Biden won’t use executive privilege to block Jan. 6 commission requests for Trump-era records

WASHINGTON, DC – SEPTEMBER 24: Joe Biden delivers remarks on his administration’s COVID-19 response and vaccination program from the State Dining Room of the White House on September 24, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 11:25 AM PT – Saturday, September 25, 2021

Joe Biden doesn’t plan to use executive privilege to conceal Trump-era documents from the Jan. 6 committee. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki made Biden’s stance clear during a press conference on Friday.

Executive privilege is a president’s ability to withhold certain executive documents and information from the judicial or legislative branches. Far from blocking the committee’s investigation, Psaki said the administration would work in tandem with the commission regarding the day in question.

“We will respond promptly to these questions as they arise and certainly as they come up from Congress,” said Psaki. “And certainly we have been working closely with the congressional committees and others as they work to get to the bottom of what happened on January 6, an incredibly dark day in our democracy.”

This comes after the committee issued subpoenas to several Trump aides on Thursday. Meanwhile, Trump has vowed he would fight the subpoenas and records request using executive privilege and other grounds.

“We will fight the subpoenas on executive privilege and other grounds, for the good of our country,” said the 45th president in a statement.

MORE NEWS: CDC Relies On Honor System For Booster Shot Eligibility





Source link

Sabrina Maddeaux: So China let the two Michaels go. This won’t end here

The regime isn’t even trying to hide it is doing hostage diplomacy. Canada and its allies must respond, but will they?

Article content

There are plenty of celebratory headlines to go around about Friday’s release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor from Chinese prisons, however it’d be a mistake to misconstrue the event as a win for Western democracies. This was not a happy ending, but rather an escalation of China’s unapologetic bully tactics on the international stage.

Advertisement

Article content

If there was ever any doubt about the nature of the two Michaels’ detention, there’s now none. China made that crystal clear when Kovrig and Spavor were released mere hours after a Vancouver court dropped the extradition case against Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou, who’d also reached a deferred prosecution deal with U.S. prosecutors that allowed her to avoid felony charges and walk free. It’s understood the U.S. agreement included a side deal to release the two Michaels.

This itself isn’t a surprise outcome. What is shocking, however, is that China didn’t so much as attempt to obscure the quid-pro-quo heart of the deal. Beijing always insisted there was no connection between Meng’s detention in December 2018 and the arrest of Kovrig and Spavor just 10 days later. Last month, China’s ambassador to Canada, Cong Peiwu, lectured that Ottawa’s accusations of hostage diplomacy were “irresponsible” and “gross interference” in the country’s judicial sovereignty. He insisted the two cases were “completely different.”

Advertisement

Article content

Now that China got what it wanted all along, it’s dropped any hint of pretense. One might’ve expected the country’s officials to wait a few weeks and perhaps release the Michaels before the holidays on some sort of humanitarian grounds or as a goodwill gesture. That they’d at least pretend to bow to international norms. Instead, the message was, “Oh yeah? What are you gonna do about it?”

When it comes to Canada, the answer is likely not much. Ottawa has so far failed to significantly shift from its long-held view that China can be a valuable business partner, and perhaps even friend. This is, of course, absurd to anyone paying even a modicum of attention to international or domestic affairs. There is ample evidence that China regularly engages in corporate espionage of Canadian companies including Nortel, intimidates and spies on Chinese immigrants in Canada, turns a blind eye to Chinese organized crime responsible for the growing opioid crisis and destabilizing our financial and real estate sectors, and now perhaps interferes in our democratic elections.

Advertisement

Article content

Then there’s the ongoing genocide against the Uighurs and China’s flouting of the one country-two systems constitutional principle in Hong Kong — two other major incidents where Western nations loudly clucked their tongues, but essentially did nothing. Canada barely managed to officially call China’s actions against the Uighurs a genocide when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet abstained from a vote on the matter. Is it any wonder China continues to test how much it can get away with?

Former U.S. President Donald Trump once infamously said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” In China’s case, not only could they do the international affairs version of this scenario and likely get away with it, they’d end up normalizing shooting people in the street. As we’ve seen time and time again, countries and companies who work with China don’t democratize the nation. Rather, the reverse happens. China exports authoritarianism and its blatant disregard for human and civil rights around the world.

Advertisement

Article content

The two Michaels won’t be their last diplomatic hostages– in fact, China still holds Australian news anchor Cheng Lei, among others. The moment for pretending China isn’t the biggest international threat of our times is long gone.

To start, Canada must update our long overdue China policy, which was initially set to be complete at the end of 2020. Our allies are getting tired of waiting as they move forward to address the China threat with new alliances like the Three Eyes and The Quad that leave us on the outside looking in. This week, U.S. President Joe Biden’s pick for ambassador to Canada took the unusual step of publicly chastising us for taking so long.

“We are all waiting for Canada to release its framework for its overall China policy,” he told a meeting on his nomination before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “As ambassador, if I’m confirmed, it’s an appropriate role to be engaged in discussions and make sure that Canada’s policies reflect its words in terms of the treatment of China.”

Advertisement

Article content

The democratic world’s inability to effectively stand up to China has a ripple effect: it emboldens other dictators and kleptocrats around the world. Over the last several years, we’ve seen increasingly blatant abuses of power and disregard for international norms. Among these were Saudi Arabia’s grotesque assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and Belarus’ recent plane hijacking and kidnapping of blogger and activist Roman Protasevich.

Canada likes to position itself as a global peacekeeper, but too often our politicians pervert this ethos to avoid conflict and tough decisions. Keeping the peace doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to bad actors at all cost; it means standing up for what’s right and doing the hard things when others won’t.

Now the two Michaels are safely back in Canada, there’s no longer the worry any strong statements or actions against China will result in bad outcomes for them. The time for deference is over. With the unapologetically quick release of the Michaels, China has sent a forbidding message to the world. We must be part of the democratic response back.

National Post

Advertisement

Comments

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.



Source link

‘Why Doesn’t He Wanna Go?’: Peter Doocy Challenges Jen Psaki On Why Biden Won’t Visit The Southern Border

Fox News’ senior White House correspondent challenged Friday White House press secretary Jen Psaki on the reason President Joe Biden has not once visited the U.S. southern border crippled with a crisis.

“Why hasn’t President Biden ever visited the southern border?” Doocy asked Psaki during Friday’s press briefing. “What would you like him to do at the southern border and what impact do you think that would have on the policies?” Psaki fired back.

“Why doesn’t he wanna go?” Doocy pressed further.

Psaki then suggested that Biden’s approach to the issue was formed on the basis of “what’s most constructive to address what we see as a challenging situation at the border and a broken immigration system.”

She added that the president preferred to be focused on advancing immigration reform and handling the institutional challenges inherited from the previous administration.

Additionally, Psaki claimed that Biden did not need to make trips to the border as he is kept up to date by a “team of advisors who have been to the border multiple times.” (RELATED: Doocy, Psaki Trade Blows Over Border Crisis, Pregnant Migrants During Heated Back-And-Forth)

The Friday exchange followed Doocy’s question during Wednesday’s press briefing, where he wondered if Biden had ever visited the U.S.-Mexico border in his life, to which Psaki could not give a definitive response, promising to look into it.

Doocy pointed out Wednesday that unlike the epicenters of issues such as hurricanes or wildfires where Biden likes to go himself, he never paid a visit to the southern border engulfed in a crisis.





Source link

Gabby Petito family friend won’t say Brian Laundrie’s name

A family friend of Gabby Petito refused to utter Brian Laundrie’s name during an emotional TV interview — referring to him only as “the evil one.”

“The evil one — I refuse to say his name — needs to be caught and brought to justice,” Maija Polsley told “NewsNation” Thursday when asked about the hunt for Laundrie.

“Evil took out, extinguished one of the brightest lights on this planet,” she said, saying that 22-year-old Long Island native Petito had a smile that “lit up the entire world.”

“Her smile is unforgettable. Her smile would light up any room,” said Polsley.

“Everybody fell in love with her. It’s hard not to,” she said of the “beautiful” woman she had known since she was “a little kid.”

“She was so easy to fall in love with, which is why the world has really taken to this whole story,” she said.

Polsley believes Petito and her family had “a false sense of security” because she’d “known Laundrie forever” after first meeting at Bayport Blue Point High School on Long Island.

Maija Polsley said that “evil” killed Gabby Petito.
NewsNation
There has been an arrest warrant placed for Brian Laundrie.
North Port/Florida Police/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo

“It turns out that he was super abusive,” she said of her friend’s fiancé who was reportedly slapping Petito when police were called on them in Utah on Aug. 12, shortly before she disappeared during their cross-country road trip.

Polsley’s interview came soon after the FBI announced an arrest warrant had been issued for Laundrie for allegedly using a Capital One debit card that may have belonged to Petito.

“At first I was like, ‘the audacity, that he had the nerve to go and use her credit card,’” Polsely told “NewsNation.”

“But you know what that $1,000 bought him? A federal arrest warrant. So well worth it, then,” she said.



Source link

Natalie Klein says WE WON’T ASK for COVID vaccine passports at Bladez 2 Fadez barbershop

Natalie Klein is saying “We Won’t Ask” your vaccine status, and she’s not afraid to let the world know, by displaying our new civil liberties awareness stickers on her door.

The owner of Bladez 2 Fadez barbershop in central Alberta, and the niece of former premier Ralph Klein, has been a leader in the resistance to the COVID lockdowns in Alberta. She is no stranger to controversy either.

She re-opened her barbershop against restrictions that closed personal care businesses, and faced two fines as a result.

But Rebel News, in partnership with the registered Canadian charity the Democracy Fund, and through the FightTheFines.com civil liberties project, teamed her up with top civil litigator Chad Williamson from Williamson Law to get her tickets withdrawn by the Crown, all at no cost to her. The police have now recharged her with those fines, and Natalie and Chad are suing for abuse of process.

Now Natalie is saying no to COVID vaccine passports. She wants to do business, mind her own business, and give great haircuts to anyone who wants one, regardless of sexual orientation, religion or medical status.

That’s why Natalie is the first small business owner in the country to display her www.WeWontAsk.com sticker in her window to signal to the world that all are welcome in Natalie’s barber chair.

If you’d like one of these fun stickers and are a business owner that will not violate the privacy of your customers, please tell us your story and consider making a donation to offset our costs at www.WeWontAsk.com.





Source link

Most People Support Women-Only Sports. Why Won’t Media Admit It?

It’s been a banner year for male athletes making waves in women’s sports. Corporate media have shamelessly hailed these men edging out women as a great achievement in human rights, in contradiction to public opinion wherever it’s been fairly measured.

Most recently, a man named Alana McLaughlin, a U.S. Army Special Forces veteran, beat female fighter Celine Provost in the ring at an MMA competition, leading critics like co-founder of Save Women’s Sports Australasia Kath Deves to lament that women’s sports shouldn’t be “a dumping ground for men who can’t hack it in male competition.”

UFC fighter Sean Strickland bluntly called McLaughlin a “man” and a “coward.” He was followed by fellow UFC fighter Sean O’Malley, who said he could tell McLaughlin was “a dude,” and didn’t think it was okay for someone with that many years of testosterone in his system to be fighting against women.

Champion MMA fighter Jake Shields pointed out in a recent interview that Provost is a competent martial artist with around a decade of experience, while McLaughlin had only trained for about six months and had terrible form. McLaughlin beat Provost anyway, and social media was splashed with pictures of him “choking out” his opponent from behind, her blood splattered in front of her.

Having such a spectacle touted as progress — and as a great leap forward in women’s rights, no less — might be enough to turn almost anyone towards a prickly revanchism.

Shields noted it was strange that MMA media was either silent on the subject or supported McLaughlin, even though many fans and athletes were critical of McLaughlin’s win. Yet what’s odd about the situation isn’t the opinions of MMA fans, but of MMA journalists. Our national poll this June tracked with national polling done in 2020, finding significant majorities of the American public oppose letting men compete in women’s sports.

Most Voters Want to Protect Women

We went back this July and polled minority voters in three states — Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia — on policies like allowing men into women’s prisons, spas, shelters, and sports teams. In each of those categories, more than half of respondents disapproved, with around 67 percent opposing male athletes in female-only sports.

A MetroNews West Virginia poll published this month got very similar results, finding that 65 percent of registered voters said sports eligibility should be based on sex.

This perspective isn’t reflected in the corporate press and its glowing treatment of transgender athletes, however. Transgender activists who want to end women’s sports intimidate the media into only telling one side of the story, and the media cabal doesn’t need convincing. Despite the fact that they’re the ones lobbying for on-demand sterilization of children, some activists in the media even malign as eugenicists people who want to keep men out of women’s sports.

Given recent national and state polls that have shown strong opposition among voters to policies like cramping women out of their own sports, does corporate media really think a majority of the American public are hatefully advocating eugenics? And is there any other issue on which the media is so consistently afraid to air a viewpoint that’s probably shared by about two-thirds of their potential audience?

The media reaction was about the same after the Wi Spa incident this summer, where most of the U.S. media denied or ignored the story of a man exposing himself to women and girls at a Los Angeles day spa.

You might think a story about a potentially serious criminal offense would receive more objective, thoughtful coverage than a story about sports. Yet at least one media outlet suggested the story was a hoax, while others parroted the narrative that the complaints were “transphobic harassment,” right up until police filed charges against a serial sex offender for the incident.

Lopsided Media Coverage Around the Globe

The media gaslighting isn’t just happening here in the United States.

An April poll of Scottish attitudes showed a majority disapproved of allowing men in women’s sports. The first-ever independent poll of its kind in Ireland this summer revealed that only 17 percent agree with the country’s policy allowing people to legally change their status “as soon as they self-identify as or believe that they are a member of the opposite sex.” A new 2021 poll of Canadians on just the sports question found that respondents believed letting men compete in women’s sports was unfair, by a margin of about four to one.

Yet media outlets in all three places have shown extreme reluctance to reflect anything like ordinary public opinion on these topics, instead seeming to fear the anger of a small minority of very loud detractors.

Maybe journalists appear afraid that a Twitter mob will get them fired, or that some of their far-left colleagues will organize against them at the office. But how many polls do journalists and their editors have to see before they stop letting internet comments and fashionably unpopular activists run their newsrooms?

We’re not holding our breath for an answer, but we think it’s been well proved that they’d have an audience for coverage that recognizes material reality.

Natasha Chart is a feminist writer and president of Chart Consulting LLC. Wendy Wixom is the president of United Families International.





Source link

Psaki Says Images from Border ‘Horrific,’ Won’t Use Horses Anymore – The First TV

Jen Psaki has her hands full these days.

The White House press secretary was forced to address the recent images of U.S. Border Patrol agents pursuing Hatian migrants while on horseback; the agents chased the migrants along the Rio Grande.

“People understandably have questions…about the images we have seen. We feel those images are horrible and horrific. There is an investigation the President certainly supports overseen by the Department of Homeland Security, which he has conveyed will happen quickly. I can also convey to you…we will no longer be using horses in Del Rio.”

The images certainly didn’t do much to advance the narrative that the Biden administration has the border situation in Del Rio under control. More than 12,000 Hatian migrants remain camped out underneath the International Bridge on the shore of the Rio Grande.

Watch Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s horse update below.

Jon Anfinsen, the President of Del Rio’s Border Patrol chapter, issued a response to the suspension of horse patrols.

“Suspending them all for even a brief amount of time takes away one of the few remaining units that have been in the field making arrests and rescues on a regular basis.”





Source link

Ohio State Quarterback C.J. Stroud Won’t Start Against Akron, Kyle McCord And Jack Miller Will Take The QB Reps

Ohio State quarterback C.J. Stroud won’t start Saturday against Akron.

Buckeyes head coach Ryan Day announced Thursday afternoon that Stroud will only be used on an emergency basis against the Zips as he rests his shoulder, and that Kyle McCord and Jack Miller will take the QB reps. (RELATED: David Hookstead Is The True King In The North When It Comes To College Football)

Notably, Ryan Day didn’t say highly-touted recruit Quinn Ewers would play.

This is huge news out of Columbus, and it’s not news I think anyone saw coming. In fact, it’s already lighting the internet on fire.

You know something is unexpected when the entire world of college football starts talking about it.

The good news for Ohio State is that Akron is absolutely awful. I could probably go out there and run OSU’s offense against the Zips.

Even if they played a walk-on freshman quarterback, Ohio State could probably win without ever having to pass the ball once.

That’s how explosive they are compared to Akron, who might be one of the top 5 worst teams in all of college football.

There’s no reason for Ohio State fans to panic right now. It’s just one game and the Buckeyes are going to be fine. However, if they get deeper into the season and Stroud isn’t 100%, then they could have some problems.





Source link

We won’t use horses anymore at the Haitian migrant camp in Del Rio – HotAir

We all understand what this “whip” incident is really about, right?

Here’s the now-famous photo if you missed it a few days ago. A border patrol agent on horseback was chasing a Haitian migrant at the Del Rio camp in Texas; photographer Paul Ratje snapped a pic at a moment when the horse’s long reins were curled in mid-air near the man, making them look a bit like a whip. Insta-narrative: The Border Patrol, which is 50 percent Latino, had resorted to tactics used to punish slaves when apprehending black migrants.

It wasn’t true. “Some of the Haitian men started running, trying to go around the horses, and that’s when the whole thing happened. I never saw them whip anyone. The agent was swinging the [reins] that to some can be misconstrued when your looking at the pictures,” Ratje later said. In fact, the agent may have been trying to protect the man by using the reins as he did:

But the legend had been born. The Biden administration was now playing the role of cruel slave overseer, never mind the news this week that many Haitians are being released into the U.S. on their own recognizance. This must be the first slave system in history in which the “slaves” are immediately freed.

Today, to turn down the heat from the left, the White House vowed that Border Patrol agents would no longer use horses in Del Rio. They would have vowed that agents would also no longer use whips except that they weren’t using whips in the first place.

Activist/journalist Yamiche Alcindor nonetheless confronted Jen Psaki at today’s briefing demanding to know why the president himself won’t put aside COVID and the looming implosion of his domestic agenda and the prospect of a U.S. debt default and a few dozen other more pressing issues to come to the podium and address this pressing non-story about slavery:

Even Kamala Harris has been forced to feign distress and share her “grave concerns about the mistreatment of Haitian migrants” with DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

What’s this all about? Is it as simple as the left stumbling across a provocative photo and not being able to resist vomiting up a narrative about slavery in reference to it, a sort of political gag reflex?

I don’t think so. I think they’re working the refs. The worse the crisis at the border gets, the more political pressure Biden will feel to reverse course and start taking enforcement seriously before the midterms. The spectacle of thousands of migrants wading across the river and then being released into the United States is poison for vulnerable Democratic centrists and the left knows it. So if they’re going to keep the border open to kids and families, they need to apply pressure on Biden from the left. One way is this stupid “slavery” smear, accusing him and his agents of being insensitive to the asylum seekers by confronting them with the same supposedly outre law enforcement tactic that residents of America’s biggest city have encountered for decades. Another way is to ludicrously accuse Biden of being as much of an immigration hard-ass as Trump in the hope that that charge will make him think twice about enforcing the border more vigorously:

“The question that’s being asked now is: How are you actually different than Trump?” said Marisa Franco, the executive director of Mijente, a Latino civil rights organization, who consulted the Biden campaign as a representative for Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. “You campaigned that immigration was one of the places where Trump was inhumane and failed. And last time I checked, Trump is not the president.”…

[T]o many immigration activists, the president’s reaction to the surge of border crossings — including a firm declaration that the border was closed and a refusal to allow many migrants to seek refuge in the United States — was a grim reminder of the Trump years and of Mr. Obama’s aggressive policies.

They point to the fact that Mr. Biden has fought civil rights groups in court to allow his administration to maintain one of the Mr. Trump’s strictest immigration policies: the use of a public health law known as Title 42 that allows the authorities to deny migrants their usual rights to claim asylum during the coronavirus pandemic.

Right, Biden has fought to keep Title 42 in effect for individuals. Kids and families are getting through. In fact, the Times notes that just 56 percent of the 1.24 million encounters the Border Patrol had with migrants between February and August resulted in people being removed under Title 42. Hundreds of thousands are being let in. Under Biden our borders are porous by design.

But they’re not entirely open, as the left wants. So they’re demagoging him with claptrap about whips and slavery in order to convince him to open them up a little more, or at least not to close them to appease Dem moderates. There are a lot of people waiting to get in, after all.





Source link

U.S. says window open for Iran nuclear talks but won’t be forever

FILE PHOTO: An Iranian flag flutters in front of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) headquarters in Vienna, Austria, September 9, 2019. REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger/File Photo

September 23, 2021

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The window is still open to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal but Tehran has yet to indicate whether it is willing to resume talks in Vienna or whether it would do so on the basis of where they left off in June, a senior U.S. official said on Thursday.

The official told reporters on condition of anonymity that Washington’s patience would not last forever but declined to set a deadline, saying this depended on technical progress in Iran’s nuclear program and a wider judgment by the United States and its partners on whether Iran was willing to revive the deal.

“We’re still interested. We still want to come back to the table,” the senior U.S. State Department official said in a telephone briefing. “The window of opportunity is open. It won’t be open forever if Iran takes a different course.”

Under the 2015 deal, Iran curbed its uranium enrichment program, a possible pathway to nuclear arms, in return for the lifting of economic sanctions. Former President Donald Trump quit the deal three years ago and re-imposed harsh sanctions on Iran’s oil and financial sectors that have crippled its economy, prompting Iran to take steps to violate its nuclear limits.

The U.S. official declined to say what the United States might do if Iran refuses to return to negotiations, or if a resumption of the original deal proves impossible. Such U.S. contingency planning is often referred to as “Plan B.”

“The ‘Plan B’ that we’re concerned about is the one that Iran may be contemplating, where they want to continue to build their nuclear program and not be seriously engaged in talks to return to the JCPOA,” he said, in a reference to the deal’s formal name, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

(Reporting by Arshad Mohammed and Humeyra Pamuk; Editing by Diane Craft and Howard Goller)





Source link