konawaena High School on the Island of Hawaii, where a high school wrestling championship was taking place, school officials, more accustomed to alerts of high surf or tsunamis, moved people to the center of the gym as they tried to figure out how to take shelter from a missile.

“Everyone cooperated,” said Kellye Krug, the athletic director at the school. “Once they were gathered, we let them use cellphones to reach loved ones. There were a couple kids who were emotional, the coaches were right there to console kids. After the retraction was issued, we gave kids time to reach out again.”

Matt LoPresti, a state representative, told CNN that he and his family headed for a bathroom. “I was sitting in the bathtub with my children, saying our prayers,” he said.

Natalie Haena, 38, of Honolulu, said she was getting ready to take her daughter to ice skating lessons when the alert came. “There’s nothing to prep for a missile coming in,” she said. “We have no bomb shelters or anything like that. There’s nowhere to go.”

Photo

An electronic sign reading “Missile alert in error: There is no threat” on a highway in Hawaii.

Credit
Anthony Quintano/Civil Beat

In Washington, Lindsay Walters, a deputy press secretary, said that President Trump had been informed of the events. “The president has been briefed on the state of Hawaii’s emergency management exercise,” she said. “This was purely a state exercise.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii said the mistake was “totally inexcusable.”

“The whole state was terrified,” he said. “There needs to be tough and quick accountability and a fixed process.”

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

While the cellphone alerting system is in state authorities’ hands, the detection of missile launches is the responsibility of the United States Strategic Command and Northern Command. It was the military — not Hawaiian officials — that was the first to declare there was no evidence of a missile launch.

The false alert was a stark reminder of what happens when the old realities of the nuclear age collide with the speed — and the potential for error — inherent in the internet age. The alert came at one of the worst possible moments — when tension with North Korea has been at one of the highest points in decades, and when Mr. Kim’s government has promised more missile tests and threatened an atmospheric nuclear test.

During the Cold War there were many false alarms. William J. Perry, the defense secretary during the Clinton administration, recalled in his memoir, “My Journey at the Nuclear Brink,” a moment in 1979 when, as an undersecretary of defense, he was awakened by a watch officer who reported that his computer system was showing 200 intercontinental ballistic missiles headed to the United States. “For one heart-stopping second I thought my worst nuclear nightmare had come true,” Mr. Perry wrote.

It turned out that a training tape had been mistakenly inserted into an early-warning system computer. No one woke up the president. But Mr. Perry went on to speculate what might have happened if such a warning had come “during the Cuban Missile Crisis or a Mideast war?”

The United States faces an especially difficult problem today, not just because of tense relations with North Korea but also because of growing fears inside the military about the cyber vulnerability of the nuclear warning system and nuclear control systems.

Because of its location, Hawaii — more than any other part of the United States — has been threatened by escalating tensions and the risks of war, and preparations have already begun there.

On Friday, the day before the erroneous alert, several hundred people attended an event in Honolulu sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce in which military commanders, politicians and others discussed the threat to the islands’ population.

“The U.S. is the designated recipient — and that’s because we are public enemy No. 1 to North Korea,” Dan Leaf, a retired Air Force lieutenant general and Pacific Command deputy commander, was quoted as saying in the Honolulu Star Advertiser.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

The Hawaii Emergency Management Agency has been holding “are you ready” drills. As a chain of islands, Hawaii is subject to all kinds of threats — hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis — but officials have made clear that none is more urgent now than the threat of an attack by North Korea, given how little time there would be between an alert and the detonation of a bomb.

The fifth page of an emergency preparation pamphlet issued by the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency features a picture of a rocket lifting off: “Nuclear Threat — Unlikely But Cannot Ignore It.”

Vern T. Miyagi, the administrator of the agency, said that during the drill, an employee — whom he did not identify — mistakenly pushed a button on a computer screen to send out the alert, rather than one marked to test it. He said the employee answered “yes” when asked by the system if he was sure he wanted to send the message.

Mr. Miyagi, going through a detailed timeline of the events at an afternoon news conference, said the agency tried to correct the error on social media. It took 38 minutes to send out a follow-up message canceling the original alert, which he acknowledged was a shortcoming with the alert system that the agency would fix.

Mr. Rapoza said he did not know if anyone would be disciplined for the mistake. “At this point, our major concern is to make sure we do what we need to do to reassure the public,” he said. “This is not a time for pointing fingers.”

The panic that followed the alert — if relatively short-lived — gripped the islands. There were reports of people seeking shelter by parking their cars inside a highway tunnel that cuts through a mountain. When the announcement was rescinded, a digital highway sign read: “Missile alert in error: There is no threat.”

People in Hawaii tend to know what to do to protect themselves to threats of a tsunami or a hurricane. The prospect of nuclear annihilation was entirely new terrain.

“So this was the most terrifying few minutes of my LIFE!” Paul Wilson, a professor at Brigham Young University-Hawaii, said on Twitter. “I just want to know why it took 38 minutes to announce it was a mistake?!?”

Chris Tacker, a veteran who lives in Kealakekua, said the mistake had left her angry and frustrated.

“I didn’t know where to go,” she said. “Anyone try to dig a hole in lava? Good luck trying to build a shelter. I’m stocking my liquor cabinet.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Still, she added, “If we don’t have our sense of humor about this, it’s all over.”

Correction: January 13, 2018

An earlier version of this article misspelled the surname of a retired Air Force lieutenant general quoted in the Honolulu Star Advertiser. The general’s name is Dan Leaf, not Leak.


Continue reading the main story

Trump’s Demand to Rewrite Iran Deal Tests a Weakened Diplomatic Corps

He also ordered targeted sanctions against the head of Iran’s judiciary, Sadeq Larijani, a powerful figure whom the administration holds culpable for the violent crackdown on the protests, as well as against an Iranian cyberwarfare unit that it accuses of internet censorship.

The nuclear deal, Mr. Trump said, drove Iranians into the streets because the government misused the proceeds from the lifting of sanctions. “It has served as a slush fund for weapons, terror and oppression, and to further line the pockets of corrupt regime leaders,” he said in a statement.

But that is precisely why European leaders argue that keeping the deal in place makes even more sense now: because it keeps a harsh spotlight on Iran’s leaders, and their malfeasance, rather than allowing the Iranians to paint the United States and its allies as the villains.

Diplomats from several European countries said that renegotiating the deal was a nonstarter. The best Mr. Trump could hope for, one official said, would be a commitment from Europe to begin work on a new and separate agreement. Such a step, they said, would require the participation of China and Russia, which are also signatories to the deal, as well as Iran itself — something the White House ruled out.

“If we want seriously to be able to raise the price to the Iranians of what they are doing internally and externally, we need the Europeans,” said Dennis B. Ross, a former adviser to President Barack Obama who helped devise his Iran policy. “But if they think that we are only interested in walking away from the nuclear deal, they won’t join us.”

The administration, other experts said, is locked into a policy that has two major pillars: dismantling Mr. Obama’s nuclear deal and confronting Iran on its aggression in the region, through its support of militant groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon and other proxies in Yemen, Syria and Iraq.

That is not surprising, given that the defense secretary, Jim Mattis, and the national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, are former commanders who served in Iraq and blame Iran for the death of American soldiers there.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Even below that level, the administration’s Iran policy is heavily influenced by the military. Joel Rayburn, the top Iran policymaker at the National Security Council, is a former military intelligence officer, as is Andrew L. Peek, a senior Iran policymaker at the State Department. Several of the department’s nonmilitary Iran experts have been pushed out in recent months.

Photo

President Trump’s action, which was widely expected, is the third time he has given a reprieve to the agreement.

Credit
Abedin Taherkenareh/European Pressphoto Agency

Now, the administration is suddenly grappling with an Iranian government that is weakened and divided by the protests — a political development that the Americans did not anticipate.

“When you’re dealing with Iran’s regional affairs, you’re dealing with how it supplies proxies and militias,” said Ray Takeyh, an Iran expert at the Council on Foreign Relations who worked in the Obama administration. “If you’re thinking about Iran’s internal problems, that is a more difficult problem. You’re thinking about fissures, and how to exploit them.”

Mr. Takeyh said Mr. Obama was similarly caught off guard in 2009 by the protests that became known as the Green Movement. At the time, he was trying to entice Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, into talks. That is one reason he reacted so little to those protests — a reaction that Mr. Trump criticized in his statement on Friday.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Ideally, Mr. Ross said, policy toward Iran would be a mix of coercive measures and diplomatic inducements. “With Obama, one could argue that the coercive part of the equation was not believable,” he said. “With Trump, the diplomatic side of the equation may prove not to be believable.”

The White House appears to recognize the weakness in its diplomatic ranks. It is considering the appointment of a special envoy for Iran, who could negotiate with the Europeans on the nuclear deal, as well as marshal a stronger response to Iran’s behavior in the region.

Any envoy would face a tough task: Administration officials said Mr. Trump was demanding an agreement that would eliminate all “sunset clauses,” under which Iran can resume activities like enriching uranium, and would explicitly link its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Iran fought against both of these demands in the negotiations that led to the 2015 deal.

With North Korea, the administration’s policy has been more balanced between diplomacy and military planning. But the talks between the Koreas have undermined Mr. Trump’s strategy, which is to impose maximum pressure on Pyongyang — including the threat of a military strike — to pressure Mr. Kim into giving up his nuclear arsenal.

The White House has sent General McMaster and the N.S.C.’s top Asia policymaker, Matthew Pottinger, to San Francisco, where they will meet with their counterparts from South Korea and Japan to discuss the implications of the North-South dialogue.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

General McMaster has spoken publicly about the need to prepare for a “preventive war” against North Korea. Mr. Pottinger, a retired Marine, also has a background in military intelligence, though at other times, he worked as a journalist and for a hedge fund.

White House officials are deeply skeptical of the overture from Mr. Kim to South Korea. They say he is trying to drive a wedge between South Korea and the United States. And they have urged the South Koreans to keep the exchanges limited to narrow issues, like security at the coming Winter Olympics in the South Korean town of Pyeongchang.

Mr. Trump, however, appears caught between continuing to heap ridicule on Mr. Kim and taking credit for the diplomatic opening. At Camp David last weekend, the president said he hoped the talks ranged far beyond the Olympics, and he backed them in a call with South Korea’s president, Moon Jae-in.

The trajectory of the talks may be out of Mr. Trump’s control anyway, according to experts on the region. Mr. Moon was elected on a platform of reducing tensions with the North. Young South Koreans, in particular, view Mr. Trump’s threats of war on North Korea with alarm — sometimes even more than the danger posed by Mr. Kim.

“The North Korea issue may be entering a new phase,” said Evan S. Medeiros, the top Asia adviser in Mr. Obama’s N.S.C. “Moon’s agenda and perceptions seem to be evolving, and, as cynical as we all are about North Korea, it is worth asking the question: Is Kim actually looking for a negotiated off-ramp, and what would such behavior look like?”

“Is the Trump administration, which has understandably focused on coercive tools to date, nimble enough to respond to this evolution?” he said.

Thomas Erdbrink contributed reporting.


Continue reading the main story

Porn Star Who Claimed Sexual Encounter With Trump Received Hush Money, Wall Street Journal Reports

A former star of pornographic movies received a $130,000 payment a month before the 2016 election that was part of an agreement to keep her from publicly discussing a sexual encounter she claimed to have had with Donald J. Trump, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday afternoon.

The Journal, citing people familiar with the matter, reported that Michael D. Cohen, who was a top lawyer at the Trump Organization, arranged the payment to the woman, Stephanie Clifford, after her lawyer negotiated a nondisclosure agreement.

Ms. Clifford, who was billed as Stormy Daniels in her videos, said the encounter with Mr. Trump took place in July 2006 after a celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe, The Journal reported. Mr. Trump married Melania Trump in 2005.

In a statement to The Journal, Mr. Cohen said of the alleged sexual encounter that “President Trump once again vehemently denies any such occurrence as has Ms. Daniels.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

He added, “You have attempted to perpetuate this false narrative for over a year; a narrative that has been consistently denied by all parties since at least 2011.”

Photo

Stephanie Clifford at a Trump Vodka launch party in 2008.

Credit
Chad Buchanan/Getty Images

The payment was made to Ms. Clifford through her lawyer, Keith Davidson, with funds sent to Mr. Davidson’s client-trust account at City National Bank in Los Angeles, The Journal reported.

Continue reading the main story

Trump’s vulgarity: Overt racism or a president who says what many think?

One barnyard epithet and the leader of the free world was now definitively a racist or, alternatively, was back in the good graces of those who had worried he’d been wavering in his nationalism.

One ugly denunciation of the population of much of the planet, and President Trump had once again propelled himself to center stage — boxing out discussion of any number of world crises and, more immediately, freezing progress toward a bipartisan deal on immigration policy.

Trump’s slur Thursday against the “shithole countries” from which he’d rather the United States take fewer immigrants sparked a louder than usual tempest Friday, but the storm took a very familiar shape.

Each side reacted more or less according to script: ever-more frustrated expressions of outrage from those who believe the president has confirmed his racism, and ever-more fervent defense from those who supported Trump in the first place because, as many of them have argued for two years, he says what many Americans think.

“Well, being president, I think he should be more careful with what he says,” said Marjorie Caddick, 93, a longtime Republican who lives in Munster, Ind., and voted for Trump. “He’s laughable and he doesn’t get the respect that he should have because he says these things.” But Caddick said that even if Trump is “too loose with his tongue . . . he means well.”

President Trump speaks during a press conference with cabinet members and Republican leadership at Camp David on Jan. 6. (Chris Kleponis/Bloomberg)

She also agreed with Trump on the need to tighten up on immigration: “These are poor countries, and . . . we’ve given them so much money, and it doesn’t get better.”

The storm over Trump’s comments — in which he was bemoaning immigration from Haiti, El Salvador and African countries rather than from wealthier nations like Norway — has taken the year-old debate over Trump’s demolition of presidential tradition to new terrain. For the first time in diplomatic history, nations around the world inserted a gutter vulgarity into official statements. The U.N.’s High Commissioner on Human Rights, Rupert Colville, declared that “there is no other word one can use but ‘racist.’”

“With one word,” wrote the New Yorker’s Robin Wright, Trump “has demolished his ability to be taken seriously on the global stage.”

But did he, really? Is Trump’s latest comment a showstopper — or just another scene in a long-running production that wins audiences through pugnacious behavior, profane language and all manner of provocation?

“This is par for the course,” said former House speaker Newt Gingrich, a supporter of the president who is writing a book about Trump’s America. “Trump relies on the fact that his opponents are so nihilistic and elitist that they’ll react hysterically to something like this. And his base isn’t remotely corroded by this. Almost anything he does that is outside the establishment resonates in the end with people who say well, at least he’s sticking it to the powerful.”

Gingrich said the normal concerns that presidents and other politicians have about their legacy and reputation don’t seem to apply to Trump, who has made smashing conventions the core of his brand for nearly half a century.

President Trump listens as Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson speaks during an event to honor Martin Luther King Jr., at the White House Friday. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

Critics of the president argued that the main issue is not Trump’s language or even what’s in his heart, but rather the policies he’s enacting and the midterm elections coming up this year.

“We’ve got to get beyond the antics and address the policy,” said Rev. William J. Barber II, a member of the NAACP’s national board who has been rallying progressives to “put checks and balances on Trump’s power by changing the makeup of the Congress.”

“It’s not just Trump,” Barber said. “Everyone in his administration . . . is participating in systemic racism . . . We turn our outrage into sustained organizing, protests, voter registration, and voter mobilization.”

Rev. Al Sharpton, the civil rights activist and TV talk host, said the fact that Trump’s slur came during a meeting about immigration policy put it in a different category from past controversial remarks. “Some of the stuff he said in the past was just as offensive and insulting,” he said, but this time, Trump was “framing 21st century Jim Crow immigration law.”

Sharpton plans to campaign for a congressional censure of the president. “The threat is not his rhetoric, it’s what he’s doing,” he said. “He’s making laws out of this . . . We have trade agreements with people in Africa. We work on security issues with African nations; that’s where ISIS is, that’s where al-Qaeda is. What do we get out of Norway? … If we insult everybody in Africa, how can we have intel on the ground for fighting ISIS and al-Qaeda?”

To Tiffany Mock, 50, a teacher and Trump supporter who lives in Cumberland, Md., Trump was simply noting that many more people from impoverished countries want to immigrate to the United States than from affluent nations like Norway.

“I don’t like the language or the comments that he made, but I do like that he’s putting America first,” she said, adding that she didn’t hear Trump favoring white immigrants over other races. “I didn’t take it as racist. He’s not a racist. I’m not a racist — although they say you’re a racist if you say that you’re not a racist.”

Right-wing extremists and white supremacists welcomed Trump’s comment. Former Ku Klux Klan leader and Louisiana legislator David Duke said the president “restores a lot of love in us by saying blunt but truthful things that no other president in our lifetime would dare say!”

On cable TV and social media, the president’s language became fodder for round-the-clock hardening of long-standing views about Trump’s unsuitability to hold office, or, conversely, his heroic championing of ordinary Americans.

“The president of the United States is racist,” CNN anchor Don Lemon began on his broadcast Thursday night.

But over on Fox News Channel, Jesse Watters concluded that “This is how the forgotten men and women of America talk at the bar . . . Is it graceful? No . . . Is it a little offensive? Of course it is. But you know what? This doesn’t move the needle at all. This is who Trump is.”

For career politicians in his own party, confrontations with Trump’s vocabulary of insults and exaggerations make for repeated awkward moments. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) Friday called Trump’s choice of words “very unfortunate, unhelpful” and praised African immigrants in his hometown, but said nothing about racism.

Before Trump won, Ryan was more pointed in his criticism. During the 2016 campaign, the speaker called Trump’s attack on a federal judge because of his Mexican heritage the “textbook definition of a racist comment.”

Although this week’s example of Trump’s rhetoric was not intended for public consumption, it mirrored a number of incidents in which the president has attached stereotypes to people based on their background — his comments about Muslims; his description of blacks as living in war zones and having nothing to lose; his singling out of a lone black man at a rally as “my African American.”

Last March, at a meeting with members of the Congressional Black Caucus, Trump asked his guests if they knew Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson, the only African American in his cabinet, NBC News reported Friday, citing sources who were in the room. The president was surprised when it turned out that none of the lawmakers knew Carson. The same report also said that Trump suggested during a briefing that a career intelligence analyst should be negotiating with North Korea because she was a “pretty Korean lady.”

In the tumult following the report of Trump’s immigration comment, which he seemed to deny in a tweet Friday morning, a few voices broke through party lines. Former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele, asked if he thought Trump is racist, said in a TV interview, “Yeah, I do. At this point, the evidence is incontrovertible.”

In a separate interview with The Washington Post, Steele said the difference between Trump’s past slurs and this incident was the connection to national policy: When Trump launched his campaign in 2015 by stating that Mexican immigrants were “bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists,” he was “speaking in broad brushes, reflecting his own internalized view of Mexicans,” Steele said. “This time around, it’s in the context of policy. This is about using the resources of the federal government to aid and assist people who are seeking a better life for themselves . . . and his view of this is ‘why should we help them, they’re from shithole countries.’”

Steele called it “disappointing as hell” that Republicans in Congress have not had “a more forceful rhetorical response to the president, particularly by the members who were in the room and heard it.” This fall, he said, voters will hold their representatives to account.

“This is no longer about what Donald Trump, what he said and did,” Steele said. “All presidents come to reflect America, our values, reflect who we are and the question we have to ask ourselves is, is this an accurate reflection of who we are?”

Walmart boosts starting pay, closing dozens of Sam’s Clubs

Walmart confirmed Thursday that it is closing dozens of Sam’s Club warehouse stores — a move that a union-backed group estimated could cost thousands of jobs — on the same day the company announced that it was boosting its starting salary for U.S. workers and handing out bonuses.

The world’s largest private employer said it was closing 63 of its 660 Sam’s Clubs over the next weeks, with some shut already. Ten are being converted into e-commerce distribution centers, according to a company official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss details of the decision publicly.

He said it was too early to say how many people overall would lose their jobs since some will be placed at other Walmart locations or rehired at the e-commerce sites. Making Change at Walmart, a campaign backed by the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, estimates that 150 to 160 people work at each Sam’s Club store, meaning the closures could affect about 10,000 people.

Lauren Fitz, 22, said she was at her other job as a church secretary when a colleague texted to say that the Sam’s Club where they both worked in Loveland, Ohio, had closed. Fitz had been pleased earlier to read the news that Walmart was boosting starting salaries and offering bonuses.

“I thought, ‘This is really cool.’ And then to find out that my store is closing,” said Fitz, who said she had worked as a sales associate in the jewelry department for two months. At home, she got a call from her manager and had a letter in the mail saying the store had closed and she could seek employment at another Sam’s Club or Walmart store.

“It was very sudden and very shocking,” Fitz said. “I don’t think our managers had any inkling yesterday. It was a normal shift.”

On Twitter, Sam’s Club responded to people’s queries by saying, “After a thorough review of our existing portfolio, we’ve decided to close a series of clubs and better align our locations with our strategy.”

Local news reports said Sam’s Clubs stores were closing in Texas, California, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana and Alaska, among other states.

Earlier in the day, Walmart had cited the sweeping Republican tax overhaul that will save it money in announcing the higher hourly wages, one-time bonuses and expanded parental benefits that will affect more than a million hourly workers in the U.S.

President Donald Trump cheered the announcement with a tweet, saying, “Great news, as a result of our TAX CUTS JOBS ACT!” White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders later said she would not comment on the Sam’s Club closings but that the wage increases were a sign that the tax measures “are having the impact that we had hoped.”

Walmart representatives did not respond to a question about the timing of the dual developments.

“This is nothing but another public relations stunt from Walmart to distract from the reality that they are laying off thousands of workers,” said Randy Parraz, a director of Making Change at Walmart.

Rising wages reflect a generally tight labor market. The conversion of stores to e-commerce sites also illustrates how companies are trying to leverage their store locations to better compete against Amazon as shopping moves online.

Walmart announced years ago that it would actively manage its store portfolio as it strives to put a dent in Amazon’s dominance online. With Thursday’s closing, that strategy is now extending to Sam’s Club.

Online retailers typically pay warehouse employees who pack and ship orders more than store jobs pay. Job postings at an Amazon warehouse in Ohio, for example, offer a starting pay of $14.50 an hour.

“This is about the evolution of retail,” said Michael Mandel, chief economic strategist at the Progressive Policy Institute. “The rise of e-commerce is leading to higher wages.”

Large employers also have been under pressure to boost benefits for workers because unemployment rates are at historic lows, allowing job seekers to be pickier.

But the low unemployment has meant that retailers have had trouble attracting and keeping talented workers, experts said. Walmart employees previously started at $9 an hour, with a rise to $10 after completing a training program. Target had raised its minimum hourly wage to $11 in October, and said it would raise wages to $15 by the end of 2020.

“They raised the minimum wage because they have to,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said about Walmart. “The labor market is tight and getting tighter.”

While many department store chains such as Macy’s and Sears are struggling, retailers as a whole are still trying to hire. The retail industry is seeking to fill 711,000 open jobs, the highest on records dating back to 2001, according to government data. The longer those jobs go unfilled, the greater pressure on employers to offer higher wages.

Walmart, which reported annual revenue of nearly $486 billion in the most recent fiscal year, said the wage increases will cost it an additional $300 million in the next fiscal year. The bonuses will cost it about $400 million in this fiscal year, which ends on Jan. 31.

It joins dozens of companies including American Airlines and Bank of America that have announced worker bonuses following the passage of the Republican tax plan that slashed the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. “Tax reform gives us the opportunity to be more competitive globally and to accelerate plans for the U.S.,” Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said Thursday.

The company said the wage increase benefits all hourly U.S. workers at its stores, including Sam’s Club, as well as hourly employees at its websites, distribution centers and its Bentonville, Arkansas, headquarters. The one-time bonus between $200 and $1,000 will be given to Walmart employees who won’t receive a pay raise.

In all, Walmart employs 2.3 million people around the world, 1.5 million of which are in the U.S.

Walmart also announced that full-time hourly U.S. employees can get 10 weeks of paid maternity leave and six weeks of paid parental leave. Before, full-time hourly workers received 50 percent of their pay for leave. Salaried employees, who already had 10 weeks paid maternity leave, will receive more paid parental leave.

For the first time, Walmart also promised to help with adoptions, offering full-time hourly and salaried workers $5,000 per child that can be used for expenses such as adoption agency fees, translation fees and legal or court costs.

———

AP Business writers Michelle Chapman in Newark, New Jersey; Chris Rugaber in Washington, D.C.; and Joyce M. Rosenberg in New York contributed to this report.